What??? Pretty much everybody in the storage industry is saying the exact opposite, NetApp doesn't have a flash/ssd solution and that EMC does. Just look on the blogs, NetApp has been talking how they don't need a flsh/ssd solution because their PAM cards are all that's needed... but are now changing that tune as they have a product. In fact EMC have an all SSD array already shipping that you can purchase. Rather than saying EMC needed it to compete with NetApp, the reality is more that EMC purchased it to keep NetApp from competing with them, delaying their entry into the market EMC is already in and shipping a product for. You gotta have deep, deep pockets but the fact is they have a product and NetApp doesn't.
The way WAFL works is that it always does full raid writes to avoid a penalty of having to read in existing data from disk. The entire point of WAFL is to avoid the partial raid write latency impact of rotating rust, using flash storage removes the rotating disk latency impact so the value of WAFL on flash becomes pretty much null. If you have enough cache in the array any array can do full raid writes just like NetApp (that cache might have to be infinitely large though), WAFL just allows it to write "anywhere" in an aggregate so blocks generally are not sequentially close to each other. If you go to an advanced NetApp performance class the instructor (at least ours did) will directly say that NetApp's are designed for high write performance not read performance because of this. I've found from our NetApp's that reads are generally the speed of a drive seek, for random read workload doesn't impact much, but if your workload has any sequential work load you can drive seek yourself into very slow performance.
The Isilon has two series: the X series geared towards sequential video streams (like NetApp's LSI arrays) and the S series geared towards random I/O.
From the specfs benchmark which does test a good chunk of random workload: the Isilon S200 series hits 1.6 million and the largest 24x node NetApp 8.1 cluster hits 1.5 million. So I'd say that fully popped either platform can do an "oh my god" level of random I/O for an "oh my god" price point.
Why would they capture the data? Because SSID's are generally unique to an area, add in more than one and you have a fairly specific physical location reference. GPS doesn't work everywhere (outside around tall buildings, inside buildings, etc), but using the not that acurate cell tower triangulation with wifi SSID's and you can get a fairly specific physical location reference without any GPS signal at all.
I have a Motorolla Razr Maxx and it has an option to due certain things based upon location (i.e. at work change cell phone ring to vibrate, at home audible ring, etc). It uses wifi ssid to identify when you are at each location.
Apple uses (or possibly used now and built their own database) Skyhook for non GPS location via wifi and cell tower mapping.
Why do you think I'm a member of the GOP? Oh I get it in your world anybody who is against something is automatically a member of the GOP... a closed minded political bigot. Good to know.
I find it very interesting you intentionally forget to mention that it was unanimously passed in the House, and unanimously passed in the Senate and signed into law by Clinton... but it was only one party who is responsible. It's not like the current VP of the US was invited to a special event by the RIAA/MPAA to honor his and 3x other members of the legislature on getting it through or anything. Oh sure it's just the GOP, not like everybody or anything; oh to be able to live in your black and white world....
On net neutrality have you read the law (also do you know it was sponsored by both GOP & DEM)? I have a similar problems with it... it doesn't do what most people think it does. It only protects lawful data (paragraph 64), so if you are downloading some content not available in your country via an in country proxy net neutrality doesn't protect you at all. Additionally there is no real prevention of degrading service, they can't degrade your torrent download/ netflix stream to where it's unusable but they can make it run at less than a MB legally (paragraph 66). ISP's are still allowed to degrade the service of people who use more than others (paragraph 73), don't get me started on how bizarre they are applying rules to mobile internet. Again like the idea, like most of it, but there are some real problems in the FCC rules.
We should *always* be worried about badly worded bills from both parties, I still don't understand why you seem think that a poorly written bill is just "peachy keen".
As I'm a registered independent who has an open mind and willing to call both parties out, I'm not getting into your whole GOP is evil and Dem are just fine (emphasized by your intentional lack of any complaints about them). But I will disagree in your supposition in that this amendment was good, it was bad, very bad period.
Maybe if the writers would actually write a good bill people would vote for it.
I'd vote for an amendment saying that "individuals can not be required or coerced to disclose personal account or password information to current or prospective employers".
I would not for vote an amendment saying that "Congress will give FCC the power to regulate privacy on the internet which also includes the ability to make rules about mandating disclosure of passwords by job applicants ".
If you can't understand the difference between the two than you are simply an idiot. Write a good law to begin with and people from either party will vote for it, write a poorly drafted one even if it has good intentions behind it and (smart) people will not vote for it. What part of that is hard to understand for you?
Really, do you want another poorly written DMCA type law on the books? Because that's what this amendment is another crappy reaction that has basically good intentions but written horribly, how hard would it be to re-write that paragraph to contain what I wrote vs the broad sweeping crat that was actually in the amendment... but I guess you are all for DMCA type laws based on emotion rather than intelligence. Me, I prefer to have a well written law that explicitly says employers can't look at my stuff rather than saying if the FCC decides to in the future do something they can but they don't have to.
I'd suggest you read the amendment first (it's literally a paragraph long)... it was way over reaching and removed much of the power from the legislature and gave it to the FCC... as such it *should* have been dumped like the DMCA, not a completely horrible idea but a completely horribly written law.
It was giving the FCC additional power to create rules over *all* privacy matters, not just job seeking social network passwords. It didn't even say that the FCC had to prevent it, it was all about giving the FCC direct power to make rules about online privacy without the need of any congressional oversight and if the future they were to make a rule it could possibly include one about social media passwords and the legislature couldn't do anything about it no matter how bad or good it is. Having seen how messed up the FCC is about showing a nipple on TV, I'm not ready to give them that power; not sure why any sane person would want to give them that power either. Granting power to groups of the government (especially one that isn't voted in by the people) needs to be *explicitly* stated instead of wide sweeping grant of power to regulate all of something. With this amendment, the FCC could make a requirement that everything needs to go through a "great wall of US" firewall to protect the privacy of US citizens from other countries, extreme example yes, but this amendment would allow them to do that completely legally and there really would be no person to vote out of (or into) office about it.
1 SEC. 5. PROTECTING THE PASSWORDS OF ONLINE USERS.
2 Nothing in this Act or any amendment made by this
3 Act shall be construed to limit or restrict the ability of
4 the Federal Communications Commission to adopt a rule
5 or to amend an existing rule to protect online privacy, in
6 cluding requirements in such rule that prohibit licensees
7 or regulated entities from mandating that job applicants
8 or employees disclose confidential passwords to social net
In the US, entrapment means that law enforcement coerces a person to do something illegal that they normally wouldn't do. Additionally if the government induces (persuades or mild coercion) a person to commit a crime, if the prosecution can show they have a verifiable predisposition to crime already entrapment defense wouldn't hold up either.
http://www.lectlaw.com/def/e024.htm
A person is 'entrapped' when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit a crime that he had no previous intent to commit; and the law as a matter of policy forbids conviction in such a case.
However, there is no entrapment where a person is ready and willing to break the law and the Government agents merely provide what appears to be a favorable opportunity for the person to commit the crime. For example, it is not entrapment for a Government agent to pretend to be someone else and to offer, either directly or through an informer or other decoy, to engage in an unlawful transaction with the person. So, a person would not be a victim of entrapment if the person was ready, willing and able to commit the crime charged in the indictment whenever opportunity was afforded, and that Government officers or their agents did no more than offer an opportunity.
Even if inducement has been shown, a finding of predisposition is fatal to an entrapment defense. The predisposition inquiry focuses upon whether the defendant "was an unwary innocent or, instead, an unwary criminal who readily availed himself of the opportunity to perpetrate the crime.
"it could be losing as much as 24 billion tons OR as little as zero".
It says that "it could be losing as much as 24 billion tons or GAINING as much as 16 billion. For some reason you decided to forget about half of the the plus or minus part.
If you are going to go around correcting people, if you don't want to look like a complete ass your complaint should really be correct... or maybe your agenda is showing.
Hmmm... would you care to provide some facts to backup your data?
Please feel free to backup your statement with some actual documentation that it is *not* illegal. What I've found is that there is quite a bit of murkiness as to it's legality but you have made a very definitive statement that it is not illegal. There is no question in your statement, so please provide some evidence that is as conclusive as you make it to be.
From what I know, there was a previous situation in the UK with the website tv-links which would seem to imply that it's not that legal in the UK.
The site, TV Links (www.tv-links.co.uk), was providing links to illegal film content that has been camcorded from within a cinema and then uploaded to the Internet. The site additionally provided links to TV shows that were also being illegally distributed.
