Strange, I can find USB 3.0 devices but there is not a single thunderbolt device listed on Newegg.
There weren't any USB devices when the original iMac came out, either.
Check out Newegg a year from now. Yes, there will still be more redundant, cheap-ass drive enclosures for USB 3.0; but there will be a nice selection of TB ones, too. The TB devices are still rolling out; but I'm sure you've conveniently ignored that fact.
I can't tell if you are trolling or not, but just in case.
I'll bet Amazon.com doesn't have 13,000 CONCURRENT clients. Gimme a break! When you LIE, at least make it believable
In fact, I wonder if there is a database on the planet that has that many CONCURRENT accesses.
Google has over 30,000 searches per second. Secondly he states that 13,000 users where using it simultaneously, not that the database had 13,000 open DB connections. Slashdot probably has more people viewing it than that now. I am sorry you suck at computing, but writing a web app to deal with 13,000 simultaneous clients is trivial. You will have room to talk when you need to deal with 30,000,000.
First, is Google running on PHP and MySQL? I think not. They use thier own database called Bigtable. Bigtable is NOT an SQL database. In fact, it isn't even a Relational Database. They even run their own custom Linux distro, don't they?
Sorry you suck at RDBMS design, and fact-checking. I would imagine that Google doesn't use Apache, neither. Nope. They use the Google Web Server. So, what was your point, again?
Second, it depends on what he meant by 13,000 simultaneous users were USING it.
Third, I still call shenanigans because FMP Server has a hard limit of 100 concurrent web users (100 concurrent sessions), if they were using it to publish the database directly. And if they WEREN'T using it to publish the database to the web directly, I'm not sure how they were getting the data to the clients. And if they were using FileMaker Clients, FMP is only tested to 250 clients. It has no actual maximum; but 250 is pretty far from 13,000. and FMP isn't like MySQL: You don't open a connection; do a transaction or two, and close the connection, like you do in PHP/MySQL. Opening a FMP database is a many-seconds-long process. He said that FMP ran for 3 hours before it buckled. I don't think 13,000 FMP clients could have OPENED the database in 3 hours!
Ok, let's look at some REAL concurrent numbers. We'll leave the likes of Google, Yahoo, eBay, the NFL, GoDaddy and Amazon out of it; because what they are doing is FAR from trivial. And BTW, anyone can throw numbers around; but I am having a real hard time verifying your claim, other than the Google number. And as I said, what they are doing has NOTHING to do with PHP/MySQL; and so is a non-sequitur:
This Tomcat/Apache and Tomcat/IIS article seems to suggest a number of concurrent sessions that is a couple of orders of magnitude LOWER than 13,000 simultaneous users.
Apache documentation seems to suggest that 13,000 concurrent open sessions is pretty damned many, too.
OTOH, WebSphere has the ability to handle hundreds of thousands of concurrent connections; but again, we ain't talking no steenkin' LAMP configuration, like the original LIAR suggested. And those applications aren't thrown together in six hours, neither. So again, not germane.
So, the bottom line is: I'm positive it can be done; but it is not "trivial" to make it run well, and I have serious doubts as to whether a LAMP solution can get there in six hours worth of real-world MySQL/PHP coding.
You are the rare exception: An IT PROFESSIONAL, rather than a POSER, who relies on (as one poster put it STONEWALLING and OBSFUCATION). I salute you! The IT world needs more people like you; there are already too many Computer Priests!
1. Configure it as an unsecure FTP server.
2. Expose it to a public network for a few days/weeks.
3. Collect 6TB of pr0n and movies from your server.
4. ?????
5. Profit.
The very G5 dualie that I am typing this on not only runs an ftp server with anonymous (albeit read-only) access (and several ftp accounts that have R/W access), and it runs a (non pr0n) streaming video server, that is liked to from a public website, but it has been "on", barenaked on the internet, since I purchased it in April, 2005. Many, many, many attacks have been launched against it. It is probably being attacked as I type; but, so far at least, None Shall Pass.
Oh, and I regularly cruise pr0n sites and d/l same. Again, no problems.
So, stop thinking in terms of Windows clients; because OS X seems to be pretty damned hardy. And I run 10.4 (Tiger); which was released before all the sandboxing, ASLR, et cetera, that more recent versions of OS X and its typical applications (like Safari) were "hardened".
Normally I recommend NOT editing anything in/System, but thats where apple put the time machine preference files so I suppose in this case it's acceptable to modify that file.
Or be safer, and use one of the GUI Time Machine editors, eh?
Advice is buy a 386 off eBay, open it up and take out the LED and the turbo button, bang a hole into the mac server, solder in the turbo button and put a battery containing led with acid mixed together into the server case. Now it's a little more useful. Anymore worthless questions or did you expect we all have magic "useful" ways that'll increase your bottomline 20%?
I really don't know if Time Machine will work well with this situation. I don't understand the underlying technology very well, and it is still getting stability and performance issues worked out. Maybe rsync can make that all magically work out, especially if he uses one of the Time Machine "editors" to make it so the backups of the Time Machine image files don't happen while Time Machine is busy making a new one...
When Time Machine is in the mix, you essentially have two "competing" backup methodologies operating simultaneously. Again, I really don't understand Time Machine NEARLY well-enough to predict the end of that story...
And as for RAID 10, I also haven't actually encountered it; so I was kinda being "safe" in my recommendations.;-)
The 80's called, and they want their database back.
Seriously, what kind of performance can you get out of FMP? NONE!
The databases I was working with were written by a FMP "expert". The one I remember best was online for 3 hours before it crashed. The 13,000 users accessing it simultaneously probably didn't help. I spent 6 hours rewriting in PHP/MySQL. It didn't even hiccup.
If not having any love for FMP makes me incompetent, I'm ok with that. FMP is a piece of shit app anyway. The only thing worse is Access.
First, You do realize that Access and FMP were one and the same at one time. FileMaker grew up; Access didn't.
