TimeMachine takes about 15 minutes to do the prep work before it starts copying for me, on a 2012 Retina MBP with 16Gb of RAM and only 256GB of disk space... 64 GB taken by an unbacked up BootCamp part and another 120 or so eaten in Windows VMs that don't get backed up either... i.e. Its not a slow spinning platter backing up a terabyte of data.
I see no indication of any Journal, it certainly isn't making it faster. Pretty freaking slow actually.
To what are you backing up and how much data do you generate in a backup interval? It sounds like you're backing up to a network storage device on a wireless network or just a SLOW network, OR you are generating 100s of megabytes if not gigabytes of data during a backup interval. Basically, something is either very wrong or you are a data hog for an SSD equipped machine to backup that slowly.
Wouldn't solve his problem. TimeMachine takes considerable time to prep and start a backup before it starts actually doing any work, I'd guess its likely doing the same sort of thing that Rsync, gathering a list of changes.
AFAIK, Time Machine is a GUI frontend for rsync. Watch Activity Monitor.app when it fires up. That will tell you. I don't use Time Machine, personally, I know how to use rsync.
In other words, when doom is called, consultants scramble to grab a piece of the hyped pie, companies take rational stock of their own situation and apply fixes as needed, and the general public scoffs as the event passes as another non-event, because of preparation and planning -- by JaredOfEuropa
Actually, it's easier to justify ill feelings toward Ballmer if you just look at past press releases and interviews with the man, Google on your own, too much material to list here. The man is quite clearly a megalomaniacal jerk who cares more about money than users.
I'm guessing that you've never owned or operated a medium to large sized business? If you had you would know all of what you said is nonsense, except the CEO pay disparity issue. That is a legitimate issue to be addressed. The rest is a rant of the ignorant. Quality managers are rare, but they are essential to business operations and continuity.
Posting AC because admitting ignorance among geeks is dangerous:
> Cryptanalysis is at a level you could not possibly comprehend.
I think this comment *really* needs to be expanded upon.
"You" being someone that thinks anything encrypted is "safe" in some sort of absolute sense. "Safe", in this instance, is a rather relative term. A house with a 30-foot high wall and a moat is "safe", but not from a drone strike. 4096-bit encryption is "safe", but not from ubergeeks that think Special Relativity is child's play with access to data centers the size of football fields all cloaked in a shield of secrecy for decades.
Cryptanalysis is at a level you could not possibly comprehend.
A person confirmed by the US government of having a lot of inside information, recently said that our encryption is secure. So unless you can explain why you know more about the NSA's capabilities than him....
Show me those words in that order and proximity in that article. Kinda like your ability to argue from personal ignorance, non-existent.
It doesn't involve users to be code masters, it just involves them engaging their brain a bit. I frequently get bug reports along the lines of "something broke last week, came up with some error (I don't remember what), but I rebooted it and its fine for now; please fix it so it doesn't happen again". You don't have to be a "code master" to figure out that reporting a bug and not actually tell me _what_ broke, what the error was or let me log into a system that is currently exhibiting the problem so I can look myself is not going to be condusive to me fixing things.
And this stuff happens again and again with the same customers... "one of our users is having a problem accessing some websites, please can you fix it?" - ok, so I have to go back and ask "which user" and "which websites", if I'm lucky the customer will give me this information, if I'm unlucky I get "I didn't ask". A week later I'll get an almost identical problem report from the same person about a different (but extremely similar) problem, and again none of the information I ask for _every_ time is included.
Also the great one that comes up occasionally is "this has been broken for a month and you haven't fixed it yet!".. well, if you'd actually told me that there was a problem I might've known to look into it, but since this is the first I've heard of it...
Not sure why this was rated Funny when it is actually quite insightful. Why, because the above points out the obvious issue here with the approach and that is that a one way street doesn't exist and never will. The users will NEVER have the expertise to tell you what went wrong, and unless you understand how they abstract things in their minds (which takes time with each user) you will not understand what they are talking about and will have to inquire.