"Currently iTunes charges 99-cents a song, with 61-cents of that going to the record industry, 9-cents of it going to the artists and the rest going to Apple."
$0.29 / $.99 = 29.29% is what iTunes take or basically 30% of the take per song.
Will it be different for Apples cloud offering and be as you say "a lot less than 30%"? Well lets take a look shall we?
"Apple has agreed to pay each music label between $25 million to $50 million for their services. The music labels will then share the cost with Apple; 30% will go to Apple, 12% will go to the music publishers, and the remaining will be left to the labels to pay out their artists"
Feel free to bring some factual data along with your posts...
US has one of the highest Corp tax rates in the world
President Obama in his State of the Union speech this very year says the US has one of the *highest* corporate tax rates in the world, and politifact did a verification check and validated that the US does have one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. Would you care to bring some facts to the table?
"Over the years," he said, "a parade of lobbyists has rigged the tax code to benefit particular companies and industries. Those with accountants or lawyers to work the system can end up paying no taxes at all. But all the rest are hit with one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. It makes no sense, and it has to change."
We found that for 2010, the U.S ranked second to Japan by a fraction of a percentage point -- 39.54 percent for Japan to 39.21 percent for the U.S. But that figure is already outdated: Japan has moved to cut its rate for 2011 by 5 percentage points, leaving the U.S. with the highest corporate tax rate among OECD nations.
That is unless you go running around making a big scare about it to management, and then later have to look like an idiot.
You said each of your hypervisors have 48GB of RAM in them so having to buy more licenses would make you look bad, however having more license capacity probably wouldn't make you look bad.
An ESX server has a minimum requirement of 2x CPU's (it's base requirement), so taking the absolute worst case situation and you have a two socket CPU configuration you are covered. With the Enterprise license you have 32GB of vram per CPU, since you already have to have 2x CPU's per server by basic requirement you are already have a minimum of 2x Enterprise CPU licenses which give 64GB of RAM per server which is more RAM than you have stated you have in your hypervisor (48GB). In fact you could have just the essential edition and still be covered (24GB/CPU * 2x CPU = 48GB)
I think it's much simpler than I've seen people speculate so far. I think it will be as simple as enabling the functionality via a key in their powerpath product. Powerpath already can be used to move data from lun to lun on a host, it seems like it would be extremely easy to extend that to local SSD.
If they use that methodology, I'd guess that the write to SSD & array is very low risk as it's more of the same: a write comes in gets intercepted by powerpath and it writes to both the array and the local SSD (just like doing a powerpath lun migration so nothing really new here). No real risk of dataloss as they've been doing split writes via powerpath for a while. There would have to be some new bitmap matching intelligence but I can't see it be that difficult. Throw out the oldest accessed block on the SSD and write new data to there update bitmap. A read would simply look at the bitmap: is the block in the map? If not request data from array.
Doesn't seem like it'd take much time to get something like that going, of course that's my speculation... and EMC might be doing something completely different; but it sure feels like that would be a very simple, low-risk option that could be into customers without years of work. Be a very easy sell as well, you've already got powerpath installed on your system... all you need is a a license key and you can be offloading array reads to local drives, no reboots, no recertification, no drivers it's already there.
As a Linux user for not quite 20 years (but getting there), he seems detached from reality. Linux people need to accept the reality that there is large quantities of patented items in Linux. All one has to do is use the slightest bit of critical thinking to realize that:
Microsoft spends millions of dollars and man hours just on ways to avoid them from violating a patent and yet they constantly are. Why would open sourcepeople believe they match or even boast they don't have any and it's all "fud" the same level of violations as MS; when they have no where near the resources looking through their data (which if we are talking opensource as a whole has an order of magnitude larger codebase)? When someone says that it's FUD when MS says Linux is violating a patent, I roll my eyes and think they are simply blind morons. If companies with hundreds of people being paid just to make sure they don't violate patents aren't able to keep their noses clean what level of stupid do you have to be to think that joe schmoe contributing code would be able to?
The problem isn't that the US is generating patents too slowly, it's that the patents they are awarding are too broad and of poor quality. I can only assume that since Obama's intent is to make the system work faster, the accepted patents will be poorer and poorer as speed is the enemy of quality.
I'm so very happy that EMC has done this... maybe it will hasten the demise of all these stupid storage benchmarks. SPEC, SPC, etc all are completely useless and meant only for vendors to see you something. Now all the other vendors will go play the same stupid game to have the top numbers. Making these already useless benchmarks more obviously useless to the masses.
Hopefully all customers will then start throwing it back at the vendors like I've been doing for years now calling them on how it's complete and total BS (you won't believe the argument I got into with a Sun/Oracle sales guy). The only valid benchmark is one done to simulate my workload. If the vendor can't benchmark my load, then sell me a solution with a SLA to support a stated IO workload; if they are confident in the solution they will stand behind it (I haven't had a vendor walk away from a deal yet requiring a SLA with a stated IO workload).
With broadcast there is no bandwidth increase based on the number of customers. i.e. 1,000 customers have the same bandwidth requirement a 100,000 to watch a single show at the same time (US HDTV spec has a peak of ~19mb/sec which you never get but that's the spec), ignoring requirements for repeaters, etc you have a constant peak requirement of 19mb/sec. With Netflix, etc (anything that isn't using multicast to send the data) everybody gets their own point in time, you aren't tapping into a constant feed. Minimum bandwidth for a HD Netflix show is around 6mb (it can go higher, lower generally is SD).
So 1000 users watching the same HD show simultaneously
Broadcast = 19mb/sec peak
Netflix = 6,000mb/sec minimum
To put it another way: Comcast has 16.3 million cable customers, if 50% of them are watching something at the same time. It would require 48,900,000 mb/sec or ~46.6 terabit of bandwidth.
Assuming the same 50% of the Comcast customers are watching something, and lets say they are even spread across 200 different shows simultaneously at the peak load of 19.6mb per show that would require at max 798,700mb or ~0.76 terabit of bandwidth.
789700mb / 48900000mb == 1.633% == the percentage 19mb broadcast bandwidth stream requires compared to a 6mb non-broadcast stream for the same number of customers.
I'd say that the current method of "on demand" HD streaming isn't sustainable right now for everybody (maybe in a few years that will change but it won't be cheap), but if there is a switch to multicast or equivalent it could be.
We've had nothing but problems with running Oracle on our T* boxes. The M* series is much, much more suited for it and find the performance of the T* boxes inadequate for what we need it to do. Fewer CPU's with more ooomph per core is much better than lots of slower threads for 99% of all the database instances we have (both OLTP and data warehouse ).
If you do a search on the web our experience with T series and Oracle seems to be the norm rather the oddity. (there's a reason licensing is so cheap for Oracle on the threads... it generally sucks)
As a person who's been around some version of unix (workstation to server) for over 2x decades, the argument that unix workstations are safer because people *have* to escalate their privileges for a number of tasks is without merit. (Note the word workstation)
If I download some app off the web that wipes all of my personal photos, do I really care that much that /bin/sh was not able to be modified? Do I care if the browser has a malware addon giving out my bank information to someone else that only gives out information for when I login but not when the the root user does. If my doctoral thesis I've been working on for the past 5 years gets blown away, I really care about it and having to type a password to become root doesn't protect me.
I find the often used argument that a user on a workstation can operate a lower level "protects us" completely devoid of reality. It sounds blasphemous but I don't really care about protecting my workstation OS, that's the last thing I really care about, it's pretty much a throwaway (I have no love for the version of /bin/bash and require keeping it); but I do care a whole hell of a lot about protecting all the things I've done with the OS: i.e. not having files deleted, not having personal files copied, not having my browser leak information, etc. Running as a non-privileged user will not protect you against that. The ability to break into root on a workstation might get headlines but for the most part who cares if all your user data is gone?
From Dell's quarterly statement... that had 12.431 billion in expenses in the last quarter. Let's assume 10% of the costs are going to these people (since Dell for the most part just does final assembly of other people parts: rather than actually make chips, motherboards, etc this percentage should be higher). 10% of 12.4 billion is 1.24 billion, .001 of 1.24 billion is 1.24 million/quarter.
Not sure about you, but 3.72 million in yearly income by just delaying payment a few days isn't neglible... as long as you don't piss off your supliers so much it cause a mfg chain problem seems like a really easy way for a huge organization to pad the bottom line with limited risk organization and hardly any cost at all (if it causes problems for critical suppliers, you can just start paying them sooner... no real capex/opex investment required for the change).