13,000 users does sound like a bit much for FileMaker, though, since Filemaker 11 Server Advanced has only been tested with 250 simultaneous users. So, I call Shenanigans, or somebody should have been FIRED for specing something that far beyond its guaranteed limits. Or you are a fucking liar. I tend to think the latter, because I can't find anything to even REMOTELY suggest that capability in MySQL. And especially not with an application you can whip together in six hours! I'll bet Amazon.com doesn't have 13,000 CONCURRENT clients. Gimme a break! When you LIE, at least make it believable.
What you don't know is that FMP actually ALLOWS for multiple users to have the same record open simultaneously, and actually updates all clients view of the record in "realtime". The overhead to manage that alone across 13,000 clients is something that MySQL simply doesn't have to deal with. In fact, I wonder if there is a database on the planet that has that many CONCURRENT accesses. Certainly not on a single server!
And was this running on the same server hardware and network as the FMP solution? Because that could make all the difference.
Also, was your PHP/MySQL solution REALLY equivalent to the FMP database? Or was it more, um, "austere"? (I'll bet I can guess...) Anything you could design, write and debug in SIX HOURS of PHP and MySQL was pretty frickin' simplistic. Because you couldn't use ANYTHING but the data between the two systems. So, either you are working at the speed of Commander Data replacing the Isolinear chips that the other (infected) crewmember had removed from the computer on TNG, or you are a liar, or you had a pretty simple application.
Filemaker sounds like a great place to start. It could be your introduction to databases.
Dear god, just tell him to commit suicide!
Once you understand the power of databases
Not using filemaker you won't!
Set up a webserver on your personal machine and start playing with some utilities that you think might be useful in your environment. When you've got more than 2 things you'd like to see in use at your office, pitch it to your boss and get his approval. Then create a webserver on the apple server and start building your new company intranet.
Oh, and stay as far away from filemaker as you possibly can. In my last job I was the go-to filemaker guy (I didn't build the FM databases, I just cleaned up the mess). My approach was to wait until a filemaker database crashed, and rebuild it correctly in PHP/MySQL.
You DO realize, of course (but it sounds like you don't) that you can design a BAD database application in ANYTHING.
FileMaker is one spectacular feat of database engineering, and actually quite unique in many, many areas. It's just a shame that your vision is too narrow to realize that.
It is absolutely amazing to me the number of people on slashdot that can't see past their small little mindset, and must shoehorn every single thing into that narrow world.
Would I try to run American Airlines' reservation system on it? Hell no! But neither would I try to run it on the likes of PHP and MySQL. FileMaker is a pretty slick database. Too bad you just HAVE to have that C like syntax and SQL queries to BELIEVE that it's a "real" database. Give me FileMaker and I will have a polished, customer-ready solution in their hands while you're still writing and debugging PHP functions, entering MySQL schemas, and designing web forms.
You, sir, were obviously ONLY the "go to" FMP guy, because NOBODY ELSE knew ANYTHING about it.
Why would you replace a Unix server with a Linux server?
Because Linux is free (as in speech, and in most cases as in beer as well). Linux isn't locked into a specific company. Linux doesn't (generally) have DRM. The only proprietary, non-open parts of Linux I can't mess with come from third parties, and even those have free (though less functional) replacements. Linux runs on most common hardware, not just Macs (both licensing and technology). Linux has a number of companies backing various versions of it, not just one company.
Now, of course someone could make up a similar list for OS A vs. OS B regardless of what A and B are. And that's fine, choice is good. But you asked why someone would replace a "unix" (and yes I know that Mac OS X is certified UNIX) server with a Linux server... so there's one answer. Could you dispute each point I made? Sure you could. Any point to anything can be disputed in some way. But the above is why *I* would choose to replace a "unix" server with a Linux server. You asked, and here's one answer that applies to at least one person.
YMMV.
You DO realize, of course, that to him, OS X was FREE, too; because it comes with the machine, right?
And what, exactly DRM were you referring to?
He already HAS a Mac. His employer has already purchased the hardware; so that's a moot point. And Linux's many flavors have been a LIABILITY, not a strength. And it's high-time that the Linux fanbois wake up and realize that the world really doesn't need 10^200 Linux distros. Or even 10^2. Or maybe not even 10^1.
For this guy (not you), OS X is EXACTLY where he should be. He will be able to set up, run, and maintain more services, in less time, and with far less manual reading, forum surfing, and hair pulling than with any other OS. That's not an opinion; it's a fact.
Seriously, data backups are crucial in every enterprise, even small ones. That's a *great* use for your server. Are you checking on your process by restoring files once per month? Once per quarter? I joined a bioscience center that had faithfully been making backups for half a year before I joined but five months of the backups had no data. So do check, please.
I have more questions about your backup methods than I can easily list here. Still, there are other good uses for *every* server. They can all:
1) Provide DHCP addresses
2) Offer NTP to keep the clocks synchronized
3) Provide comprehensive system logging (for all systems of concern)
4) Store and/or offer common utilities like print services
Can things like 5 months of "no backups" happen with an rsync-based backup to external hard drives? (see my comment above regarding same). I'm honestly asking.
If all the clients AND the server use NTP, then why does the SERVER have to dole out the correct time, too? I would assume that if they are using a Mac as a Server, they are probably an all-Mac shop (or nearly so). OS X offers NTP clock/calendar sync on every workstation (in fact, Apple, Inc. itself provides NTP services). I think that Windows 7 does, too. So, why run an NTP SERVER on your Server?
Same thing for logging: OS X is a logging FOOL! I suppose that one could backup those Workstation Logfiles to the Server. Might be a good idea. But, again, there really isn't much reason to do "extra" logging on the Server (it will be keeping its own logs, too, of course).