Bug fixing is a two way street. The user tells me something is broken and like any good investigator I must then begin asking questions to gather more detailed information about the problem in order to identify the cause and subsequently the solution. The users aren't stupid, per se, they just don't speak the same language and look at a problem the same way a coder/developer does. Why is this so unexpected and a cause for any frustration at all? It's a reality that won't change unless we end up in a world of coders/developers.
If its all encrypted its safe, but i agree it could be a bad day when they decide to ransom your data with higher prices down the road. It also sux when you are off-line and want a file.
I prefer not to have a monthly bill to access my stuff. ( sure, you could depreciate out your hard drives and come up with a "monthly equivalent", but still.. )
1. You're delusional. Encryption is NOT a magic spell that keeps anyone but you out. I don't care if it's 65536-bit, no. Cryptanalysis is at a level you could not possibly comprehend.
2. Booth was a coward that shot a great man in the back of the head while seated in a theatre. And like your sig says, I don't give a flying fornication what you think of that.
Rummaging through the thread I see a few good pieces of advice. One, somebody in the food chain needs to grow a set of balls and learn how to say no. Yeah, yeah, yeah, the-customer-is-always-right, if-I-piss-the-customer-off-we-may-never-get-any-more-business BS. It's BS. Grow a set! Second, even with a set and some compromise you will still need to start setting REAL (as in hard) deadlines for feature requests with regard to release dates. Project management 101, actually, and even the current methodologies assume there are still dates for changes. If your boss(es) don't know this already from experience before they became management or while managing elsewhere, they are incompetent and need to be rooted out. Not easy, mind you. Third, keep looking for other opportunities. Even if change starts you may not want to wait for the positive effects, as you may not retain your sanity/joie de vive long enough to reap them where you are.
Small problem with that theory is that the items are still U.S. government property by international law/agreement. Taking them without permission would constitute grand theft and the U.S. would most likely be willing to go to war to get them back, given their significance.
And there's the ACTUAL problem, not necessarily the fault of HTTP. I know how cookies work. I never coded a site poorly, I guess, and why I couldn't understand why someone would implement one so large that it could be a problem. Never underestimate the power of stupid.
This is FAR from a done deal. The binary/ASCII question is being hotly debated.
I want to be on the counter-argument side of the debate for binary. Why? Explain to me the exact benefits of binary encoding over ascii. As one person noted above they performance gain estimates are in the 10 - 20 % range. Sure, great if you're a hosting company or iTunes but is that really enough of a savings for the amount of change needed to implement it for the rest of us? I need to look at this harder but if there aren't real world improvements of 50% or better, why bother? Seems like this might go the way of IPv6 implementation if the gains don't outweigh the cost of change.
Yes, but considering TCP is a core part of IP... what you did kind of falls flat.
Nope, that's like saying hamburgers are a core part of cows.
You make hambugers out of cows, you don't make cows out of hamburgers.
You make TCP out of IP, you don't make IP out of TCP.
I think you might have that backwards. "TCP provides reliable, ordered, error-checked delivery of a stream of octets between programs running on computers connected to a local area network, intranet or the public Internet." That implies that TCP is the basis for networking between machines. "The Internet Protocol (IP) is the principal communications protocol in the Internet protocol suite for relaying datagrams across network boundaries. Its routing function enables internetworking, and essentially establishes the Internet." That seems to imply that IP then connects TCP networks together to form the Internet. In that case the cow is made of hamburgers.
Except cookies. And even worse - ViewState variables posted on badly coded.NET applications. Some of those are near the hundred kilobyte range.
Last time I checked, cookies were stored locally and not transmitted with every request. Now the ViewState.NET variables I'd have to look up because I didn't fall into that trap, but I would imagine that they are also locally stored so not so much the reason your HTTP requests being generally slow.
Citation please! I clearly remember "Episode IV" appearing in the scrolling intro to the original, 1977 release and until someone can give me non-anecdotal evidence to the contrary I am sticking with what I know I saw, TYVM. Now, I did go see it again in 1978, and 1981 multiple times because that's what us kids did those days; play arcade games and see how many times we could watch Star Wars. I do not remember anything changing in those screenings from one release to another. AFAIK, Lucas didn't change them until he did the new space FX.
Alternatively, are we, as a species, willing to start over if we experience a catastrophe, pandemic, etc. of significant magnitude on a global scale that derails our progress and sends us back to the dark ages or worse?