Ummm... until they did some network changes here, I've had the exact same comcast ip for over a year. That was during power outages, etc. where the routers and cable modem were rebooted. I've also had a port nailed open for multiple days (actually more like multiple weeks) so they don't kick connections either. They definetly don't flip ip's or drop every 24h, not sure where you got that information from. Sure they assign me a dynamic ip address, but if that dynamic address doesn't change for over a year (through reboots, etc) you can hardly say that ip tracking isn't useful. Additionally even modem banks which have a high-rate of change per customer haae a small finite range of ip's it will use. Using that finite range combined with other data (time of day, etc) u can identify an individual fairly easily as well.
That is the most telling statement to me, it shows that MySQL under Oracle would never be allowed to compete with their Oracle DB. While MySQL isn't a feature competitor against Oracle today, people have been working on it, Oracle is basically broadcasting that MySQL under them would not be allowed to grow into a feature-full DB and keep them in a "different" market.
Why is it easier? I can more a running VM from one physical server to another live with no downtime. Ever try to coordinate a downtime with a database or exchange for thousands of users?
True doesn't help much with app upgrades, but the wonderful thing is that I can take a snapshot and rollback immediately if the upgrade goes bad, etc.
Being hardware independant means I can take the virtual machine running on an old Dell with different scsi cards, etc and move it to a new HP within seconds. I don't have to install an OS, I don't have to re-install the app (and hopefully remember all of the manually changed settings done over the past 5 years), it's completely self contained and I can complete it quicker... i.e. less downtime to the business which means less $$
Why run them on the same system? Because as you scale up the number of services in your environment, isolating them is a good thing for your sanity. Security is the obvious first thing, it's much easier to protect a webserver if that's all it does, it's much easier to protect a mail server if that's all it does. Additionally think about patches you want to patch the mailserver from the latest exploit, but it changes some files that the webserver uses... do you want to pull your QA group away from whatever they are working on to do a regression test across your webserver? How about organizations where there isn't the lone admin, where different people do different things (Oracle DBA's don't go on our webservers). I can now only take downtime for a single service rather than lots of multiple services (I allude to this above, try and coordinate simultaneous downtime for your web, mail, dns, firewall, etc at the same time to patch the OS have fun with that). The penalty is measured in single digit percentages relative to peak. So unless you are running your system 99% utilized to begin with you will see hardly any slow down.
"Google asserts that blocking calls to certain numbers is necessary as such calls were eating up 26 per cent of Google Voice's US running costs."
Evil Comcast
"Comcast’s plan is to identify the 2% or 3% of customers who over the last hour or two have consumed more than 50% of the capacity on the network, Werner said. Those heavy users are then given lower priority and will have their bandwidth limited for a temporary period of time."
I have to wonder why Google doesn't get the same bad rep as Comcast when their cutoff level is lower than Comcast?? I'm thinking Google didn't quite think things through on what they were requesting on the whole net neutrality thing there...
If it's an ATA drive it's absolutely required these days, period end of story. I told both 3PAR & IBM (XIV product) to not talk to me about using ATA storage until you have that. It's not about how fast you do a rebuild, it's about how big of a rebuild you have to do. It's all about URE, I've got literally thousands of drives on the floor in the datacenter, you don't have 2x drives stop spinning, which is really where you care about how fast a rebuild is. A URE stands for "uncorrectable read error", which means that the drive thinks everything is fine and you make a request and it is unable to fulfil it. There is nothing the drive array can do about it, it's part of the drive. Goto Seagate, Hitachi, etc and look it up, most standard ATA drives have a drive manufacture failure rate of 10^14 (or ~12TB). So let's say I's using big raid5 groups 6+1 using 2TB drives (12TB usable). Statistically during a rebuild you are more likely to not to have some data loss. It might be a single 512byte bit, but that 512byte bit could include an oracle datafile, a critical bank transfer, or whitespace that you don't care about. Constant disk scrubbing minimizes this as it should find those failing sectors before the entire drive failure
I've personally had a raid5 drive failure + URE event in a raid event, only a single sector couldn't be rebuilt but it wrecked havoc and ultimately made ~30TB of other VTL data useless (the VTL app spread the writes around the array... very similar to 3PAR). So I'm not talking out my ass, not am I looking for simply a checkbox (note this was on 320GB pata drives so it was a few years ago).
I suggest you do some reading up, as it's a very real danger.
One real easy way to destroy data permanently is to have do a data resync of a mirror in the reverse direction while having an active filesystem against it.
i.e. lets say before you do a upgrade you mirror the drive as a rollback so you have a point in time to roll back to. If an admin does a restore rather than a resync, you'll be rolling the disk back to a date a month ago live (which is something you can do with arrays), while the filesystem didn't know you did that and will continue writing to filesystem with new data. So you'll have a filesystem with old data and new files and a corrupted filesystem. If you have some form of a database (i.e. oracle, ms sql, etc) which is most likely in this configuration even filesystem forensics looking for file EOF markers wouldn't work. If you are replicating the data it would copy over the corruption as well.
Hardware won't stop you from a bad admin (we had this type of thing happen to us by a contractor 10 years ago)
The only way that the lawyers are getting screwed over this in situation is this: they purposely lowered their fee to spend the hundreds of hours creating their documents with the expectation that they could resell it later. If they did not lower their fee, then all this is an unrealized second revenue stream that they just now realized someone is already doing; and instead of competing against them they figure they can just block access to it and get a mini-monopoly and double-dip.
It's very obvious they didn't lower their rates to capitalize on this since they "just found out" about it. So the lawyers aren't the ones getting screwed here... maybe their client could complain since they paid for all the stuff upfront but the lawyers don't have any to bitch about.
Having used a number of touch-screen only phones... they all suck horribly at making calls (i.e. dialing the actual number numbers). Compare initiating a call while driving in a noisy car, walking, trying to do just about anything else at the same time, it's the most annoying thing ever. The fact that everything is visual drove me away from them, not just calling but any other task you might be trying to do.
Looks like it's off to a foreign country to for some random mass murder rampaging fun and return before I'm identified (as long as I never return I'm scott free). Never say never.
Currently ESX 3.5 supports upto 256GB of ram in a physical server, and upto 64GB of ram per guest. ESX 4.0 release is just around the corner in the next 2-3 months will support even more.
As AC said, if you put more RAM into a server with VMware the ratio should only go up in favor of VMware (provided you aren't fully CPU bound). Additionally VMware with it's memory "deduplication" (if groups of ram are the same it points all servers to one copy rather than having 20 copies of the same dll, etc like a symlink or shortcut) can logically present more ram than is in the box physically.
Comeon peopel you really don't think this way do you? Reality check
I am a heavy linux/unix user (both at work and at home), but look at the number of times MS is sued yearly over patents; and look how many *hundreds* of millions of dollars they have been fined over the years due to those patents. They have a whole army of people just trying to find patents in the system; but for some reason a bunch of people think that there is no patent infringement in Linux (kernel and userspace).
The fact of reality is that common logic (unless you are wearing blinders) would have to suggest that there are a relatively large quantity of patent infringement in Linux. Look at Linux over the years... I'd say out of any OS out there is copies the most from all the other OS's (heck probably all the other main ones combied)... before you jump all over me, from a user like me that's a good thing since normally it's copying the good things (only zealots and fanboys claim the "yeah be <foo> OS did it first", really they did it first tell me why I should care? So let's get over this stupid notion that Linux (or any other OS) doesn't infringe on a large number of patents and get into reality.
AC: "The xen hypervisor, unlike the VMware and KVM hypervisors, does not sit inside the host OS, it's an OS in its own right."
That would depend upon the version of VMware you are running ESX it is a hardware layer micro-kernel hypervisor like Xen (VMware workstation and server run inside another host OS). Additionally with Linux kernel 2.6.21 including paravirtops & VMI in the mainline kernel all VMware versions support full paravirtualization of Linux guests as well.
Main reason is that Xen isn't linux at all, it's a based off a different microkernel rather than Linux. So when you are running Xen, something other than a Linux OS is actually running interfacing at the hardware layer, and then you run Linux on top of that layer... which is why the kernel guys probably won't ever fully integrate it into the mainline kernel, and it always will be an "add-on" by distros, etc.
Only 99.9%? The business cost difference can go against Google (or any online service at that same SLA) very quickly . What is the cost to the business to have 100 people sitting on their hands while still collecting a paycheck? Lets be honest is won't be happening (dropping off all the time), but businesses look at it that Google is only willing to guarantee that much so they have to assume the worst. All you have to have is around 3x outages over 4 years and you have paid for the cost of MS Office, in wages and lost productivity, let alone for those times when a secretary needs to get a message, etc out for the CEO "right now"...
