i really wonder where those numbers come from too. in my company there are about 50 servers with about 400 sata, scsi and sas drives (including san/nas/external sas-attached storage and so on, all speeds, all sizes from 16gig to 1TB) and within the last 6 years i have been working there i saw exactly 5 drives dying. we exchange most hardware in 3-5 year-cycles, depending on how important that piece of hardware is.
most of our storage are databases and video/image data which is very frequently written/read and re/overwritten. all in all i think we have somewhere around 25 TB of storage.
For server side applications this is practically irrelevant because the bottleneck is almost always the database.
this is not necessarily true. take a look at complex ajax applications and you will soon realize that of a 2 second response 1.5 sec might be the client rendering the changed DOM.
Also, it can be useful if you write a fairly sophisticated filtering function to make sure that someone doesn't input the wrong answer. You can run it on the client, but it might make sense to run it at the server at other times.
i totally disagree here. i would NEVER run any validation code on the client.
still eager to follow the upcoming comments ^^ rgds from vienna (no, the one in yrp XD)
Well, yes, I love strict typing too. But hey, Java on the client isn't dominant.
agreed!
It often makes sense to run the same code on the server and the client. You can move code from the server to the client if you need to. And share code too.
hmmm, i cannot recall a single time i wanted to do that. but it might be that i am too much used to the client-server paradigma to see the possible advantages?
Now if only all of the Javascript implementations agreed on a stable definition....
seriously, i am trying not to troll here but why would i want to use a language with no strict typing on the server to generate html+js text when i can use lots of great languages with typing that can do that very well and are not scripting languages? o.O
I've seen windows servers with well over 100 processes.
100 processes for a server is _nothing_. i wonder what kind of servers we are talking about. i just checked on our application- and database servers and almost all of them have > 400 processes and well over 500 threads running. and right now where i live it is night and there are hardly any customers on our servers. (yes we run linux)
a great way to make ff use tons of memory is to leave self-reloading pages (like oracle enterprise manager) open overnight. i have seen ff use > 1 GB resident on linux and on windows leaving it running wile displaying EM.
"demonstrates performance visually indistinguishable from VMware"
what? i have been running vmware on my linux workstation at work for years and recently switched to virtualbox and realized that virtualbox is in orders of magnitude snappier, faster and less ressource-intensive than vmware.
just the fact that mouse support works absolutely flawless in vb is an enormous advantage over vmware. i am not even going into how much i/o wait vmware seemed to cause all the time which vb simply doesn't (yes the settings are comparable:>)
NEVER will i go back to vmware again (at least not on the desktop)
We're working very hard on getting Amarok 2 out of the door, and if you are enthusiastic please give our alphas and betas a try. Amarok 2 is quite usable at this point,
actually for me amarok is _the_ app that i will wait for with my switch to kde4. i've tried the dev versions and they look very promising. can't wait to use my favourite playa with the pretty new qt:>
select bt.* from big_table bt, bigger_table bbt, biggest_table bbbt where bt.id=bbt.bt_id order by non_indexed_column;
Perhaps a good left outer join tossed in there to really thrash the drives. why join tables anyway? if you really want to fsck your server just SELECT * FROM HUGE_TABLE t1, HUGE_TABLE t2, HUGE_TABLE t3;:D
if you want to make it less obvious feel free to throw in a few FIRST_ROWs, RANKs and DISTINCTs;)
thanks for posting this...i do not use pidgin myself but it illustrates very well, why developers shouldn't be (the only) decision makers when it comes to application design (yes, i am a developer myself).
well, i really doubt, that anyone, who needs to code a highly dynamic website will use DW. most of these people (including me) use frameworks like jsf, adf or something like that and use "real" IDEs that are "really" integrated such as netbeans, which includes its own instance of glassfish or tomcat or whatever.
in my opinion WYSIWYG editors have their place in quite static or/and 'stupid' (meaning that they do not have to react to a lot of user input) websites, but interactive web applications are clearly a different pair of shoes.
i personally tend to solve most things with jsf/icefaces, since i am comfortable with it, and i know, that with more advanced technologies you can create simple apps but also complicated ones...this is where WYSIWYG fails. of course i would not use jsf to code a guestbook or something like that;)
Slashdot Mirror
sits at 0% forever. ff+noscript+linux
YES! OMG YES!
*almost can't believe it*
being proud of you own ignorance sure makes you look like a hero!
What does Gnome not do out of the box that you have to be able to configure it to do?
offer a open/save file dialog that doesn't make santa clause vomit with rage.
If you want the latest you use the unstable branch, and if you want stable/reliable you use the stable but older software.
that's not true. to get kde 4.2 on debian you need a mix of testing, unstable, experimental plus the kde 4.2 packages from the UNRELEASED repository.
been there, done that, reverted to kde 3.5. i'll switch again when kde4 is in debian testing.
FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD are *cohesive systems*, not collections.
is that the reason, why in freebsd the binaries' names are a total chaos of upper and lower case?
granted, i like freebsd. but debian feel a lot more coherent than freebsd.
star trek is also a tv show. ^^
i really wonder where those numbers come from too. in my company there are about 50 servers with about 400 sata, scsi and sas drives (including san/nas/external sas-attached storage and so on, all speeds, all sizes from 16gig to 1TB) and within the last 6 years i have been working there i saw exactly 5 drives dying. we exchange most hardware in 3-5 year-cycles, depending on how important that piece of hardware is.
most of our storage are databases and video/image data which is very frequently written/read and re/overwritten. all in all i think we have somewhere around 25 TB of storage.
i _really_ don't believe that article ^^
and that is so funny because?
For server side applications this is practically irrelevant because the bottleneck is almost always the database.
this is not necessarily true. take a look at complex ajax applications and you will soon realize that of a 2 second response 1.5 sec might be the client rendering the changed DOM.
Also, it can be useful if you write a fairly sophisticated filtering function to make sure that someone doesn't input the wrong answer. You can run it on the client, but it might make sense to run it at the server at other times.
i totally disagree here. i would NEVER run any validation code on the client.
still eager to follow the upcoming comments ^^
rgds from vienna (no, the one in yrp XD)
Well, yes, I love strict typing too. But hey, Java on the client isn't dominant.
agreed!
It often makes sense to run the same code on the server and the client. You can move code from the server to the client if you need to. And share code too.
hmmm, i cannot recall a single time i wanted to do that. but it might be that i am too much used to the client-server paradigma to see the possible advantages?
Now if only all of the Javascript implementations agreed on a stable definition....
oh well :D
seriously, i am trying not to troll here but why would i want to use a language with no strict typing on the server to generate html+js text when i can use lots of great languages with typing that can do that very well and are not scripting languages? o.O
maybe i am missing the point here.
I've seen windows servers with well over 100 processes.
100 processes for a server is _nothing_. i wonder what kind of servers we are talking about. i just checked on our application- and database servers and almost all of them have > 400 processes and well over 500 threads running. and right now where i live it is night and there are hardly any customers on our servers. (yes we run linux)
a great way to make ff use tons of memory is to leave self-reloading pages (like oracle enterprise manager) open overnight. i have seen ff use > 1 GB resident on linux and on windows leaving it running wile displaying EM.
not being the GP i still wanted to add myself to the list of linux users who buy (linux-) software:
* quake3
* f.a.k.k 2
* quake4
* rune
* unreal tournament
* rtcw
* nwn1
also i have bought and run the following with wine on linux:
* nwn2
* world of warcraft
* vampire bloodlines
* half-life 2
* counterstrike
i know those are all games, but all other software that i use is either free or open source and i have no need to buy any other software.
same here. ff3 almost never crashes on me due to flash but fullscreen support just plain sucks.
Would be neat if you could write a regex-based plugin to parse the text-formats.
egrep? :)
"demonstrates performance visually indistinguishable from VMware"
what? i have been running vmware on my linux workstation at work for years and recently switched to virtualbox and realized that virtualbox is in orders of magnitude snappier, faster and less ressource-intensive than vmware.
just the fact that mouse support works absolutely flawless in vb is an enormous advantage over vmware. i am not even going into how much i/o wait vmware seemed to cause all the time which vb simply doesn't (yes the settings are comparable:>)
NEVER will i go back to vmware again (at least not on the desktop)
We're working very hard on getting Amarok 2 out of the door, and if you are enthusiastic please give our alphas and betas a try. Amarok 2 is quite usable at this point,
actually for me amarok is _the_ app that i will wait for with my switch to kde4. i've tried the dev versions and they look very promising. can't wait to use my favourite playa with the pretty new qt :>
select bt.* from big_table bt, bigger_table bbt, biggest_table bbbt where bt.id=bbt.bt_id order by non_indexed_column;
Perhaps a good left outer join tossed in there to really thrash the drives. why join tables anyway? if you really want to fsck your server just SELECT * FROM HUGE_TABLE t1, HUGE_TABLE t2, HUGE_TABLE t3;
if you want to make it less obvious feel free to throw in a few FIRST_ROWs, RANKs and DISTINCTs
why not use the technologies that have been around for ages and were specifically designed for that kind of thing?
hi!
thanks for posting this...i do not use pidgin myself but it illustrates very well, why developers shouldn't be (the only) decision makers when it comes to application design (yes, i am a developer myself).
well, i really doubt, that anyone, who needs to code a highly dynamic website will use DW. most of these people (including me) use frameworks like jsf, adf or something like that and use "real" IDEs that are "really" integrated such as netbeans, which includes its own instance of glassfish or tomcat or whatever.
;)
in my opinion WYSIWYG editors have their place in quite static or/and 'stupid' (meaning that they do not have to react to a lot of user input) websites, but interactive web applications are clearly a different pair of shoes.
i personally tend to solve most things with jsf/icefaces, since i am comfortable with it, and i know, that with more advanced technologies you can create simple apps but also complicated ones...this is where WYSIWYG fails. of course i would not use jsf to code a guestbook or something like that
purely my opinion ^^
hehe :)