Partition the mirror into two halves, and have your OS on the first partition do a backup to the second once every 24 hours. Or do three partitions, and do the same.
You can make mirroring a haphazard disaster recovery solution, it just requires contributing sizable portions of your hard disk space to it.
Of course, the above won't help you if a meteorite takes out your server and the surrounding building.
There's a USB 2.0 hard drive dock on NewEgg that will accept any 2.5" or 3.5" SATA hard disk, top-loading, no mounting bracket, no screws. Every day, press a button to release the current drive and then put in a new one.
Yep, that's it. We're going to take em down when we prove without a doubt that the IED schematics were printed with an HP Color Laserjet CP4005 (600x600 DPI at 25ppm! those terrorists have better office equipment than I do!)
No, no, they have all of your records for the past 8 years in impeccable detail. When asked if they could help organize the White House files they threw their hands up in the air and walked away.
No, the ideas aren't fundamentally flawed. There's an enormous advantage that you gain when you abstract out the filesystem in the manner of a database. And if based upon a minimal subset of SQL Server (there are embedded versions) then you gain ACID compliance right away. Every operation on your filesystem is a transaction that either fully succeeds or has no effect, etc.
There -are- advantages to having a database supported filesystem (I would never call it 'database based', it's still sectors on a disk.) Don't disregard the idea because the implementation details were too complex for use quite yet. Let's face it, it's a monstrous task and an enormous change from the way most databases work.
I think because no other OS really supports that either. I think that sort of thing would have been a feature of a database filesystem, because what you're talking about is essentially a database view that takes some original data + user's own data and creates a new listing from it.
Managing that on disk is profoundly more complex than simply writing a few SQL queries though.
Let me put it to you in a way that should impress you: Kernel modesetting allows things like the Windows BSOD and the Mac Kernel Panic, which means that when your kernel dies you can get a direct, immediate error message with details.
Those STOP messages in BSODs are pretty important for figuring out what's wrong with Windows, I imagine with the open kernel of Linux, you could have much more detailed errors.
Because the UAC window is on an independent desktop that other applications cannot interact with. The only possible flaw is if something has installed itself as a mouse or keyboard input driver, I believe. But doing that will spawn a great big red unsigned driver prompt.
I don't get why people misread what I'm saying. There are a number of established cryptographic techniques for 'breaking' an encryption or hashing algorithm. A tentative first step to finding a new algorithm is to, duh, make sure it's resistant to all the old techniques.
-I- never said you could prove the security of anything other than a one time pad, everyone loves to infer that though.
Let me know when Youtube makes it easy to make and maintain a playlist of songs, artists, albums, etc, that I like to listen to, and will automatically shuffle them in playback and do, in general, everything Winamp does.
I'd like to know why you think the newer versions, esp. 2007, is a stinking pile. I'm not going to give a spiel why I think it's not, I'd just like to know why you detest it.
You can prove its security against a number of known types of attacks, which is how there's already 1, up to 4 disqualified hashing algorithms in the NIST competition.
you mean BARELY causing? I am sorry but ten thousand or so postings when there are over a billion Windows users out there is NOT in my mind major trouble.
If 10,000 small businesses begin to capitulate, ideally the system works to save some percentage of them. If 10,000 is more than can be profitable, maybe 6,000 isn't. And so 40,000 jobs will be lost but 60,000 won't.
On the other hand, boneheaded massive corporations who fire 40,000 employees are hated and detested for their evils.
BitTorrent is not very flexible in this regard and so if you have bits -added- to the middle, then everything after the first added bit will need to be updated.
The worse case is of course, if you have new material at the beginning and everything is shifted. BitTorrent is not designed for that.
Let's be honest, this is a direction search had to go eventually anyway.
What I want and what you want in search results may be very different, in terms of sources we like, in terms of what we consider valid. So either you and I can both separately buy millions of dollars worth of computer hardware and spend thousands of hours of our time writing the code to make it do what Google does, but with tweaks for our specific preferences... Or Google can do that for everyone simultaneously based on decisions made within their site.
Slashdot Mirror
Partition the mirror into two halves, and have your OS on the first partition do a backup to the second once every 24 hours. Or do three partitions, and do the same.
You can make mirroring a haphazard disaster recovery solution, it just requires contributing sizable portions of your hard disk space to it.
Of course, the above won't help you if a meteorite takes out your server and the surrounding building.
There's a USB 2.0 hard drive dock on NewEgg that will accept any 2.5" or 3.5" SATA hard disk, top-loading, no mounting bracket, no screws. Every day, press a button to release the current drive and then put in a new one.