Umm... if the T5440's are not out, then was the heck are *these* page off of Sun's website? (I can even buy a T5440 according to sun.com, guess I have magic back-door to Sun powers)
Tell me do those two documents from SUN's website link to a T5440, tell me do those same docs say that the T5440 has any specs other than what I state.
I'm not making anything up, it's right there off of Sun's website! I went off the PDF's for the T5440 directly from Sun's website! I guess I have some L33T powers to be able to goto's Sun's website, search for T5440 and get a magical pdf telling me information for the T5440 that isn't out yet. Unless you are now going to tell me that you were meaning a different T5440 than the T5440 that appears in Sun's link, or that Sun is just screwing with people and putting up tech specs for a T5440 that actually aren't for a T5440 (har, har you got me Sun, splashing T5440 all over the docs and then tricking me). I'm wondering that maybe you should go get "real figures instead of making hot air", because all my information came *directly* from Sun's website.
I'm guessing that you are going to go on you merry little way, because you now realize you look pretty stupid after that.
A T5440 is no where near equal to a E25K, that is close to the silliest thing I've ever heard. A T5440 has 16 cores on two chips, all those cores share onboard cache. A thread gives absolutely no CPU number crunching power in fact it lowers it due to scheduling. Where threads give benefits is when the CPU is waiting on some other task: i.e. storage, etc. you can schedule something else. It's pure stupidity to say it's anywhere near a E25k, it's barely a v1290.
Talking Oracle, let's compare a T5440 vs a HP Dl580:
DL580= 4x 4 core 2.93 Ghz CPU's = total 46.88Ghz
T5440 = 2x 8 core 1.4 Ghz CPU's = total 22.4Ghz
DL580 = 2x 4M L2 cache per socket = 32M total L2 cache
T5440 = 4M L2 cache per socket = 8M total L2 cache
Assume list price for Oracle Enterprise RAC ~= $60k/CPU
DL580 = 16 cores * 60k * .5 = $480k
T5440 = 16 cores * 60k * .75 = $720k
So for less than half the total Mhz processing power, a quarter of the L2 cache, and $240,000 more I can use a T5440 for Oracle RAC. This my friends is why the Oracle is running from the Sparc architecture, and why saying the T5440 is anything near a E25k is friggin silly.
Stepping into the inevitable frying pan, but this stupidity annoys me to know end, and it is plain and stupid to continue the same complaint.
Coming from an ISP back over a decade ago when POTS line modem were all the rage... the phrase unlimited came into ISP lingo because there were hourly limits per month. i.e.
5 hour plan/month
10 hour plan/month
unlimited plan
You could have timed service or you can have unlimited time on the internet.
All the people saying it's advertised as unlimited service, YES it is unlimited service, but they make no guarantees about anything else. They don't cut you off if you are using your service 24x7, which is all that unlimited covers. You can piss and moan all you want but look at your terms of service document, that's what it meant 10 years ago and that's what it means today. You can't just come in now years later and say that because you think it has a different meaning it automatically does (heck I wish by repeating over and over "Angelina Jolie wants me" would automatically make it true).
Additionally knowing what the monthly price of an OC-12 circuit is... well all I can say is that if they only sold 1:1 ratio lines your speed would be measured in kilobits/sec vs megabits/sec for the price (62x 10mb Comcast customers would fill a OC-12 circuit). You will *never* get 1:1 ratio lines from an ISP unless you are willing to get dial-up speeds or pay hundreds of dollars a month, if you want something in the middle you ONLY will ever get a shared line period end of story.
I'm not saying they shouldn't be bitched about, but something so wrong being constantly repeated over and over by uninformed people blathering on about it acting like they actually have some facts behind them annoys me to no end. So stop with the stupid arguments about unlimited supposedly meaning something else because you look like a fool
Gave a system admin a bundle of fibre cables going to the SAN during a lease return and told him to unplug them from the patch panel. I go around the other side to pull up cables from another returning storage array, I come around the front and he has a wonderful grin on his face of "boy did I do a good job". Unfortunately mine I'm sure was a look of horror, instead of unplugging the bundle of 15-20 cables I handed to him, he unplugged *ALL* the fibre cables in the patch panel. I grunt and squeek something in ununderstandable half words and run out of the datacenter (leaving him perplexed as to what happened but knowing that it wasn't good), on my way through the building I yell at the ops folks that "shit is going down" they say "what stuff?" I say "everything!". Get to my laptop pull up the cable report (that I luckily had updated 2 days before), run back in the datacenter tell him to get out of the way and I start plugging things back in. Spent the next 2 hours getting filesystems and databases happy again.
60" TV with a viewing distance of 7'. The problem you are going to have is with your field of vision. To keep from having to move your eyes around to try and watch things on the screen, you need to sit further away. You are missing a good portion of activities at the sides of your TV, effectively making your nice big 60" widescreen TV into a much smaller 4x3 (you are only seeing the middle, unless you move your eyes). Sure you can "catch" something out of your perephrial vision and move your eyes, to focus on it but then you are missing something else.
You should be sitting 2-2.5x (depends upon who you talk to) the distance relative to the size of the TV. So at 60" or 5 feet you should really be at a 10-12.5 feet viewing distance... unless you like missing things happening on the screen.
When was the last time your IP changed? Mines been about 2x years or so, and before that was 8-12 months. The only person rejecting a cookie from doubleclick would benefit is the person on a dial-up type connection where they come from different IP's almost every connection. Your IP address is the most reliable information around now, with doubleclick and adwords google can now track your habits on probably >60% of sites on the web.
Rejecting cookies is not the answer, not requesting adds is the only resonable option... and that is rather tenuous. Suppose that I host my corporate logo on a Google hosted service, add blocking won't catch that; but now my ip address has been given away to google who can now track my habits for websites without adds (or hosted on any third party who would sell info to doubleclick, etc). Not meant to be banging just on Google, but being so broad (search, mail, office apps, doubleclick, adwords, etc) they have the largest amount of inhouse data on individuals in the world and it can be easily indexed between databases. So they are the easiest company to show what "could" happen.
I think that maybe you are probably sitting in the "unwary or unaware" to use your own words category, thinking that simply rejecting cookies would protect your privacy.
Actually anonymous who posted the VGChartz data if you compare to the number of games sold the Xbox360 is handily beating the Wii & PS3 consoles. From the same website as you I used a more proper calculation value taking those total quantity sold, rather that what you did: which games sold more during a single week in December.
---
Xbox360: 104.66 mill games sold
WII: 61.61 mill games sold (78.96 if you count the bundled Wii Sports as a sale)
PS3: 30.31 mill games sold
---
To reproduce, goto vgchartz.com & login as a member to give you the option of by sorting by sales and filter by console
Select game database, select the console (PS3, X360 & WII), select order by sales, and simply add up the total sales column (I went until I hit "0.00mill"). This will give a resonable represenation of the total number of physical games sold for each platform, rather than who sold what this week based on hype. I retrieved this data on Jan 4, 2008 from the website.
Additionally downloaded games from Xbox Live, Wii Virtual Console or PSN do not appear to be included on the list so the total values should be higher. Including paid for downloaded games should not materialy change these values, and most likely would only increase the 360's lead.
Register
41 posts • joined Friday 4th January 2008 17:36 GMT
Re: Netapp has another ace
What??? Pretty much everybody in the storage industry is saying the exact opposite, NetApp doesn't have a flash/ssd solution and that EMC does. Just look on the blogs, NetApp has been talking how they don't need a flsh/ssd solution because their PAM cards are all that's needed... but are now changing that tune as they have a product. In fact EMC have an all SSD array already shipping that you can purchase. Rather than saying EMC needed it to compete with NetApp, the reality is more that EMC purchased it to keep NetApp from competing with them, delaying their entry into the market EMC is already in and shipping a product for. You gotta have deep, deep pockets but the fact is they have a product and NetApp doesn't.
The way WAFL works is that it always does full raid writes to avoid a penalty of having to read in existing data from disk. The entire point of WAFL is to avoid the partial raid write latency impact of rotating rust, using flash storage removes the rotating disk latency impact so the value of WAFL on flash becomes pretty much null. If you have enough cache in the array any array can do full raid writes just like NetApp (that cache might have to be infinitely large though), WAFL just allows it to write "anywhere" in an aggregate so blocks generally are not sequentially close to each other. If you go to an advanced NetApp performance class the instructor (at least ours did) will directly say that NetApp's are designed for high write performance not read performance because of this. I've found from our NetApp's that reads are generally the speed of a drive seek, for random read workload doesn't impact much, but if your workload has any sequential work load you can drive seek yourself into very slow performance.