Willing? Like we have control over the cosmos and would choose to hit ourselves with an asteroid, or get decimated by a plague?
First thing is to set expectations on "permanent", because in reality...there is no such thing. The Earth, the Sun, even the universe has an expiration date. In order to even begin to narrow the types of materials needed you would need to define the duration of "permanent" before you went anywhere. I couldn't dig it up but I seem to remember an article online about something like this. Using thin diamond sheets to encode information into or the like that would be able to survive hundreds if not thousands of years intact if locked away like the seed vault. If I find it I will reply to this if someone else hasn't posted it elsewhere in the thread.
the smaller the fabrication design, the less power used
Ummm, no. The smaller the design the more leakage current you get and the more power is wasted as heat. Who is this idiot that wrote this completely clueless "opinion"? Intel does have a foundry unit, but they don't make lots the size that Apple would need with the fabs that Apple would want to use. The third parties aren't getting lots on 10 million finished parts per quarter at 22nm from Intel. Not unless those third parties are buying Intel branded parts.
But, says Canavero, recent advances in re-connecting spinal cords that are surgically severed mean that it should be technically feasible to do it in humans.
'If I could, I would repeal the Internet. It is the technological marvel of the age, but it is not â" as most people imagine â" a symbol of progress. Just the opposite. We would be better off without it.'
That makes about as much sense as:
'If I could, I would repeal the fire. It is the technological marvel of the age, but it is not â" as most people imagine â" a symbol of progress. Just the opposite. We would be better off without it.'
Why not do that instead. It would certainly have ended a lot of conflicts if we didn't have fire. Actually, you could reference just about any man made technology as contributing to man's demise. Anything can be perverted to be a weapon. Where do they find these idiots and why on Earth are they paid money for spreading this nonsensical drivel?
Slashdot Mirror
TimeMachine takes about 15 minutes to do the prep work before it starts copying for me, on a 2012 Retina MBP with 16Gb of RAM and only 256GB of disk space ... 64 GB taken by an unbacked up BootCamp part and another 120 or so eaten in Windows VMs that don't get backed up either ... i.e. Its not a slow spinning platter backing up a terabyte of data.
I see no indication of any Journal, it certainly isn't making it faster. Pretty freaking slow actually.
To what are you backing up and how much data do you generate in a backup interval? It sounds like you're backing up to a network storage device on a wireless network or just a SLOW network, OR you are generating 100s of megabytes if not gigabytes of data during a backup interval. Basically, something is either very wrong or you are a data hog for an SSD equipped machine to backup that slowly.
Wouldn't solve his problem. TimeMachine takes considerable time to prep and start a backup before it starts actually doing any work, I'd guess its likely doing the same sort of thing that Rsync, gathering a list of changes.
AFAIK, Time Machine is a GUI frontend for rsync. Watch Activity Monitor.app when it fires up. That will tell you. I don't use Time Machine, personally, I know how to use rsync.
In other words, when doom is called, consultants scramble to grab a piece of the hyped pie, companies take rational stock of their own situation and apply fixes as needed, and the general public scoffs as the event passes as another non-event, because of preparation and planning -- by JaredOfEuropa
God bless those Europans.
Actually, it's easier to justify ill feelings toward Ballmer if you just look at past press releases and interviews with the man, Google on your own, too much material to list here. The man is quite clearly a megalomaniacal jerk who cares more about money than users.
I'm guessing that you've never owned or operated a medium to large sized business? If you had you would know all of what you said is nonsense, except the CEO pay disparity issue. That is a legitimate issue to be addressed. The rest is a rant of the ignorant. Quality managers are rare, but they are essential to business operations and continuity.
Posting AC because admitting ignorance among geeks is dangerous:
> Cryptanalysis is at a level you could not possibly comprehend.
I think this comment *really* needs to be expanded upon.
"You" being someone that thinks anything encrypted is "safe" in some sort of absolute sense. "Safe", in this instance, is a rather relative term. A house with a 30-foot high wall and a moat is "safe", but not from a drone strike. 4096-bit encryption is "safe", but not from ubergeeks that think Special Relativity is child's play with access to data centers the size of football fields all cloaked in a shield of secrecy for decades.
