Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Question doesn't match (Score 1) 241

I doubt it was new then, either. Businesses don't like to spend money, and IT gets classified as a cost center.

Then your IT department needs to become a business partner and enabler. That's the tact we've taken, the vast majority of our costs are in projects, and we let the business drive those with us helping to steer them, if someone complains about IT spending we ask them which of their projects they want us to defund. We recently completed an acquisition equal to about 40% of the size of the company, without adding any significant headcount, all because our IT systems have gotten to the point where the business can absorb that many extra units without adding significantly to their workload and the work around the new assets is mostly loading the data into the system which we do for them. Since we've taken this approach our budget issues have become almost non-existent and our interaction with the business have become much less adversarial.

Comment Re:Power failure to the computer (Score 2) 68

So stupid, it's not hard to achieve damn near 100% uptime on power, get feeds from two substations A and B, put each one through two UPS's and use two different sets of generators with different fuel sources as backup so you have A, A', B, and B', use a transfer switch to feed your equipment's A side supply from A with A' in reserve, and the B side supply from B' and have B in reserve (that way one of your power sources stays up without a transfer switchover even if you have a fuel problem). If you want to further reduce the chances of an outage at the cost of some increased complexity use different UPS vendors and different transfer switch vendors so you don't have a possible common design flaw in both paths. The whole setup would probably cost as much as shutting down Heathrow for around 10 minutes. I've got this setup minus the redundant generators and I'm just running a midsized enterprise, not a freaking critical piece of national (and international) infrastructure.

Comment Re:The trend in servers seems to be "lousy cooling (Score 2) 25

but replacement costs are still lower that energy costs long term.

I'm not buying it, my VMWare hosts are pretty large boxes and they've used 630kWhrs since June when they were installed, that comes out to $128/year or so, and that's for primary usage, DX CRAC units have a PUE of ~1.28 which means it costs around $36/year to cool. Even with really cheap servers you'd have to have a LOT of them and have very little effect on AFR to justify it. I'm sure at some scale it makes sense or everyone wouldn't be researching it so hard and doing so many pilot datacenters, but if you don't have thousands and thousands of identical servers (99.999+% of installations) it's just not worth it.

Comment Re:End of flight as we know it (Score 2) 225

Huh? There's no way a missile can outmaneuver the optical targeting system on these things, the biggest threat will be surface skimming that will reduce the targeting systems reaction time, but the newest class of ships have pretty good synthetic aperture radar and the computer aided target discrimination is getting better all the time.

Comment Re:Reduced revenues != lost profit (Score 1) 280

One can either massively over produce in summer or rely on grid power in the winter. If one is relying on winter grid power then the equipment generating that power will only be used a fraction of the year.
My average power draw during the summer is ~4x my winter draw since I use natural gas heat but air conditioning, and I'm fairly typical. So you design your solar system to produce ~75% of summer demand and your grid demand remains relatively constant yet significantly lower than today which should actually reduce the utilities costs significantly since they will need fewer plants and less grid infrastructure and fewer grid upgrades.

Comment Re: Reduced revenues != lost profit (Score 2) 280

Do you watch use your computer after dark? There is 400 watts.
LOL, on slashdot that's funny. My VMWare hosts which are dual 10 core Xeon's with 384GB of ram, multiple network cards and fiber channel HBA's peak just over 300W:
Last Week-
average 183 W | 625 BTU/hr
peak 301 W | 1027 BTU/hr

Unless you're running dual GPU with a 60" display there's no way you're using 400W.

Comment Re: There is a reason for this! (Score 2) 317

You're misreading, the QuantumFlow Processor IS the ASIC
Further, each PPE can access hardware feature acceleration of network address and prefix lookups, hash lookups, WRED, Traffic Policers, range lookups, and TCAM for advanced classification and access-control-list (ACL) acceleration as it processes packets

If you turn off dCEF and force all packets through the RP CPU you'd quickly bring an ASR to it's knees. By comparison the Cisco 7200 did everything in CPU, but it had much lower bounds to its capabilities.

Comment Re:Very cool. (Score 1) 127

And since SDXC cards are available at ~ $.40/GB (up to 256GB) addon storage is competitive with 2.5" SSD's in price if not performance. It would be nice if the internal SSD was about 4x that size though so you could have more programs than the base installed, but that would add ~$40 to the price which would make it too expensive to compete with Chromebooks.

Slashdot Top Deals

Get hold of portable property. -- Charles Dickens, "Great Expectations"

Working...