Re: Isilon slow?
The Isilon has two series: the X series geared towards sequential video streams (like NetApp's LSI arrays) and the S series geared towards random I/O.
From the specfs benchmark which does test a good chunk of random workload: the Isilon S200 series hits 1.6 million and the largest 24x node NetApp 8.1 cluster hits 1.5 million. So I'd say that fully popped either platform can do an "oh my god" level of random I/O for an "oh my god" price point.
Re: Kismet
Why would they capture the data? Because SSID's are generally unique to an area, add in more than one and you have a fairly specific physical location reference. GPS doesn't work everywhere (outside around tall buildings, inside buildings, etc), but using the not that acurate cell tower triangulation with wifi SSID's and you can get a fairly specific physical location reference without any GPS signal at all.
I have a Motorolla Razr Maxx and it has an option to due certain things based upon location (i.e. at work change cell phone ring to vibrate, at home audible ring, etc). It uses wifi ssid to identify when you are at each location.
Apple uses (or possibly used now and built their own database) Skyhook for non GPS location via wifi and cell tower mapping.
http://www.skyhookwireless.com/location-technology/coverage.php
Re: Thanks GOP
Why do you think I'm a member of the GOP? Oh I get it in your world anybody who is against something is automatically a member of the GOP... a closed minded political bigot. Good to know.
I find it very interesting you intentionally forget to mention that it was unanimously passed in the House, and unanimously passed in the Senate and signed into law by Clinton... but it was only one party who is responsible. It's not like the current VP of the US was invited to a special event by the RIAA/MPAA to honor his and 3x other members of the legislature on getting it through or anything. Oh sure it's just the GOP, not like everybody or anything; oh to be able to live in your black and white world....
On net neutrality have you read the law (also do you know it was sponsored by both GOP & DEM)? I have a similar problems with it... it doesn't do what most people think it does. It only protects lawful data (paragraph 64), so if you are downloading some content not available in your country via an in country proxy net neutrality doesn't protect you at all. Additionally there is no real prevention of degrading service, they can't degrade your torrent download/ netflix stream to where it's unusable but they can make it run at less than a MB legally (paragraph 66). ISP's are still allowed to degrade the service of people who use more than others (paragraph 73), don't get me started on how bizarre they are applying rules to mobile internet. Again like the idea, like most of it, but there are some real problems in the FCC rules.
http://transition.fcc.gov/Daily_Releases/Daily_Business/2010/db1223/FCC-10-201A1.pdf
We should *always* be worried about badly worded bills from both parties, I still don't understand why you seem think that a poorly written bill is just "peachy keen".
As I'm a registered independent who has an open mind and willing to call both parties out, I'm not getting into your whole GOP is evil and Dem are just fine (emphasized by your intentional lack of any complaints about them). But I will disagree in your supposition in that this amendment was good, it was bad, very bad period.
Re: Thanks GOP
Maybe if the writers would actually write a good bill people would vote for it.
I'd vote for an amendment saying that "individuals can not be required or coerced to disclose personal account or password information to current or prospective employers".
I would not for vote an amendment saying that "Congress will give FCC the power to regulate privacy on the internet which also includes the ability to make rules about mandating disclosure of passwords by job applicants ".
If you can't understand the difference between the two than you are simply an idiot. Write a good law to begin with and people from either party will vote for it, write a poorly drafted one even if it has good intentions behind it and (smart) people will not vote for it. What part of that is hard to understand for you?
Really, do you want another poorly written DMCA type law on the books? Because that's what this amendment is another crappy reaction that has basically good intentions but written horribly, how hard would it be to re-write that paragraph to contain what I wrote vs the broad sweeping crat that was actually in the amendment... but I guess you are all for DMCA type laws based on emotion rather than intelligence. Me, I prefer to have a well written law that explicitly says employers can't look at my stuff rather than saying if the FCC decides to in the future do something they can but they don't have to.
Re: Thanks GOP
I'd suggest you read the amendment first (it's literally a paragraph long)... it was way over reaching and removed much of the power from the legislature and gave it to the FCC... as such it *should* have been dumped like the DMCA, not a completely horrible idea but a completely horribly written law.
It was giving the FCC additional power to create rules over *all* privacy matters, not just job seeking social network passwords. It didn't even say that the FCC had to prevent it, it was all about giving the FCC direct power to make rules about online privacy without the need of any congressional oversight and if the future they were to make a rule it could possibly include one about social media passwords and the legislature couldn't do anything about it no matter how bad or good it is. Having seen how messed up the FCC is about showing a nipple on TV, I'm not ready to give them that power; not sure why any sane person would want to give them that power either. Granting power to groups of the government (especially one that isn't voted in by the people) needs to be *explicitly* stated instead of wide sweeping grant of power to regulate all of something. With this amendment, the FCC could make a requirement that everything needs to go through a "great wall of US" firewall to protect the privacy of US citizens from other countries, extreme example yes, but this amendment would allow them to do that completely legally and there really would be no person to vote out of (or into) office about it.
1 SEC. 5. PROTECTING THE PASSWORDS OF ONLINE USERS.
2 Nothing in this Act or any amendment made by this
3 Act shall be construed to limit or restrict the ability of
4 the Federal Communications Commission to adopt a rule
5 or to amend an existing rule to protect online privacy, in
6 cluding requirements in such rule that prohibit licensees
7 or regulated entities from mandating that job applicants
8 or employees disclose confidential passwords to social net
9 working web sites.
No entrapment defense here
In the US, entrapment means that law enforcement coerces a person to do something illegal that they normally wouldn't do. Additionally if the government induces (persuades or mild coercion) a person to commit a crime, if the prosecution can show they have a verifiable predisposition to crime already entrapment defense wouldn't hold up either.
http://www.lectlaw.com/def/e024.htm
A person is 'entrapped' when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit a crime that he had no previous intent to commit; and the law as a matter of policy forbids conviction in such a case.
However, there is no entrapment where a person is ready and willing to break the law and the Government agents merely provide what appears to be a favorable opportunity for the person to commit the crime. For example, it is not entrapment for a Government agent to pretend to be someone else and to offer, either directly or through an informer or other decoy, to engage in an unlawful transaction with the person. So, a person would not be a victim of entrapment if the person was ready, willing and able to commit the crime charged in the indictment whenever opportunity was afforded, and that Government officers or their agents did no more than offer an opportunity.
http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/crm00645.htm
Even if inducement has been shown, a finding of predisposition is fatal to an entrapment defense. The predisposition inquiry focuses upon whether the defendant "was an unwary innocent or, instead, an unwary criminal who readily availed himself of the opportunity to perpetrate the crime.
No it doesn't say:
"it could be losing as much as 24 billion tons OR as little as zero".
It says that "it could be losing as much as 24 billion tons or GAINING as much as 16 billion. For some reason you decided to forget about half of the the plus or minus part.
If you are going to go around correcting people, if you don't want to look like a complete ass your complaint should really be correct... or maybe your agenda is showing.
Hmmm... would you care to provide some facts to backup your data?
Please feel free to backup your statement with some actual documentation that it is *not* illegal. What I've found is that there is quite a bit of murkiness as to it's legality but you have made a very definitive statement that it is not illegal. There is no question in your statement, so please provide some evidence that is as conclusive as you make it to be.
From what I know, there was a previous situation in the UK with the website tv-links which would seem to imply that it's not that legal in the UK.
http://www.fact-uk.org.uk/site/latest_news/October2007.htm
The site, TV Links (www.tv-links.co.uk), was providing links to illegal film content that has been camcorded from within a cinema and then uploaded to the Internet. The site additionally provided links to TV shows that were also being illegally distributed.
takes a lot less than 30% for music???
http://www.tomsguide.com/us/Apple-iTunes-Royalties-music,news-2665.html
"Currently iTunes charges 99-cents a song, with 61-cents of that going to the record industry, 9-cents of it going to the artists and the rest going to Apple."
$0.29 / $.99 = 29.29% is what iTunes take or basically 30% of the take per song.
Will it be different for Apples cloud offering and be as you say "a lot less than 30%"? Well lets take a look shall we?
http://theunlockr.com/2011/06/05/apples-100m-payout-to-music-giants-for-icloud-launch/
"Apple has agreed to pay each music label between $25 million to $50 million for their services. The music labels will then share the cost with Apple; 30% will go to Apple, 12% will go to the music publishers, and the remaining will be left to the labels to pay out their artists"
Feel free to bring some factual data along with your posts...