I call them up every time I reinstall. "Hello, how can I help you." "I reinstalled windows because of a virus." "Ok, enter this key:"
It only takes a couple minutes.
You should switch it to the address of the new residents so they think the previous owners left a wireless router somewhere in the house turned on.
Schadenfreude, fun for the whole family.
Yep, that's it. We're going to take em down when we prove without a doubt that the IED schematics were printed with an HP Color Laserjet CP4005 (600x600 DPI at 25ppm! those terrorists have better office equipment than I do!)
Better that than fifty thousand "linksys" SSIDs.
Hey look, there's another one.
No, no, they have all of your records for the past 8 years in impeccable detail. When asked if they could help organize the White House files they threw their hands up in the air and walked away.
No, the ideas aren't fundamentally flawed. There's an enormous advantage that you gain when you abstract out the filesystem in the manner of a database. And if based upon a minimal subset of SQL Server (there are embedded versions) then you gain ACID compliance right away. Every operation on your filesystem is a transaction that either fully succeeds or has no effect, etc.
There -are- advantages to having a database supported filesystem (I would never call it 'database based', it's still sectors on a disk.) Don't disregard the idea because the implementation details were too complex for use quite yet. Let's face it, it's a monstrous task and an enormous change from the way most databases work.
I think because no other OS really supports that either. I think that sort of thing would have been a feature of a database filesystem, because what you're talking about is essentially a database view that takes some original data + user's own data and creates a new listing from it.
Managing that on disk is profoundly more complex than simply writing a few SQL queries though.
Unlike New Coke and New Math, Math 2.0 is really, truly the future. For reals this time.
Let me put it to you in a way that should impress you: Kernel modesetting allows things like the Windows BSOD and the Mac Kernel Panic, which means that when your kernel dies you can get a direct, immediate error message with details.
Those STOP messages in BSODs are pretty important for figuring out what's wrong with Windows, I imagine with the open kernel of Linux, you could have much more detailed errors.
Because the UAC window is on an independent desktop that other applications cannot interact with. The only possible flaw is if something has installed itself as a mouse or keyboard input driver, I believe. But doing that will spawn a great big red unsigned driver prompt.
I don't get why people misread what I'm saying. There are a number of established cryptographic techniques for 'breaking' an encryption or hashing algorithm. A tentative first step to finding a new algorithm is to, duh, make sure it's resistant to all the old techniques.
-I- never said you could prove the security of anything other than a one time pad, everyone loves to infer that though.
Let me know when Youtube makes it easy to make and maintain a playlist of songs, artists, albums, etc, that I like to listen to, and will automatically shuffle them in playback and do, in general, everything Winamp does.
I'd like to know why you think the newer versions, esp. 2007, is a stinking pile. I'm not going to give a spiel why I think it's not, I'd just like to know why you detest it.
You can prove its security against a number of known types of attacks, which is how there's already 1, up to 4 disqualified hashing algorithms in the NIST competition.
You know what goes best with a drink? A side of revenge. Just saying.
you mean BARELY causing? I am sorry but ten thousand or so postings when there are over a billion Windows users out there is NOT in my mind major trouble.
If 10,000 small businesses begin to capitulate, ideally the system works to save some percentage of them. If 10,000 is more than can be profitable, maybe 6,000 isn't. And so 40,000 jobs will be lost but 60,000 won't.
On the other hand, boneheaded massive corporations who fire 40,000 employees are hated and detested for their evils.
BitTorrent is not very flexible in this regard and so if you have bits -added- to the middle, then everything after the first added bit will need to be updated.
The worse case is of course, if you have new material at the beginning and everything is shifted. BitTorrent is not designed for that.
Let's be honest, this is a direction search had to go eventually anyway.
What I want and what you want in search results may be very different, in terms of sources we like, in terms of what we consider valid. So either you and I can both separately buy millions of dollars worth of computer hardware and spend thousands of hours of our time writing the code to make it do what Google does, but with tweaks for our specific preferences... Or Google can do that for everyone simultaneously based on decisions made within their site.
Real men, not like Wernher von Braun, simply hitch a ride on a cannonball to their duration.
Baron Munchausen would have a lot to teach you kids.
25-times more carbon and air pollution than ... how much? How much air pollution -does- wind generate, because I thought it was vanishingly small?
Is the FTC going to crack down on politicians now too? This is fantastic!
Hey, stop right there. In Windows you can protect user accounts but it doesn't work when you choose to make all the other accounts administrators!
(Yes, that's an OPT-IN, not an OPT-OUT when making new accounts.)