Print Services: Just like Windows (and I assume Linux, too?), a printer's queue is maintained on whatever machine the printer is actually attached to. In the case of a directly-networked printer (like, for example, an HP LaserJet with a JetDirect card), I believe that each workstation has a local queue, and submits jobs to the printer's internal "print server" through an arbitration scheme managed by that print server, too. At least that's my understanding of how OS X (client) handles Print Services. If he is running OS X Server, I believe it can/does provide "centralized" Print Services, even for printers that are NOT physically attached. I'm not an expert in OS X Server or CUPS in general; but that's my guess. WIth as few people as his office has, printer arbitration is probably not too much of a problem, anyway, and I'll bet that he is just doing the "shared printers" bit (which works great in OS X).
This, exactly. You might explore setting up a VPN so people can log in to work from home. That's an office pleaser, but it's also open to the Internet and maybe not a good idea to have sitting on the same hardware you are backing up / serving internal files from. Yeah scratch that... one really good backup server is worth more than anything else you could add. If you have spare PC's lying around, install Linux and add services to them... for 12 people you don't need big guns for most services. If you do decide to run other services off that server, consider putting them in a seperate virtual machine.
Yeah, because someone who needs help with an OS X Server is going to have NO problem setting up Linux!
[rollseyes]
To the original poster of this article: That was NOT meant as a slam or slight of your abilities; rather a slam on the mindset that "Linux is for everyone and everything". You are right where you ought to be. OS X will make a FINE server for your dozen or so workstations (assuming you aren't all doing Non-Linear-Editing of video, or heavy-duty software development to/from same!). Grow your skills slowly and carefully. That way, you'll thoroughly understand what you are doing BEFORE you do it, instead of creating an environment and network that gets ever more complicated and rickety as time goes on, by doing things like "just setting up another Linux server" before you even understand what you're doing with the FIRST (OS X) one!
Fercrissakes, people around here give the STOOPIDEST advice sometimes!
Yeah, he needs a MIXED-PLATFORM server environment, especially one that is as difficult for the average person to deal with as LINUX, like he needs the proverbial hole in his head! SHEESH!
Yep... IT seems fairly easy for a layman until you have a hardware failure due a power outage, and suddenly find out that your daily backups haven't been working correctly for the past few weeks.
Only THEN will many people understand how important IT concepts like UPS battery backup, RAID, and scheduled backup tests are.
Stonewall and obfuscate until they are willing to hire additional help or give you an obscene raise. Once they recognize your unique ability to set priorities, they will promote you to manager.
Spoken like a TRUE IT "professional". You DO know what "MCSE" REALLY stands for, don't you:
Must Consult Someone Experienced!
Don't listen to this jackass. You're doing what most IT "pros" NEVER do: Admit it when they DON'T know something; and instead just "STONEWALL AND OBSFUCATE"
Did they teach you that technique in Famous IT Professional's School? Or did you just make that one up all by yourself?
You, sir, are why WINDOWS continues to be the predominant business platform.
Let me say it again: STONEWALL AND OBSFUCATE.
I hope they put that on your tombstone. In fact, I wish I knew who your boss was, I'd copy that comment right to him. Then perhaps Human Resources would be having a short, direct chat (i.e., exit interview) with you...
Actually... I used to be an on-demand IT guy. I worked for a company that charged on billable hours. When something needed maintenance or a break happened, I would schedule some time to see them and take care of it. When my clients had a need, they'd talk it out with me and our business guy, we'd draw up a quote and then do the work. We'd also take care of necessary maintenance (again on demand).
It's actually a pretty good way to get the IT needs taken care of without needing to spend 100K... Or even 50K... If you're an office of about a dozen or so you could probably get by on less than 10K/year including hardware.
It worked out for me because I had a lot of clients, so I always had work to do... It worked great for my clients because (I like to think) that I did good work for them without costing them their profit margin.
Spoken like a true consultant/thief.
I like the "Would schedule some time" bit. When businesses have IT problems, they don't have TIME to be "scheduled". They need to be back up and running THIRTY MINUTES AGO!
Don't listen to these charlatans. There is a reason why "real" businesses have on-site IT. Do you REALLY think they like paying for those guys to sit around reading Slashdot all day? No; but you don't need the police or fire department all the time, either...
The original poster of this story is performing a VERY valuable service for his company. In fact, I suggest he talks with his boss about increasing his compensation a bit to let his company know that they realize that he is actually performing TWO REAL JOBS now. People don't value what they get for free. Take it from one who knows...
I second this, a good small business I.T. consultant/contractor can be hard to find, but if you find a good guy a few hours of his time could save you a lot of headaches. My former boss who had small business specializing in networking for small businesses probably could set everything up for a business your size in a few days.
Yeah, and then nobody in the office has the knowledge and or the ACCESS to fix even the tiniest little thing, and so someone (or everyone!) sits around for a whole day (minimum!) while the 2-person "IT consultancy" gets time to get around to you.
In fact, that's why I ended up doing IT for the firm I worked as an embedded developer for. We had an outside IT firm. But their response times kept slipping and slipping, and I kept getting collared by the secretarial (and other) staff as I walked in the door "Can you fix my printer?" "Can you help me find a file?" "I don't think the backups ran last night." Et frickin' CETERA, 'til suddenly one day it became actual company policy to call me before calling the IT consultants.
Yeah, I know about you guys, and have the battle scars to show for it.
As they say, "Experience is what you get when you don't get what you want."
I got more than my share of IT "experience" that way...
RAID is not a backup solution. RAID will simply increase the reliability. I've had many raid 5 arrays fail and loose everything. There are many ways of backing up data and RAID is not one of them.
I agree. But RAID is a place to start.
There are a zillion GUI front-ends for rsync-based backups for OS X. Most of them are even free. Some of them handle backing-up Time Machine backups (Sparse Image files). Then there are industrial-strength backup systems like the ones from TOLIS (full disclosure: I haven't used these. I just know they exist). But, I think with a 10-person office, you probably can get by with something that is rsync-based (rsync is a very powerful UNIX "file/folder synchronization" utility that has been around since dirt. Rsync is included with OS X. Like all UNIX utilities, it is actually a command-line creature; but as I said, there are MANY GUI "front-ends" for rsync for OS X. Checkout this and this list. Let me know when you get through all those, LOL!