US has one of the highest Corp tax rates in the world
President Obama in his State of the Union speech this very year says the US has one of the *highest* corporate tax rates in the world, and politifact did a verification check and validated that the US does have one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. Would you care to bring some facts to the table?
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/jan/25/barack-obama/barack-obama-state-union-says-us-corporate-tax-rat/
"Over the years," he said, "a parade of lobbyists has rigged the tax code to benefit particular companies and industries. Those with accountants or lawyers to work the system can end up paying no taxes at all. But all the rest are hit with one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world. It makes no sense, and it has to change."
We found that for 2010, the U.S ranked second to Japan by a fraction of a percentage point -- 39.54 percent for Japan to 39.21 percent for the U.S. But that figure is already outdated: Japan has moved to cut its rate for 2011 by 5 percentage points, leaving the U.S. with the highest corporate tax rate among OECD nations.
No you aren't going to look like a complete twunt
That is unless you go running around making a big scare about it to management, and then later have to look like an idiot.
You said each of your hypervisors have 48GB of RAM in them so having to buy more licenses would make you look bad, however having more license capacity probably wouldn't make you look bad.
An ESX server has a minimum requirement of 2x CPU's (it's base requirement), so taking the absolute worst case situation and you have a two socket CPU configuration you are covered. With the Enterprise license you have 32GB of vram per CPU, since you already have to have 2x CPU's per server by basic requirement you are already have a minimum of 2x Enterprise CPU licenses which give 64GB of RAM per server which is more RAM than you have stated you have in your hypervisor (48GB). In fact you could have just the essential edition and still be covered (24GB/CPU * 2x CPU = 48GB)
EMC & Flash on the host
I think it's much simpler than I've seen people speculate so far. I think it will be as simple as enabling the functionality via a key in their powerpath product. Powerpath already can be used to move data from lun to lun on a host, it seems like it would be extremely easy to extend that to local SSD.
If they use that methodology, I'd guess that the write to SSD & array is very low risk as it's more of the same: a write comes in gets intercepted by powerpath and it writes to both the array and the local SSD (just like doing a powerpath lun migration so nothing really new here). No real risk of dataloss as they've been doing split writes via powerpath for a while. There would have to be some new bitmap matching intelligence but I can't see it be that difficult. Throw out the oldest accessed block on the SSD and write new data to there update bitmap. A read would simply look at the bitmap: is the block in the map? If not request data from array.
Doesn't seem like it'd take much time to get something like that going, of course that's my speculation... and EMC might be doing something completely different; but it sure feels like that would be a very simple, low-risk option that could be into customers without years of work. Be a very easy sell as well, you've already got powerpath installed on your system... all you need is a a license key and you can be offloading array reads to local drives, no reboots, no recertification, no drivers it's already there.
I'd like to live in his alternate reality...
As a Linux user for not quite 20 years (but getting there), he seems detached from reality. Linux people need to accept the reality that there is large quantities of patented items in Linux. All one has to do is use the slightest bit of critical thinking to realize that:
Microsoft spends millions of dollars and man hours just on ways to avoid them from violating a patent and yet they constantly are. Why would open sourcepeople believe they match or even boast they don't have any and it's all "fud" the same level of violations as MS; when they have no where near the resources looking through their data (which if we are talking opensource as a whole has an order of magnitude larger codebase)? When someone says that it's FUD when MS says Linux is violating a patent, I roll my eyes and think they are simply blind morons. If companies with hundreds of people being paid just to make sure they don't violate patents aren't able to keep their noses clean what level of stupid do you have to be to think that joe schmoe contributing code would be able to?
Problem isn't speed... it's quality of patents
The problem isn't that the US is generating patents too slowly, it's that the patents they are awarding are too broad and of poor quality. I can only assume that since Obama's intent is to make the system work faster, the accepted patents will be poorer and poorer as speed is the enemy of quality.
Awesome, I love this
I'm so very happy that EMC has done this... maybe it will hasten the demise of all these stupid storage benchmarks. SPEC, SPC, etc all are completely useless and meant only for vendors to see you something. Now all the other vendors will go play the same stupid game to have the top numbers. Making these already useless benchmarks more obviously useless to the masses.
Hopefully all customers will then start throwing it back at the vendors like I've been doing for years now calling them on how it's complete and total BS (you won't believe the argument I got into with a Sun/Oracle sales guy). The only valid benchmark is one done to simulate my workload. If the vendor can't benchmark my load, then sell me a solution with a SLA to support a stated IO workload; if they are confident in the solution they will stand behind it (I haven't had a vendor walk away from a deal yet requiring a SLA with a stated IO workload).
I believe he's meaning in aggregate broadcast
With broadcast there is no bandwidth increase based on the number of customers. i.e. 1,000 customers have the same bandwidth requirement a 100,000 to watch a single show at the same time (US HDTV spec has a peak of ~19mb/sec which you never get but that's the spec), ignoring requirements for repeaters, etc you have a constant peak requirement of 19mb/sec. With Netflix, etc (anything that isn't using multicast to send the data) everybody gets their own point in time, you aren't tapping into a constant feed. Minimum bandwidth for a HD Netflix show is around 6mb (it can go higher, lower generally is SD).
So 1000 users watching the same HD show simultaneously
Broadcast = 19mb/sec peak
Netflix = 6,000mb/sec minimum
To put it another way: Comcast has 16.3 million cable customers, if 50% of them are watching something at the same time. It would require 48,900,000 mb/sec or ~46.6 terabit of bandwidth.
Assuming the same 50% of the Comcast customers are watching something, and lets say they are even spread across 200 different shows simultaneously at the peak load of 19.6mb per show that would require at max 798,700mb or ~0.76 terabit of bandwidth.
789700mb / 48900000mb == 1.633% == the percentage 19mb broadcast bandwidth stream requires compared to a 6mb non-broadcast stream for the same number of customers.
I'd say that the current method of "on demand" HD streaming isn't sustainable right now for everybody (maybe in a few years that will change but it won't be cheap), but if there is a switch to multicast or equivalent it could be.
backin the Unix game with Sparc T3 serversOracle on the T* boxes
We've had nothing but problems with running Oracle on our T* boxes. The M* series is much, much more suited for it and find the performance of the T* boxes inadequate for what we need it to do. Fewer CPU's with more ooomph per core is much better than lots of slower threads for 99% of all the database instances we have (both OLTP and data warehouse ).
If you do a search on the web our experience with T series and Oracle seems to be the norm rather the oddity. (there's a reason licensing is so cheap for Oracle on the threads... it generally sucks)
Allways have that argument without merit
As a person who's been around some version of unix (workstation to server) for over 2x decades, the argument that unix workstations are safer because people *have* to escalate their privileges for a number of tasks is without merit. (Note the word workstation)
If I download some app off the web that wipes all of my personal photos, do I really care that much that /bin/sh was not able to be modified? Do I care if the browser has a malware addon giving out my bank information to someone else that only gives out information for when I login but not when the the root user does. If my doctoral thesis I've been working on for the past 5 years gets blown away, I really care about it and having to type a password to become root doesn't protect me.
I find the often used argument that a user on a workstation can operate a lower level "protects us" completely devoid of reality. It sounds blasphemous but I don't really care about protecting my workstation OS, that's the last thing I really care about, it's pretty much a throwaway (I have no love for the version of /bin/bash and require keeping it); but I do care a whole hell of a lot about protecting all the things I've done with the OS: i.e. not having files deleted, not having personal files copied, not having my browser leak information, etc. Running as a non-privileged user will not protect you against that. The ability to break into root on a workstation might get headlines but for the most part who cares if all your user data is gone?
Savings of .1% not so neglible at scale
From Dell's quarterly statement... that had 12.431 billion in expenses in the last quarter. Let's assume 10% of the costs are going to these people (since Dell for the most part just does final assembly of other people parts: rather than actually make chips, motherboards, etc this percentage should be higher). 10% of 12.4 billion is 1.24 billion, .001 of 1.24 billion is 1.24 million/quarter.
Not sure about you, but 3.72 million in yearly income by just delaying payment a few days isn't neglible... as long as you don't piss off your supliers so much it cause a mfg chain problem seems like a really easy way for a huge organization to pad the bottom line with limited risk organization and hardly any cost at all (if it causes problems for critical suppliers, you can just start paying them sooner... no real capex/opex investment required for the change).
