Comment Re:Does it matter? (Score 2) 294
Big whoop. Nobody lives in the desert or in arctic tundra.
Big whoop. Nobody lives in the desert or in arctic tundra.
1. Thank you! I KNEW that 21,499 figure was wrong
2. Why does ANYBODY still use the mind-numbingly stupid UTF-16?
Hilarious; I had grep aliased to "grep -i --color=auto" because the idiots have deprecated GREP_OPTIONS. A lesson in unexpected interaction (-i and -v in this case).
I fixed my alias. Thank you for leading to me finding my bad practice.
Odd; that command only works for me if I replace the second grep with egrep. I wonder why.
Secondly your "rule two" is not actually rule of algebra. There is no rule x/x = 1.
With the domain defined as finite real numbers, I don't believe you, and furthermore I can't believe you would state such an absurdity. It is the fundamental identity.
Multiply both sides by x:
x/x = 1
x = 1 x
x = x
If that ain't the most fundamental rule of algebra, I don't know what is.
Thank you for pointing out that the needy ought to receive more than a patchwork of bandaids. As a long-time flirter with libertarianism and a hater of nanny state excess, it does nonetheless seem to me that unconditional basic income is an idea whose time is due. It should also not involve insulting hoops to jump through to qualify. I do think that basic housing and basic nutrition and of course basic healthcare do need to be separated from any "mad money" which could be squandered unwisely and self-destructively.
I shouldn't have to, but wearily I hasten to add that frivolous shit must not be allowed to squeeze into these programs. That means frivolous cosmetic surgery, frivolous sex-change mutilation, degenerate drug binging, etc. Not as part of the social compact. Clothing is a tough one. Everybody should have shoes on their feet and adequate clothing for working and living without gross shabbiness, but no one should be able to spend their life preening on public money.
If you feel that way, volunteer your own money. You seem to be a spendthrift when it comes to using other people's money.
How about you resign from the social compact if you are so goddam selfish. Go into the woods where there are no public services, public roads, etc.
It doesn't ever work correctly.
The fact that you can contrive an example that doesn't do what you want is largely irrelevant.
No, the fact that anyone can effortlessly give many examples that flat out don't do what it says they should do is very relevant.
The HELL it will, regardless of what YOU may be willing to accept.
Which is why you choose a VPS provider who offers unlimited bandwidth. They exist, and they are the only safe VPSs to run.
VPSs have exactly the same situation. You end up on an overloaded host with other VPSs hogging CPU and bandwidth like crazy, and they hate you if YOU use too much.
Where the VPS wins is that you have your own IP, so other users can't get that IP blacklisted (unless the whole block gets blacklisted).
FTFS:
Our new deployments were switched to different SSD drives
Is "SSD drive" grammatically anything like "PIN number"?
Use of TRIM fights the deleterious effect of write amplification on lifespan, as well as reducing degradation of performance over time. Why does that "make no sense" for individual users?
There are two strategies for using TRIM.
The first one is "discard" in the mount options, which causes the drive to be informed via the TRIM command at the time a block is freed (file erased). The second strategy runs a utility (fstrim) periodically - for example, once a day - to TRIM all the blocks freed since the last time.
The first strategy somewhat slows down each delete in normal operation, and is considered to be dangerous. For this reason the second strategy is considered to be preferable. It is not clear to me why grouping the TRIMs and executing the groups infrequently is considered safer. But I have used the second strategy for a long time on my M500 SSD and never discovered any corruption.
ZFS is COW and still cannot magically eliminate rrandom writes due to fragmentation as it gets near full. I daresay all filesystems have this problem to a degree. Reserved blocks and over-provisioning in no way can prevent it.
Reserved blocks are solely present to allow bad-block replacement. Over-provisioning adds to the general pool of available blocks, but as soon as they are used they have to be erased before re-use, just like any other block. As your writes cumulatively total multiples of the capacity of the drive, over-provisioned or not, you end up with exactly the same situation that TRIM is intended to address.
Whether all blocks are written to when you have written 1.0 times the capacity of the drive (no over-provisioning), or 1.5 times the capacity (strongly over-provisioned), this occurs when only a tiny fraction of the drive endurance limit is reached.
It is easier to change the specification to fit the program than vice versa.