Now, let's talk about what MEDIA to backup to: In this day and age, pretty much the only reasonable thing to backup a hard drive to is another hard drive. Nothing else makes sense, cost and speed wise. You have a 6TB Drobo. What RAID mode is it being used in? Let's say it is in RAID 1. That means it will have 50% of its actual capacity, due to the "mirroring". Ok, so that's roughly 3TB (nevermind the formatting overhead). If it is in RAID 5 mode, the Drobo will have roughly 2/3 of its 6TB (or about 4TB). I'll assume you are NOT running RAID 0, 2, 3, or 4. Nor do I personally like any of the RAID levels above 5, because they are either relatively less safe, and/or have sort of "cumulative" storage and performance penalties as the array size grows. If you are doing a lot of random-writes to your server, then RAID 1 (straight mirroring) will give you the best overall performance, at the cost of less storage overall. See this article for more details than you probably want to know right now.
But, I digress... Let's say you have this running in RAID 1. This means that your Drobo is effectively 3TB. That's very convenient; because the world has 3TB drives now. So, here's what you do: Go and get two (to start) 3TB EXTERNAL drives (preferably FireWire 800 (if the server supports FW800. I'm assuming it doesn't support Thunderbolt). Format these as HFS+ (journaled). Name them the same (but not the same as the Drobo, just for confusion's sake). Now, you effectively have two 3TB "backup tapes" that you can "rsync" your Drobo to.
"Rotate" these at whatever frequency you desire (not less frequency than once per week). Take the "new" backup OFFSITE (Monday evening is easy to remember. That way, you can bring the "old" backup into the office on Friday morning, swap it with the "new" backup, and take it home with you on Friday night when you go home. Assuming your business is an 8-5 M-F type thing, set your rsync "incremental" backups to start late in the evening, every evening, like around 11pm (that way, people leaving late aren't a problem). If all goes well (and it should, because backup-to-harddrive is rarely a problem), your drive should be backed-up by the time you return in the morning. If you want to be extra safe, you can even rotate your drives every day, but that is a lot of wear-and-tear on the power and FireWire connectors on the drives; but is the safest overall. Swapping the drives every day also keeps rsync from having to to a BIG backup the first time the drives are swapped; because it won't have to "catch up" for the whole time the "returning" drive has been "away". But DO know that you probably will start having connector problems in a year or two. Big deal. You can replace the drives every freakin' MONTH and still be money ahead over a tape-changer (and
Agreed. Apple techs are far from "worth their weight in gold". First off, they have specialized, niche skills (if they have them at all), secondly, they are fat.
I am frequently baffled by some of the stuff that Apple gets away with patenting. In this case, the patent described would(to my layman's inspection) appear to be a mere subset of Microsoft's (equally odious and sinister) 2008 "Digital Manners" patent, except that that patent covered a much broader range of possible prohibition/settings propagation media, and a much more generic set of possible commands.
Excuse me, but doesn't TFS say Patent Application? First, Apple applies for a lot of things it has no intention of actually doing. Second, a Patent Application is not a Patent.
Third, there are the increasing numbers of places, such as Federal Court Buildings, Juvenile settings, and even some companies, where you can't have any device with a camera anywhere in the building. That makes it a PITA for the owner of the device. Either they have to send the thing to a third-party service that can disable the camera, or remove it, an provide an official report documenting same (and then the user loses some of the functionality they paid for in the device); or, they simply can't take their laptop/tablet/smartphone into those buildings at all, which is a royal pain if you're a salesman, attorney, IT consultant, or even just an employee.
Look, I hate the whole idea, too; but I can see a small justification for it.
When cameras are Outlawed, only Outlaws will have Cameras... Or IR filters!
I am frequently baffled by some of the stuff that Apple gets away with patenting. In this case, the patent described would(to my layman's inspection) appear to be a mere subset of Microsoft's (equally odious and sinister) 2008 "Digital Manners" patent, except that that patent covered a much broader range of possible prohibition/settings propagation media, and a much more generic set of possible commands.
Excuse me, but doesn't TFS say Patent Application? First, Apple applies for a lot of things it has no intention of actually doing. Second, a Patent Application is not a Patent. Also, there are the increasing numbers of places, such as Federal Court Buildings, Juvenile settings, and even some companies, where you can't have any device with a camera anywhere in the building. That makes it a PITA for the owner of the device. Either they have to send the thing to a third-party service that can disable the camera, or remove it, an provide an official report documenting same (and then the user loses some of the functionality they paid for in the device); or, they simply can't take their laptop/tablet/smartphone into those buildings at all, which is a royal pain if you're a salesman, attorney, IT consultant, or even just an employee.
Look, I hate the whole idea, too; but I can see a small justification for it.
When cameras are Outlawed, only Outlaws will have Cameras... Or IR filters!
Now, there's no choice but to go to DigiKey and Mouser, and figure out how I'm going to meet their minimum order requirements, when all I wanted was $5 worth of stuff
Um... what's DigiKey's minimum order again? I regularly buy small quantities of stuff from them. AFAIK, they have no minimum order. And they're fast and reliable.
Now, there's no choice but to go to DigiKey and Mouser, and figure out how I'm going to meet their minimum order requirements, when all I wanted was $5 worth of stuff
Um... what's DigiKey's minimum order again? I regularly buy small quantities of stuff from them. AFAIK, they have no minimum order. And they're fast and reliable.
(Posting as AC because I'm too lazy to login)
Maybe they've dropped it; but I thought it used to be $25. I guess they DID drop it!, summabitch! THANKS!!! Shows how long I've been ordering from DigiKey, LOL!
Slashdot Mirror
Strange, I can find USB 3.0 devices but there is not a single thunderbolt device listed on Newegg.
There weren't any USB devices when the original iMac came out, either.
Check out Newegg a year from now. Yes, there will still be more redundant, cheap-ass drive enclosures for USB 3.0; but there will be a nice selection of TB ones, too. The TB devices are still rolling out; but I'm sure you've conveniently ignored that fact.
