PostgreSQL also can embed a JVM for writing stored procudures and user functions and aggregate functions, but its not very well supported (yet). PG does have quite a few companies behind it so I doubt it will stay that way for long.
PG probably has the best language support of all DBs. Is there any major language that doesn't have a PG interface in 8.1?
Just like on Unix based systems, open() can return ELOOP to indicate "Too many symbolic links were encountered" - Windows will have something similar.
The Windows Vista PSDK is out, you can look it up now if you like.
Symlinks have never posed a problem like you describe on any system I have encountered. With modern filesystems like reiser4, I only ever hit the disk two or three times a day on my laptop (everything I read/write is cached in my 2GB or RAM until the last possible moment).
I am genuinely interested to find out what it was like in the US about 25 years ago...
I have only been there a few times and never for longer than a couple of months, but this is exactly the impression I got.
Younger people there were not just anti-science, but generally anti-intellect. Being intellectual must carry some sort of stigma there as a child and people respond to this by being anti-science it seems.
My parents are American, though I grew up here in the UK, and I can not find any single instance of such behaviour in this country that did not have a single specific event triggering it.
I simply can not imagine how this kind of thing happens on such a large scale.
Can someone who grew up there enlighten me on how this kind of environment developed? What, if anything, triggered and fed this development?
I only said very expensive because I meant it relative to the other options.
The cost of running your own SAN + support from luster is very much more expensive than getting the same thing from EMC or Symantec. Of course, the custom option is better suited to certain tasks, but since the OP was not specific as to what the purpose of this storage cluster was, I am inclined to suggest avoiding running their own.
I agree that lustre is not very expensive as such, but its not the only expense when running your own cluster.
Perhaps the 32-bit UNIX calculator ends in 2038, but my 64-bit calculator does not end for at least 292.27 billion years - by which time I am sure even Windows will be 128-bit.
I forgot to mention OCFS2 - It does not scale well to large numbers of nodes, but it does handle Pb volumes better than lustre 1.2 (I have never used 1.4).
If you know the scale of the problem, you should consult with a company like EMC to provide the support for this thing - you WILL need it.
Clustering the disks with iSCSI or ATAoE is trivial - you can do that very easily, but the filesystem to run on top of it is where you will have problems.
PVFS - has no redundancy - Lose one node lose them all. GFS - does not scale well to those sizes or a large number of nodes - lots of hassle with the dlm. GoogleFS - Essentially one write only - no small (50GB) files - little or no locking. xFS - Way too easy to lose your data.
It seems that you only have one option: Lustre - VERY Expensive - lots of hassle with meta-data servers and lock servers.
Go with a company to take care of all this hassle - you do not have the resources of Google to deal with this kind of thing yourself.
The consenus on the Lionhead forums seems to be that multiplayer and skirmish modes will be released as a pay-for expansion pack rather than a free patch.
This is quite disturbind that LH could release an in-complete game and charge for features that should have been present in the first place (at least single-player skirmish).
I am in the London at the moment, and I bought a 6600GT for £45 from a shop called GHS Technology on Tottenham Court road last friday. That is almost exactly $80.
Actually the last few months have seen nothing but great drivers from ATI. I have an X800 in one of my machines and every release from ATI is better than the last. I haven't seen any crashes for a long time, and although I am not a big gamer, I do play games frequently and they have been running great.
I still stick to Nvidia for the time being, but ATI is nowhere near as bad as they used to be (except for Linux support where they still suck).
Ebay them. or scrounge them for parts.
I knew a guy who was collecting SRAM sticks and those old cache sticks from 386s for his art, paid quite a lot for them, even though few people could appreciate the work. I must remember to put a few pictures of it on the web.
NTFS has case-sensitive file names. You can use them now.
Can't change existing APIs - new ones could be added, but thats confusing to developers (Should we be compatible and use deprecated APIs or new incompatible ones?).
This will break Windows. The NT Kernel can happily do it, but without major changes to the Windows codebase all userspace apps will have problems.
Slashdot Mirror
PostgreSQL also can embed a JVM for writing stored procudures and user functions and aggregate functions, but its not very well supported (yet). PG does have quite a few companies behind it so I doubt it will stay that way for long.
PG probably has the best language support of all DBs. Is there any major language that doesn't have a PG interface in 8.1?
PostgreSQL is your best bet in terms of Oracle like features with an Open Source (BSD) license.
Some very nice Oracle features are also being developed in Bizgres.
Just like on Unix based systems, open() can return ELOOP to indicate "Too many symbolic links were encountered" - Windows will have something similar.