Expansive enough?
A person confirmed by the US government of having a lot of inside information, recently said that our encryption is secure. So unless you can explain why you know more about the NSA's capabilities than him....
Show me those words in that order and proximity in that article. Kinda like your ability to argue from personal ignorance, non-existent.
Your users aren't code masters and never will be.
It doesn't involve users to be code masters, it just involves them engaging their brain a bit. I frequently get bug reports along the lines of "something broke last week, came up with some error (I don't remember what), but I rebooted it and its fine for now; please fix it so it doesn't happen again". You don't have to be a "code master" to figure out that reporting a bug and not actually tell me _what_ broke, what the error was or let me log into a system that is currently exhibiting the problem so I can look myself is not going to be condusive to me fixing things.
And this stuff happens again and again with the same customers... "one of our users is having a problem accessing some websites, please can you fix it?" - ok, so I have to go back and ask "which user" and "which websites", if I'm lucky the customer will give me this information, if I'm unlucky I get "I didn't ask". A week later I'll get an almost identical problem report from the same person about a different (but extremely similar) problem, and again none of the information I ask for _every_ time is included.
Also the great one that comes up occasionally is "this has been broken for a month and you haven't fixed it yet!".. well, if you'd actually told me that there was a problem I might've known to look into it, but since this is the first I've heard of it...
Not sure why this was rated Funny when it is actually quite insightful. Why, because the above points out the obvious issue here with the approach and that is that a one way street doesn't exist and never will. The users will NEVER have the expertise to tell you what went wrong, and unless you understand how they abstract things in their minds (which takes time with each user) you will not understand what they are talking about and will have to inquire.
Bug fixing is a two way street. The user tells me something is broken and like any good investigator I must then begin asking questions to gather more detailed information about the problem in order to identify the cause and subsequently the solution. The users aren't stupid, per se, they just don't speak the same language and look at a problem the same way a coder/developer does. Why is this so unexpected and a cause for any frustration at all? It's a reality that won't change unless we end up in a world of coders/developers.
If its all encrypted its safe, but i agree it could be a bad day when they decide to ransom your data with higher prices down the road. It also sux when you are off-line and want a file.
I prefer not to have a monthly bill to access my stuff. ( sure, you could depreciate out your hard drives and come up with a "monthly equivalent", but still.. )
1. You're delusional. Encryption is NOT a magic spell that keeps anyone but you out. I don't care if it's 65536-bit, no. Cryptanalysis is at a level you could not possibly comprehend.
2. Booth was a coward that shot a great man in the back of the head while seated in a theatre. And like your sig says, I don't give a flying fornication what you think of that.
Rummaging through the thread I see a few good pieces of advice. One, somebody in the food chain needs to grow a set of balls and learn how to say no. Yeah, yeah, yeah, the-customer-is-always-right, if-I-piss-the-customer-off-we-may-never-get-any-more-business BS. It's BS. Grow a set! Second, even with a set and some compromise you will still need to start setting REAL (as in hard) deadlines for feature requests with regard to release dates. Project management 101, actually, and even the current methodologies assume there are still dates for changes. If your boss(es) don't know this already from experience before they became management or while managing elsewhere, they are incompetent and need to be rooted out. Not easy, mind you. Third, keep looking for other opportunities. Even if change starts you may not want to wait for the positive effects, as you may not retain your sanity/joie de vive long enough to reap them where you are.
Small problem with that theory is that the items are still U.S. government property by international law/agreement. Taking them without permission would constitute grand theft and the U.S. would most likely be willing to go to war to get them back, given their significance.
On a poorly coded site...
And there's the ACTUAL problem, not necessarily the fault of HTTP. I know how cookies work. I never coded a site poorly, I guess, and why I couldn't understand why someone would implement one so large that it could be a problem. Never underestimate the power of stupid.
It's all relative.
This is FAR from a done deal. The binary/ASCII question is being hotly debated.