I can't tell if you are trolling or not, but just in case.
I'll bet Amazon.com doesn't have 13,000 CONCURRENT clients. Gimme a break! When you LIE, at least make it believable
In fact, I wonder if there is a database on the planet that has that many CONCURRENT accesses.
Google has over 30,000 searches per second. Secondly he states that 13,000 users where using it simultaneously, not that the database had 13,000 open DB connections. Slashdot probably has more people viewing it than that now. I am sorry you suck at computing, but writing a web app to deal with 13,000 simultaneous clients is trivial. You will have room to talk when you need to deal with 30,000,000.
First, is Google running on PHP and MySQL? I think not. They use thier own database called Bigtable. Bigtable is NOT an SQL database. In fact, it isn't even a Relational Database. They even run their own custom Linux distro, don't they?
Sorry you suck at RDBMS design, and fact-checking. I would imagine that Google doesn't use Apache, neither. Nope. They use the Google Web Server. So, what was your point, again? Second, it depends on what he meant by 13,000 simultaneous users were USING it.
Third, I still call shenanigans because FMP Server has a hard limit of 100 concurrent web users (100 concurrent sessions), if they were using it to publish the database directly. And if they WEREN'T using it to publish the database to the web directly, I'm not sure how they were getting the data to the clients. And if they were using FileMaker Clients, FMP is only tested to 250 clients. It has no actual maximum; but 250 is pretty far from 13,000. and FMP isn't like MySQL: You don't open a connection; do a transaction or two, and close the connection, like you do in PHP/MySQL. Opening a FMP database is a many-seconds-long process. He said that FMP ran for 3 hours before it buckled. I don't think 13,000 FMP clients could have OPENED the database in 3 hours!
Ok, let's look at some REAL concurrent numbers. We'll leave the likes of Google, Yahoo, eBay, the NFL, GoDaddy and Amazon out of it; because what they are doing is FAR from trivial. And BTW, anyone can throw numbers around; but I am having a real hard time verifying your claim, other than the Google number. And as I said, what they are doing has NOTHING to do with PHP/MySQL; and so is a non-sequitur:
This Tomcat/Apache and Tomcat/IIS article seems to suggest a number of concurrent sessions that is a couple of orders of magnitude LOWER than 13,000 simultaneous users.
Apache documentation seems to suggest that 13,000 concurrent open sessions is pretty damned many, too.
OTOH, WebSphere has the ability to handle hundreds of thousands of concurrent connections; but again, we ain't talking no steenkin' LAMP configuration, like the original LIAR suggested. And those applications aren't thrown together in six hours, neither. So again, not germane.
So, the bottom line is: I'm positive it can be done; but it is not "trivial" to make it run well, and I have serious doubts as to whether a LAMP solution can get there in six hours worth of real-world MySQL/PHP coding.
You are the rare exception: An IT PROFESSIONAL, rather than a POSER, who relies on (as one poster put it STONEWALLING and OBSFUCATION). I salute you! The IT world needs more people like you; there are already too many Computer Priests!
1. Configure it as an unsecure FTP server. 2. Expose it to a public network for a few days/weeks. 3. Collect 6TB of pr0n and movies from your server. 4. ????? 5. Profit.
The very G5 dualie that I am typing this on not only runs an ftp server with anonymous (albeit read-only) access (and several ftp accounts that have R/W access), and it runs a (non pr0n) streaming video server, that is liked to from a public website, but it has been "on", barenaked on the internet, since I purchased it in April, 2005. Many, many, many attacks have been launched against it. It is probably being attacked as I type; but, so far at least, None Shall Pass.
Oh, and I regularly cruise pr0n sites and d/l same. Again, no problems.
So, stop thinking in terms of Windows clients; because OS X seems to be pretty damned hardy. And I run 10.4 (Tiger); which was released before all the sandboxing, ASLR, et cetera, that more recent versions of OS X and its typical applications (like Safari) were "hardened".
So, it seems I have already "profited"...
Normally I recommend NOT editing anything in /System, but thats where apple put the time machine preference files so I suppose in this case it's acceptable to modify that file.
Or be safer, and use one of the GUI Time Machine editors, eh?
Or drop the kiddie os and use a real one Linux Solaris or even windows
Yeah, because a certified Unix is such a kiddie OS compared to Linux.
No wonder you posted as AC. Even YOU don't believe your bullshit!
Advice is buy a 386 off eBay, open it up and take out the LED and the turbo button, bang a hole into the mac server, solder in the turbo button and put a battery containing led with acid mixed together into the server case. Now it's a little more useful. Anymore worthless questions or did you expect we all have magic "useful" ways that'll increase your bottomline 20%?
Going through The Change, are we?
I really don't know if Time Machine will work well with this situation. I don't understand the underlying technology very well, and it is still getting stability and performance issues worked out. Maybe rsync can make that all magically work out, especially if he uses one of the Time Machine "editors" to make it so the backups of the Time Machine image files don't happen while Time Machine is busy making a new one...
;-)
When Time Machine is in the mix, you essentially have two "competing" backup methodologies operating simultaneously. Again, I really don't understand Time Machine NEARLY well-enough to predict the end of that story...
And as for RAID 10, I also haven't actually encountered it; so I was kinda being "safe" in my recommendations.
The 80's called, and they want their database back.
Seriously, what kind of performance can you get out of FMP? NONE!
The databases I was working with were written by a FMP "expert". The one I remember best was online for 3 hours before it crashed. The 13,000 users accessing it simultaneously probably didn't help. I spent 6 hours rewriting in PHP/MySQL. It didn't even hiccup.
If not having any love for FMP makes me incompetent, I'm ok with that. FMP is a piece of shit app anyway. The only thing worse is Access.
First, You do realize that Access and FMP were one and the same at one time. FileMaker grew up; Access didn't.