The Windows Vista PSDK is out, you can look it up now if you like.
Symlinks have never posed a problem like you describe on any system I have encountered. With modern filesystems like reiser4, I only ever hit the disk two or three times a day on my laptop (everything I read/write is cached in my 2GB or RAM until the last possible moment).
I am genuinely interested to find out what it was like in the US about 25 years ago...
I have only been there a few times and never for longer than a couple of months, but this is exactly the impression I got.
Younger people there were not just anti-science, but generally anti-intellect. Being intellectual must carry some sort of stigma there as a child and people respond to this by being anti-science it seems.
My parents are American, though I grew up here in the UK, and I can not find any single instance of such behaviour in this country that did not have a single specific event triggering it.
I simply can not imagine how this kind of thing happens on such a large scale.
Can someone who grew up there enlighten me on how this kind of environment developed? What, if anything, triggered and fed this development?
C++ has no implicit int return type, but the rest are all possibilities.
Your point still stands.
http://www.gpgpu.org/
Froogle lists amazon - therefore is not in competition with it.
I only said very expensive because I meant it relative to the other options. The cost of running your own SAN + support from luster is very much more expensive than getting the same thing from EMC or Symantec. Of course, the custom option is better suited to certain tasks, but since the OP was not specific as to what the purpose of this storage cluster was, I am inclined to suggest avoiding running their own. I agree that lustre is not very expensive as such, but its not the only expense when running your own cluster.
Ebay does not own Verisign - they only bought a small devision of it. Besides, Verisign merging with eBay is like me merging with a cheeseburger.
Ooops: s/calculator/calendar/
Perhaps the 32-bit UNIX calculator ends in 2038, but my 64-bit calculator does not end for at least 292.27 billion years - by which time I am sure even Windows will be 128-bit.
Read my reply to paradigmdream's post.
Only if we had working fusion generators could come up with that kind of energy.
See http://code.google.com/
I forgot to mention OCFS2 - It does not scale well to large numbers of nodes, but it does handle Pb volumes better than lustre 1.2 (I have never used 1.4).
If you know the scale of the problem, you should consult with a company like EMC to provide the support for this thing - you WILL need it.
Clustering the disks with iSCSI or ATAoE is trivial - you can do that very easily, but the filesystem to run on top of it is where you will have problems.
PVFS - has no redundancy - Lose one node lose them all.
GFS - does not scale well to those sizes or a large number of nodes - lots of hassle with the dlm.
GoogleFS - Essentially one write only - no small (50GB) files - little or no locking.
xFS - Way too easy to lose your data.
It seems that you only have one option:
Lustre - VERY Expensive - lots of hassle with meta-data servers and lock servers.
Go with a company to take care of all this hassle - you do not have the resources of Google to deal with this kind of thing yourself.
The consenus on the Lionhead forums seems to be that multiplayer and skirmish modes will be released as a pay-for expansion pack rather than a free patch.
This is quite disturbind that LH could release an in-complete game and charge for features that should have been present in the first place (at least single-player skirmish).
I am in the London at the moment, and I bought a 6600GT for £45 from a shop called GHS Technology on Tottenham Court road last friday. That is almost exactly $80.
Actually the last few months have seen nothing but great drivers from ATI. I have an X800 in one of my machines and every release from ATI is better than the last. I haven't seen any crashes for a long time, and although I am not a big gamer, I do play games frequently and they have been running great.
I still stick to Nvidia for the time being, but ATI is nowhere near as bad as they used to be (except for Linux support where they still suck).
A 6600GT is just fine for Quake 4 and costs $80. How can you afford the game ($50) and fraps ($37) and not get an $80 graphics card to play it on?
Not as far as older OSes are concerned - they simply see multiple cores as multiple CPUs and treat them as such.
Ebay them. or scrounge them for parts. I knew a guy who was collecting SRAM sticks and those old cache sticks from 386s for his art, paid quite a lot for them, even though few people could appreciate the work. I must remember to put a few pictures of it on the web.
Dual core has poor support in Windows currently
This is not true. All versions of NT (including as far back as version 4) supported dual CPUs just fine, and scale up to 128.
I currently run Windows XP Pro x64 Edition and it certainly supports my Athlon 64 X2 4800+ better than any other OS at the moment.
(Linux does not work with Cool'n-Quiet drivers yet, the -rc5-mm1 kernel doesn't even boot)
When you click a link in your e-mail client, how do you expect a browser to pick it up??
And do you really want to update 39 (the number of apps I have running at the moment) systems when there is a patch or update?