I want to be on the counter-argument side of the debate for binary. Why? Explain to me the exact benefits of binary encoding over ascii. As one person noted above they performance gain estimates are in the 10 - 20 % range. Sure, great if you're a hosting company or iTunes but is that really enough of a savings for the amount of change needed to implement it for the rest of us? I need to look at this harder but if there aren't real world improvements of 50% or better, why bother? Seems like this might go the way of IPv6 implementation if the gains don't outweigh the cost of change.
It was much less bloated before Javascript and CSS started throwing up in every corner of every webpage everywhere.
That's HTML, not HTTP.
Actually, that's the payload not the protocol.
Nope, that's like saying hamburgers are a core part of cows.
You make hambugers out of cows, you don't make cows out of hamburgers.
You make TCP out of IP, you don't make IP out of TCP.
I think you might have that backwards. "TCP provides reliable, ordered, error-checked delivery of a stream of octets between programs running on computers connected to a local area network, intranet or the public Internet." That implies that TCP is the basis for networking between machines. "The Internet Protocol (IP) is the principal communications protocol in the Internet protocol suite for relaying datagrams across network boundaries. Its routing function enables internetworking, and essentially establishes the Internet." That seems to imply that IP then connects TCP networks together to form the Internet. In that case the cow is made of hamburgers.
Except cookies. And even worse - ViewState variables posted on badly coded .NET applications. Some of those are near the hundred kilobyte range.
Last time I checked, cookies were stored locally and not transmitted with every request. Now the ViewState .NET variables I'd have to look up because I didn't fall into that trap, but I would imagine that they are also locally stored so not so much the reason your HTTP requests being generally slow.
Yeah, let's hinder the 99.999% scenario for the benefit of the 0.001% one.
ROFLMFAO...Have you LOOKED at society lately?
/.'s poll editorial board. [ducks]
Citation please! I clearly remember "Episode IV" appearing in the scrolling intro to the original, 1977 release and until someone can give me non-anecdotal evidence to the contrary I am sticking with what I know I saw, TYVM. Now, I did go see it again in 1978, and 1981 multiple times because that's what us kids did those days; play arcade games and see how many times we could watch Star Wars. I do not remember anything changing in those screenings from one release to another. AFAIK, Lucas didn't change them until he did the new space FX.
Found it http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2012-09/25/hitachi-quartz-data-storage
Alternatively, are we, as a species, willing to start over if we experience a catastrophe, pandemic, etc. of significant magnitude on a global scale that derails our progress and sends us back to the dark ages or worse?
Willing? Like we have control over the cosmos and would choose to hit ourselves with an asteroid, or get decimated by a plague? First thing is to set expectations on "permanent", because in reality...there is no such thing. The Earth, the Sun, even the universe has an expiration date. In order to even begin to narrow the types of materials needed you would need to define the duration of "permanent" before you went anywhere. I couldn't dig it up but I seem to remember an article online about something like this. Using thin diamond sheets to encode information into or the like that would be able to survive hundreds if not thousands of years intact if locked away like the seed vault. If I find it I will reply to this if someone else hasn't posted it elsewhere in the thread.
the smaller the fabrication design, the less power used
Ummm, no. The smaller the design the more leakage current you get and the more power is wasted as heat. Who is this idiot that wrote this completely clueless "opinion"? Intel does have a foundry unit, but they don't make lots the size that Apple would need with the fabs that Apple would want to use. The third parties aren't getting lots on 10 million finished parts per quarter at 22nm from Intel. Not unless those third parties are buying Intel branded parts.
But, says Canavero, recent advances in re-connecting spinal cords that are surgically severed mean that it should be technically feasible to do it in humans.
Ok...you first.
'If I could, I would repeal the Internet. It is the technological marvel of the age, but it is not â" as most people imagine â" a symbol of progress. Just the opposite. We would be better off without it.'
That makes about as much sense as:
'If I could, I would repeal the fire. It is the technological marvel of the age, but it is not â" as most people imagine â" a symbol of progress. Just the opposite. We would be better off without it.'
Why not do that instead. It would certainly have ended a lot of conflicts if we didn't have fire. Actually, you could reference just about any man made technology as contributing to man's demise. Anything can be perverted to be a weapon. Where do they find these idiots and why on Earth are they paid money for spreading this nonsensical drivel?