13,000 users does sound like a bit much for FileMaker, though, since Filemaker 11 Server Advanced has only been tested with 250 simultaneous users. So, I call Shenanigans, or somebody should have been FIRED for specing something that far beyond its guaranteed limits. Or you are a fucking liar. I tend to think the latter, because I can't find anything to even REMOTELY suggest that capability in MySQL. And especially not with an application you can whip together in six hours! I'll bet Amazon.com doesn't have 13,000 CONCURRENT clients. Gimme a break! When you LIE, at least make it believable.
What you don't know is that FMP actually ALLOWS for multiple users to have the same record open simultaneously, and actually updates all clients view of the record in "realtime". The overhead to manage that alone across 13,000 clients is something that MySQL simply doesn't have to deal with. In fact, I wonder if there is a database on the planet that has that many CONCURRENT accesses. Certainly not on a single server!
And was this running on the same server hardware and network as the FMP solution? Because that could make all the difference.
Also, was your PHP/MySQL solution REALLY equivalent to the FMP database? Or was it more, um, "austere"? (I'll bet I can guess...) Anything you could design, write and debug in SIX HOURS of PHP and MySQL was pretty frickin' simplistic. Because you couldn't use ANYTHING but the data between the two systems. So, either you are working at the speed of Commander Data replacing the Isolinear chips that the other (infected) crewmember had removed from the computer on TNG, or you are a liar, or you had a pretty simple application.
I'm betting on "liar".
Filemaker sounds like a great place to start. It could be your introduction to databases.
Dear god, just tell him to commit suicide!
Once you understand the power of databases
Not using filemaker you won't!
Set up a webserver on your personal machine and start playing with some utilities that you think might be useful in your environment. When you've got more than 2 things you'd like to see in use at your office, pitch it to your boss and get his approval. Then create a webserver on the apple server and start building your new company intranet.
Oh, and stay as far away from filemaker as you possibly can. In my last job I was the go-to filemaker guy (I didn't build the FM databases, I just cleaned up the mess). My approach was to wait until a filemaker database crashed, and rebuild it correctly in PHP/MySQL.
You DO realize, of course (but it sounds like you don't) that you can design a BAD database application in ANYTHING.
FileMaker is one spectacular feat of database engineering, and actually quite unique in many, many areas. It's just a shame that your vision is too narrow to realize that.
It is absolutely amazing to me the number of people on slashdot that can't see past their small little mindset, and must shoehorn every single thing into that narrow world.
Would I try to run American Airlines' reservation system on it? Hell no! But neither would I try to run it on the likes of PHP and MySQL. FileMaker is a pretty slick database. Too bad you just HAVE to have that C like syntax and SQL queries to BELIEVE that it's a "real" database. Give me FileMaker and I will have a polished, customer-ready solution in their hands while you're still writing and debugging PHP functions, entering MySQL schemas, and designing web forms.
You, sir, were obviously ONLY the "go to" FMP guy, because NOBODY ELSE knew ANYTHING about it.
Why would you replace a Unix server with a Linux server?
Because Linux is free (as in speech, and in most cases as in beer as well). Linux isn't locked into a specific company. Linux doesn't (generally) have DRM. The only proprietary, non-open parts of Linux I can't mess with come from third parties, and even those have free (though less functional) replacements. Linux runs on most common hardware, not just Macs (both licensing and technology). Linux has a number of companies backing various versions of it, not just one company.
Now, of course someone could make up a similar list for OS A vs. OS B regardless of what A and B are. And that's fine, choice is good. But you asked why someone would replace a "unix" (and yes I know that Mac OS X is certified UNIX) server with a Linux server... so there's one answer. Could you dispute each point I made? Sure you could. Any point to anything can be disputed in some way. But the above is why *I* would choose to replace a "unix" server with a Linux server. You asked, and here's one answer that applies to at least one person.
YMMV.
You DO realize, of course, that to him, OS X was FREE, too; because it comes with the machine, right?
And what, exactly DRM were you referring to?
He already HAS a Mac. His employer has already purchased the hardware; so that's a moot point. And Linux's many flavors have been a LIABILITY, not a strength. And it's high-time that the Linux fanbois wake up and realize that the world really doesn't need 10^200 Linux distros. Or even 10^2. Or maybe not even 10^1.
For this guy (not you), OS X is EXACTLY where he should be. He will be able to set up, run, and maintain more services, in less time, and with far less manual reading, forum surfing, and hair pulling than with any other OS. That's not an opinion; it's a fact.
And his mileage will NOT vary.
First off replace it with a linux server or at least a Windows server
Obviously, you don't even believe that yourself, or you wouldn't have posted AC.
Seriously, data backups are crucial in every enterprise, even small ones. That's a *great* use for your server. Are you checking on your process by restoring files once per month? Once per quarter? I joined a bioscience center that had faithfully been making backups for half a year before I joined but five months of the backups had no data. So do check, please.
I have more questions about your backup methods than I can easily list here. Still, there are other good uses for *every* server. They can all:
1) Provide DHCP addresses 2) Offer NTP to keep the clocks synchronized 3) Provide comprehensive system logging (for all systems of concern) 4) Store and/or offer common utilities like print services
Can things like 5 months of "no backups" happen with an rsync-based backup to external hard drives? (see my comment above regarding same). I'm honestly asking.
If all the clients AND the server use NTP, then why does the SERVER have to dole out the correct time, too? I would assume that if they are using a Mac as a Server, they are probably an all-Mac shop (or nearly so). OS X offers NTP clock/calendar sync on every workstation (in fact, Apple, Inc. itself provides NTP services). I think that Windows 7 does, too. So, why run an NTP SERVER on your Server?
Same thing for logging: OS X is a logging FOOL! I suppose that one could backup those Workstation Logfiles to the Server. Might be a good idea. But, again, there really isn't much reason to do "extra" logging on the Server (it will be keeping its own logs, too, of course).