Comcast are pretty much static
@Anton
Ummm... until they did some network changes here, I've had the exact same comcast ip for over a year. That was during power outages, etc. where the routers and cable modem were rebooted. I've also had a port nailed open for multiple days (actually more like multiple weeks) so they don't kick connections either. They definetly don't flip ip's or drop every 24h, not sure where you got that information from. Sure they assign me a dynamic ip address, but if that dynamic address doesn't change for over a year (through reboots, etc) you can hardly say that ip tracking isn't useful. Additionally even modem banks which have a high-rate of change per customer haae a small finite range of ip's it will use. Using that finite range combined with other data (time of day, etc) u can identify an individual fairly easily as well.
Don't compete against each other..
That is the most telling statement to me, it shows that MySQL under Oracle would never be allowed to compete with their Oracle DB. While MySQL isn't a feature competitor against Oracle today, people have been working on it, Oracle is basically broadcasting that MySQL under them would not be allowed to grow into a feature-full DB and keep them in a "different" market.
@AC
Why is it easier? I can more a running VM from one physical server to another live with no downtime. Ever try to coordinate a downtime with a database or exchange for thousands of users?
True doesn't help much with app upgrades, but the wonderful thing is that I can take a snapshot and rollback immediately if the upgrade goes bad, etc.
Being hardware independant means I can take the virtual machine running on an old Dell with different scsi cards, etc and move it to a new HP within seconds. I don't have to install an OS, I don't have to re-install the app (and hopefully remember all of the manually changed settings done over the past 5 years), it's completely self contained and I can complete it quicker... i.e. less downtime to the business which means less $$
Why run them on the same system? Because as you scale up the number of services in your environment, isolating them is a good thing for your sanity. Security is the obvious first thing, it's much easier to protect a webserver if that's all it does, it's much easier to protect a mail server if that's all it does. Additionally think about patches you want to patch the mailserver from the latest exploit, but it changes some files that the webserver uses... do you want to pull your QA group away from whatever they are working on to do a regression test across your webserver? How about organizations where there isn't the lone admin, where different people do different things (Oracle DBA's don't go on our webservers). I can now only take downtime for a single service rather than lots of multiple services (I allude to this above, try and coordinate simultaneous downtime for your web, mail, dns, firewall, etc at the same time to patch the OS have fun with that). The penalty is measured in single digit percentages relative to peak. So unless you are running your system 99% utilized to begin with you will see hardly any slow down.
Hmmm... net neutrality for others maybe?
So comparing the two
Innocent Google
"Google asserts that blocking calls to certain numbers is necessary as such calls were eating up 26 per cent of Google Voice's US running costs."
Evil Comcast
"Comcast’s plan is to identify the 2% or 3% of customers who over the last hour or two have consumed more than 50% of the capacity on the network, Werner said. Those heavy users are then given lower priority and will have their bandwidth limited for a temporary period of time."
http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Comcast-Cox-Trot-Out-Their-Worst-Bandwidth-Hogs-95623
I have to wonder why Google doesn't get the same bad rep as Comcast when their cutoff level is lower than Comcast?? I'm thinking Google didn't quite think things through on what they were requesting on the whole net neutrality thing there...
*NOT* just for the checkbox
If it's an ATA drive it's absolutely required these days, period end of story. I told both 3PAR & IBM (XIV product) to not talk to me about using ATA storage until you have that. It's not about how fast you do a rebuild, it's about how big of a rebuild you have to do. It's all about URE, I've got literally thousands of drives on the floor in the datacenter, you don't have 2x drives stop spinning, which is really where you care about how fast a rebuild is. A URE stands for "uncorrectable read error", which means that the drive thinks everything is fine and you make a request and it is unable to fulfil it. There is nothing the drive array can do about it, it's part of the drive. Goto Seagate, Hitachi, etc and look it up, most standard ATA drives have a drive manufacture failure rate of 10^14 (or ~12TB). So let's say I's using big raid5 groups 6+1 using 2TB drives (12TB usable). Statistically during a rebuild you are more likely to not to have some data loss. It might be a single 512byte bit, but that 512byte bit could include an oracle datafile, a critical bank transfer, or whitespace that you don't care about. Constant disk scrubbing minimizes this as it should find those failing sectors before the entire drive failure
I've personally had a raid5 drive failure + URE event in a raid event, only a single sector couldn't be rebuilt but it wrecked havoc and ultimately made ~30TB of other VTL data useless (the VTL app spread the writes around the array... very similar to 3PAR). So I'm not talking out my ass, not am I looking for simply a checkbox (note this was on 320GB pata drives so it was a few years ago).
I suggest you do some reading up, as it's a very real danger.
http://blogs.zdnet.com/storage/?p=164
http://storagemojo.com/2007/02/26/netapp-weighs-in-on-disks/
Probably an incorrect protection resync
One real easy way to destroy data permanently is to have do a data resync of a mirror in the reverse direction while having an active filesystem against it.
i.e. lets say before you do a upgrade you mirror the drive as a rollback so you have a point in time to roll back to. If an admin does a restore rather than a resync, you'll be rolling the disk back to a date a month ago live (which is something you can do with arrays), while the filesystem didn't know you did that and will continue writing to filesystem with new data. So you'll have a filesystem with old data and new files and a corrupted filesystem. If you have some form of a database (i.e. oracle, ms sql, etc) which is most likely in this configuration even filesystem forensics looking for file EOF markers wouldn't work. If you are replicating the data it would copy over the corruption as well.
Hardware won't stop you from a bad admin (we had this type of thing happen to us by a contractor 10 years ago)
The guy doesn't have a point
@Chris Thomas Alpha
The only way that the lawyers are getting screwed over this in situation is this: they purposely lowered their fee to spend the hundreds of hours creating their documents with the expectation that they could resell it later. If they did not lower their fee, then all this is an unrealized second revenue stream that they just now realized someone is already doing; and instead of competing against them they figure they can just block access to it and get a mini-monopoly and double-dip.
It's very obvious they didn't lower their rates to capitalize on this since they "just found out" about it. So the lawyers aren't the ones getting screwed here... maybe their client could complain since they paid for all the stuff upfront but the lawyers don't have any to bitch about.
Where's the actual *making calls* part?
Having used a number of touch-screen only phones... they all suck horribly at making calls (i.e. dialing the actual number numbers). Compare initiating a call while driving in a noisy car, walking, trying to do just about anything else at the same time, it's the most annoying thing ever. The fact that everything is visual drove me away from them, not just calling but any other task you might be trying to do.
Never extradite eh??
Looks like it's off to a foreign country to for some random mass murder rampaging fun and return before I'm identified (as long as I never return I'm scott free). Never say never.
myxipix why limit yourself to 32GB?
Currently ESX 3.5 supports upto 256GB of ram in a physical server, and upto 64GB of ram per guest. ESX 4.0 release is just around the corner in the next 2-3 months will support even more.
As AC said, if you put more RAM into a server with VMware the ratio should only go up in favor of VMware (provided you aren't fully CPU bound). Additionally VMware with it's memory "deduplication" (if groups of ram are the same it points all servers to one copy rather than having 20 copies of the same dll, etc like a symlink or shortcut) can logically present more ram than is in the box physically.
http://www.vmware.com/pdf/vi3_35/esx_3/r35u2/vi3_35_25_u2_config_max.pdf
Comeon peopel you really don't think this way do you? Reality check
I am a heavy linux/unix user (both at work and at home), but look at the number of times MS is sued yearly over patents; and look how many *hundreds* of millions of dollars they have been fined over the years due to those patents. They have a whole army of people just trying to find patents in the system; but for some reason a bunch of people think that there is no patent infringement in Linux (kernel and userspace).
The fact of reality is that common logic (unless you are wearing blinders) would have to suggest that there are a relatively large quantity of patent infringement in Linux. Look at Linux over the years... I'd say out of any OS out there is copies the most from all the other OS's (heck probably all the other main ones combied)... before you jump all over me, from a user like me that's a good thing since normally it's copying the good things (only zealots and fanboys claim the "yeah be <foo> OS did it first", really they did it first tell me why I should care? So let's get over this stupid notion that Linux (or any other OS) doesn't infringe on a large number of patents and get into reality.
Re: Xen doesn't want to get their code mainstream
AC: "The xen hypervisor, unlike the VMware and KVM hypervisors, does not sit inside the host OS, it's an OS in its own right."
That would depend upon the version of VMware you are running ESX it is a hardware layer micro-kernel hypervisor like Xen (VMware workstation and server run inside another host OS). Additionally with Linux kernel 2.6.21 including paravirtops & VMI in the mainline kernel all VMware versions support full paravirtualization of Linux guests as well.