Print Services: Just like Windows (and I assume Linux, too?), a printer's queue is maintained on whatever machine the printer is actually attached to. In the case of a directly-networked printer (like, for example, an HP LaserJet with a JetDirect card), I believe that each workstation has a local queue, and submits jobs to the printer's internal "print server" through an arbitration scheme managed by that print server, too. At least that's my understanding of how OS X (client) handles Print Services. If he is running OS X Server, I believe it can/does provide "centralized" Print Services, even for printers that are NOT physically attached. I'm not an expert in OS X Server or CUPS in general; but that's my guess. WIth as few people as his office has, printer arbitration is probably not too much of a problem, anyway, and I'll bet that he is just doing the "shared printers" bit (which works great in OS X).
Doorstop?
I know you are, but what am I?
This, exactly. You might explore setting up a VPN so people can log in to work from home. That's an office pleaser, but it's also open to the Internet and maybe not a good idea to have sitting on the same hardware you are backing up / serving internal files from. Yeah scratch that... one really good backup server is worth more than anything else you could add. If you have spare PC's lying around, install Linux and add services to them... for 12 people you don't need big guns for most services. If you do decide to run other services off that server, consider putting them in a seperate virtual machine.
Yeah, because someone who needs help with an OS X Server is going to have NO problem setting up Linux! [rollseyes]
To the original poster of this article: That was NOT meant as a slam or slight of your abilities; rather a slam on the mindset that "Linux is for everyone and everything". You are right where you ought to be. OS X will make a FINE server for your dozen or so workstations (assuming you aren't all doing Non-Linear-Editing of video, or heavy-duty software development to/from same!). Grow your skills slowly and carefully. That way, you'll thoroughly understand what you are doing BEFORE you do it, instead of creating an environment and network that gets ever more complicated and rickety as time goes on, by doing things like "just setting up another Linux server" before you even understand what you're doing with the FIRST (OS X) one!
Fercrissakes, people around here give the STOOPIDEST advice sometimes!
Yeah, he needs a MIXED-PLATFORM server environment, especially one that is as difficult for the average person to deal with as LINUX, like he needs the proverbial hole in his head! SHEESH!
Yep... IT seems fairly easy for a layman until you have a hardware failure due a power outage, and suddenly find out that your daily backups haven't been working correctly for the past few weeks.
Only THEN will many people understand how important IT concepts like UPS battery backup, RAID, and scheduled backup tests are.
Yeah, because there aren't ANY lazy IT people...
Stonewall and obfuscate until they are willing to hire additional help or give you an obscene raise. Once they recognize your unique ability to set priorities, they will promote you to manager.
Spoken like a TRUE IT "professional". You DO know what "MCSE" REALLY stands for, don't you:
Must Consult Someone Experienced!
Don't listen to this jackass. You're doing what most IT "pros" NEVER do: Admit it when they DON'T know something; and instead just "STONEWALL AND OBSFUCATE"
Did they teach you that technique in Famous IT Professional's School? Or did you just make that one up all by yourself?
You, sir, are why WINDOWS continues to be the predominant business platform.
Let me say it again: STONEWALL AND OBSFUCATE.
I hope they put that on your tombstone. In fact, I wish I knew who your boss was, I'd copy that comment right to him. Then perhaps Human Resources would be having a short, direct chat (i.e., exit interview) with you...
Actually... I used to be an on-demand IT guy. I worked for a company that charged on billable hours. When something needed maintenance or a break happened, I would schedule some time to see them and take care of it. When my clients had a need, they'd talk it out with me and our business guy, we'd draw up a quote and then do the work. We'd also take care of necessary maintenance (again on demand).
It's actually a pretty good way to get the IT needs taken care of without needing to spend 100K... Or even 50K... If you're an office of about a dozen or so you could probably get by on less than 10K/year including hardware.
It worked out for me because I had a lot of clients, so I always had work to do... It worked great for my clients because (I like to think) that I did good work for them without costing them their profit margin.
Spoken like a true consultant/thief.
I like the "Would schedule some time" bit. When businesses have IT problems, they don't have TIME to be "scheduled". They need to be back up and running THIRTY MINUTES AGO!
Don't listen to these charlatans. There is a reason why "real" businesses have on-site IT. Do you REALLY think they like paying for those guys to sit around reading Slashdot all day? No; but you don't need the police or fire department all the time, either...
The original poster of this story is performing a VERY valuable service for his company. In fact, I suggest he talks with his boss about increasing his compensation a bit to let his company know that they realize that he is actually performing TWO REAL JOBS now. People don't value what they get for free. Take it from one who knows...
I second this, a good small business I.T. consultant/contractor can be hard to find, but if you find a good guy a few hours of his time could save you a lot of headaches. My former boss who had small business specializing in networking for small businesses probably could set everything up for a business your size in a few days.
Yeah, and then nobody in the office has the knowledge and or the ACCESS to fix even the tiniest little thing, and so someone (or everyone!) sits around for a whole day (minimum!) while the 2-person "IT consultancy" gets time to get around to you.
In fact, that's why I ended up doing IT for the firm I worked as an embedded developer for. We had an outside IT firm. But their response times kept slipping and slipping, and I kept getting collared by the secretarial (and other) staff as I walked in the door "Can you fix my printer?" "Can you help me find a file?" "I don't think the backups ran last night." Et frickin' CETERA, 'til suddenly one day it became actual company policy to call me before calling the IT consultants.
Yeah, I know about you guys, and have the battle scars to show for it.
As they say, "Experience is what you get when you don't get what you want."
I got more than my share of IT "experience" that way...
RAID is not a backup solution. RAID will simply increase the reliability. I've had many raid 5 arrays fail and loose everything. There are many ways of backing up data and RAID is not one of them.
I agree. But RAID is a place to start.
There are a zillion GUI front-ends for rsync-based backups for OS X. Most of them are even free. Some of them handle backing-up Time Machine backups (Sparse Image files). Then there are industrial-strength backup systems like the ones from TOLIS (full disclosure: I haven't used these. I just know they exist). But, I think with a 10-person office, you probably can get by with something that is rsync-based (rsync is a very powerful UNIX "file/folder synchronization" utility that has been around since dirt. Rsync is included with OS X. Like all UNIX utilities, it is actually a command-line creature; but as I said, there are MANY GUI "front-ends" for rsync for OS X. Checkout this and this list. Let me know when you get through all those, LOL!