Xen will never fully be part of Linux kernel
Main reason is that Xen isn't linux at all, it's a based off a different microkernel rather than Linux. So when you are running Xen, something other than a Linux OS is actually running interfacing at the hardware layer, and then you run Linux on top of that layer... which is why the kernel guys probably won't ever fully integrate it into the mainline kernel, and it always will be an "add-on" by distros, etc.
http://blog.codemonkey.ws/2008/05/truth-about-kvm-and-xen.html
Allowed 45 minutes of downtime per month
Only 99.9%? The business cost difference can go against Google (or any online service at that same SLA) very quickly . What is the cost to the business to have 100 people sitting on their hands while still collecting a paycheck? Lets be honest is won't be happening (dropping off all the time), but businesses look at it that Google is only willing to guarantee that much so they have to assume the worst. All you have to have is around 3x outages over 4 years and you have paid for the cost of MS Office, in wages and lost productivity, let alone for those times when a secretary needs to get a message, etc out for the CEO "right now"...
Correction for anonymous
Umm... if the T5440's are not out, then was the heck are *these* page off of Sun's website? (I can even buy a T5440 according to sun.com, guess I have magic back-door to Sun powers)
http://www.sun.com/servers/netra/t5440/specs.xml
http://www.sun.com/servers/netra/t5440/datasheet.pdf
Tell me do those two documents from SUN's website link to a T5440, tell me do those same docs say that the T5440 has any specs other than what I state.
I'm not making anything up, it's right there off of Sun's website! I went off the PDF's for the T5440 directly from Sun's website! I guess I have some L33T powers to be able to goto's Sun's website, search for T5440 and get a magical pdf telling me information for the T5440 that isn't out yet. Unless you are now going to tell me that you were meaning a different T5440 than the T5440 that appears in Sun's link, or that Sun is just screwing with people and putting up tech specs for a T5440 that actually aren't for a T5440 (har, har you got me Sun, splashing T5440 all over the docs and then tricking me). I'm wondering that maybe you should go get "real figures instead of making hot air", because all my information came *directly* from Sun's website.
I'm guessing that you are going to go on you merry little way, because you now realize you look pretty stupid after that.
T5440 == an E25K?? HA!
A T5440 is no where near equal to a E25K, that is close to the silliest thing I've ever heard. A T5440 has 16 cores on two chips, all those cores share onboard cache. A thread gives absolutely no CPU number crunching power in fact it lowers it due to scheduling. Where threads give benefits is when the CPU is waiting on some other task: i.e. storage, etc. you can schedule something else. It's pure stupidity to say it's anywhere near a E25k, it's barely a v1290.
Talking Oracle, let's compare a T5440 vs a HP Dl580:
DL580= 4x 4 core 2.93 Ghz CPU's = total 46.88Ghz
T5440 = 2x 8 core 1.4 Ghz CPU's = total 22.4Ghz
DL580 = 2x 4M L2 cache per socket = 32M total L2 cache
T5440 = 4M L2 cache per socket = 8M total L2 cache
Assume list price for Oracle Enterprise RAC ~= $60k/CPU
DL580 = 16 cores * 60k * .5 = $480k
T5440 = 16 cores * 60k * .75 = $720k
So for less than half the total Mhz processing power, a quarter of the L2 cache, and $240,000 more I can use a T5440 for Oracle RAC. This my friends is why the Oracle is running from the Sparc architecture, and why saying the T5440 is anything near a E25k is friggin silly.
People are not getting unlimited right
Stepping into the inevitable frying pan, but this stupidity annoys me to know end, and it is plain and stupid to continue the same complaint.
Coming from an ISP back over a decade ago when POTS line modem were all the rage... the phrase unlimited came into ISP lingo because there were hourly limits per month. i.e.
5 hour plan/month
10 hour plan/month
unlimited plan
You could have timed service or you can have unlimited time on the internet.
All the people saying it's advertised as unlimited service, YES it is unlimited service, but they make no guarantees about anything else. They don't cut you off if you are using your service 24x7, which is all that unlimited covers. You can piss and moan all you want but look at your terms of service document, that's what it meant 10 years ago and that's what it means today. You can't just come in now years later and say that because you think it has a different meaning it automatically does (heck I wish by repeating over and over "Angelina Jolie wants me" would automatically make it true).
Additionally knowing what the monthly price of an OC-12 circuit is... well all I can say is that if they only sold 1:1 ratio lines your speed would be measured in kilobits/sec vs megabits/sec for the price (62x 10mb Comcast customers would fill a OC-12 circuit). You will *never* get 1:1 ratio lines from an ISP unless you are willing to get dial-up speeds or pay hundreds of dollars a month, if you want something in the middle you ONLY will ever get a shared line period end of story.
I'm not saying they shouldn't be bitched about, but something so wrong being constantly repeated over and over by uninformed people blathering on about it acting like they actually have some facts behind them annoys me to no end. So stop with the stupid arguments about unlimited supposedly meaning something else because you look like a fool
Been there, experienced that
Gave a system admin a bundle of fibre cables going to the SAN during a lease return and told him to unplug them from the patch panel. I go around the other side to pull up cables from another returning storage array, I come around the front and he has a wonderful grin on his face of "boy did I do a good job". Unfortunately mine I'm sure was a look of horror, instead of unplugging the bundle of 15-20 cables I handed to him, he unplugged *ALL* the fibre cables in the patch panel. I grunt and squeek something in ununderstandable half words and run out of the datacenter (leaving him perplexed as to what happened but knowing that it wasn't good), on my way through the building I yell at the ops folks that "shit is going down" they say "what stuff?" I say "everything!". Get to my laptop pull up the cable report (that I luckily had updated 2 days before), run back in the datacenter tell him to get out of the way and I start plugging things back in. Spent the next 2 hours getting filesystems and databases happy again.
It's kinda funny now, back then it wasn't so much
@Bob you are sitting too close
60" TV with a viewing distance of 7'. The problem you are going to have is with your field of vision. To keep from having to move your eyes around to try and watch things on the screen, you need to sit further away. You are missing a good portion of activities at the sides of your TV, effectively making your nice big 60" widescreen TV into a much smaller 4x3 (you are only seeing the middle, unless you move your eyes). Sure you can "catch" something out of your perephrial vision and move your eyes, to focus on it but then you are missing something else.
You should be sitting 2-2.5x (depends upon who you talk to) the distance relative to the size of the TV. So at 60" or 5 feet you should really be at a 10-12.5 feet viewing distance... unless you like missing things happening on the screen.
Don't need a cookie just your IP
When was the last time your IP changed? Mines been about 2x years or so, and before that was 8-12 months. The only person rejecting a cookie from doubleclick would benefit is the person on a dial-up type connection where they come from different IP's almost every connection. Your IP address is the most reliable information around now, with doubleclick and adwords google can now track your habits on probably >60% of sites on the web.
Rejecting cookies is not the answer, not requesting adds is the only resonable option... and that is rather tenuous. Suppose that I host my corporate logo on a Google hosted service, add blocking won't catch that; but now my ip address has been given away to google who can now track my habits for websites without adds (or hosted on any third party who would sell info to doubleclick, etc). Not meant to be banging just on Google, but being so broad (search, mail, office apps, doubleclick, adwords, etc) they have the largest amount of inhouse data on individuals in the world and it can be easily indexed between databases. So they are the easiest company to show what "could" happen.
I think that maybe you are probably sitting in the "unwary or unaware" to use your own words category, thinking that simply rejecting cookies would protect your privacy.
Total # of 360 games sold beat Wii by 41.1%
Actually anonymous who posted the VGChartz data if you compare to the number of games sold the Xbox360 is handily beating the Wii & PS3 consoles. From the same website as you I used a more proper calculation value taking those total quantity sold, rather that what you did: which games sold more during a single week in December.
---
Xbox360: 104.66 mill games sold
WII: 61.61 mill games sold (78.96 if you count the bundled Wii Sports as a sale)
PS3: 30.31 mill games sold
---
To reproduce, goto vgchartz.com & login as a member to give you the option of by sorting by sales and filter by console
Select game database, select the console (PS3, X360 & WII), select order by sales, and simply add up the total sales column (I went until I hit "0.00mill"). This will give a resonable represenation of the total number of physical games sold for each platform, rather than who sold what this week based on hype. I retrieved this data on Jan 4, 2008 from the website.
Additionally downloaded games from Xbox Live, Wii Virtual Console or PSN do not appear to be included on the list so the total values should be higher. Including paid for downloaded games should not materialy change these values, and most likely would only increase the 360's lead.