Now, let's talk about what MEDIA to backup to: In this day and age, pretty much the only reasonable thing to backup a hard drive to is another hard drive. Nothing else makes sense, cost and speed wise. You have a 6TB Drobo. What RAID mode is it being used in? Let's say it is in RAID 1. That means it will have 50% of its actual capacity, due to the "mirroring". Ok, so that's roughly 3TB (nevermind the formatting overhead). If it is in RAID 5 mode, the Drobo will have roughly 2/3 of its 6TB (or about 4TB). I'll assume you are NOT running RAID 0, 2, 3, or 4. Nor do I personally like any of the RAID levels above 5, because they are either relatively less safe, and/or have sort of "cumulative" storage and performance penalties as the array size grows. If you are doing a lot of random-writes to your server, then RAID 1 (straight mirroring) will give you the best overall performance, at the cost of less storage overall. See this article for more details than you probably want to know right now.
But, I digress... Let's say you have this running in RAID 1. This means that your Drobo is effectively 3TB. That's very convenient; because the world has 3TB drives now. So, here's what you do: Go and get two (to start) 3TB EXTERNAL drives (preferably FireWire 800 (if the server supports FW800. I'm assuming it doesn't support Thunderbolt). Format these as HFS+ (journaled). Name them the same (but not the same as the Drobo, just for confusion's sake). Now, you effectively have two 3TB "backup tapes" that you can "rsync" your Drobo to.
"Rotate" these at whatever frequency you desire (not less frequency than once per week). Take the "new" backup OFFSITE (Monday evening is easy to remember. That way, you can bring the "old" backup into the office on Friday morning, swap it with the "new" backup, and take it home with you on Friday night when you go home. Assuming your business is an 8-5 M-F type thing, set your rsync "incremental" backups to start late in the evening, every evening, like around 11pm (that way, people leaving late aren't a problem). If all goes well (and it should, because backup-to-harddrive is rarely a problem), your drive should be backed-up by the time you return in the morning. If you want to be extra safe, you can even rotate your drives every day, but that is a lot of wear-and-tear on the power and FireWire connectors on the drives; but is the safest overall. Swapping the drives every day also keeps rsync from having to to a BIG backup the first time the drives are swapped; because it won't have to "catch up" for the whole time the "returning" drive has been "away". But DO know that you probably will start having connector problems in a year or two. Big deal. You can replace the drives every freakin' MONTH and still be money ahead over a tape-changer (and
Agreed. Apple techs are far from "worth their weight in gold". First off, they have specialized, niche skills (if they have them at all), secondly, they are fat.
You know why they are fat?
Because they don't have to DO anything!
I am frequently baffled by some of the stuff that Apple gets away with patenting. In this case, the patent described would(to my layman's inspection) appear to be a mere subset of Microsoft's (equally odious and sinister) 2008 "Digital Manners" patent, except that that patent covered a much broader range of possible prohibition/settings propagation media, and a much more generic set of possible commands.
Excuse me, but doesn't TFS say Patent Application? First, Apple applies for a lot of things it has no intention of actually doing. Second, a Patent Application is not a Patent.
Third, there are the increasing numbers of places, such as Federal Court Buildings, Juvenile settings, and even some companies, where you can't have any device with a camera anywhere in the building. That makes it a PITA for the owner of the device. Either they have to send the thing to a third-party service that can disable the camera, or remove it, an provide an official report documenting same (and then the user loses some of the functionality they paid for in the device); or, they simply can't take their laptop/tablet/smartphone into those buildings at all, which is a royal pain if you're a salesman, attorney, IT consultant, or even just an employee.
Look, I hate the whole idea, too; but I can see a small justification for it.
When cameras are Outlawed, only Outlaws will have Cameras... Or IR filters!
I am frequently baffled by some of the stuff that Apple gets away with patenting. In this case, the patent described would(to my layman's inspection) appear to be a mere subset of Microsoft's (equally odious and sinister) 2008 "Digital Manners" patent, except that that patent covered a much broader range of possible prohibition/settings propagation media, and a much more generic set of possible commands.
Excuse me, but doesn't TFS say Patent Application? First, Apple applies for a lot of things it has no intention of actually doing. Second, a Patent Application is not a Patent. Also, there are the increasing numbers of places, such as Federal Court Buildings, Juvenile settings, and even some companies, where you can't have any device with a camera anywhere in the building. That makes it a PITA for the owner of the device. Either they have to send the thing to a third-party service that can disable the camera, or remove it, an provide an official report documenting same (and then the user loses some of the functionality they paid for in the device); or, they simply can't take their laptop/tablet/smartphone into those buildings at all, which is a royal pain if you're a salesman, attorney, IT consultant, or even just an employee.
Look, I hate the whole idea, too; but I can see a small justification for it.
When cameras are Outlawed, only Outlaws will have Cameras... Or IR filters!
Now, there's no choice but to go to DigiKey and Mouser, and figure out how I'm going to meet their minimum order requirements, when all I wanted was $5 worth of stuff
Um... what's DigiKey's minimum order again? I regularly buy small quantities of stuff from them. AFAIK, they have no minimum order. And they're fast and reliable.
(Again posting as AC cuz I'm lazy).
I guess Mouser dropped their Minimum Order, too! Cool!
Now, there's no choice but to go to DigiKey and Mouser, and figure out how I'm going to meet their minimum order requirements, when all I wanted was $5 worth of stuff
Um... what's DigiKey's minimum order again? I regularly buy small quantities of stuff from them. AFAIK, they have no minimum order. And they're fast and reliable.
(Posting as AC because I'm too lazy to login) Maybe they've dropped it; but I thought it used to be $25. I guess they DID drop it!, summabitch! THANKS!!! Shows how long I've been ordering from DigiKey, LOL!