He never said he was happy with Windows Server's versioning.
From the submission.
That is, users have a highly available network location where they can "go back" to how their file was an hour ago. How do you do that with Linux? This is a highly desirable situation for users.
I took "is highly desirable" to indicate he was happy with it.
If that was the case he'd still be on windows.
If what was the case?
He wants something better, that's both distributed and has version control.
The submission does not ask for those things.
Poverty = ignorance. Have you ever touched anything not sold in Bestbuy?
I think it's worse than that. He's a real life Nelson "Big Head" Bighetti. Makes himself look knowledgeable but is really just fucking worthless.
Wow. Not only is everything you said way wrong (way way way WAY wrong,) but it's also approaching retardation.
In fact, I strongly recommend there be a restraining order to prevent you from going anywhere within a mile of any enterprise grade network. You're of those guys who talks down to other employees at IT shops while always being the biggest cause of down time. 100% Dunning-Kruger.
Quite a difference between using any old Linux server as a router, and using an actual device that is purpose built for that which includes an ASIC to make faster and more efficient forwarding decisions.
A layer 3 switch is in many ways better than a router because it makes forwarding decisions in hardware. Meanwhile dedicated routers don't offer any big advantages over a layer 3 switch unless you happen to be using old shit like frame relay where you need special WICs and can't use ordinary ethernet or SFP adapters.
Well at least we can now distinguish protest from celebration, because it seems that in France, setting your neighbors car into a blazing inferno is a sign of celebration.
http://europe.newsweek.com/940...
So there you have it:
Car flipped, somebody is angry.
Car burned, somebody is happy.
The shuttle wasn't a rocket, rather it was the rocket's payload.
You can only use a file system snapshot to store a database file because databases are designed specifically to handle this. 3-phase commit logic, journals, transaction logs... The database builds transactional capabilities on top of the file system. And even those don't work if the drive "lies" and says it committed data when it didn't. That's why you should be careful running an enterprise file system on consumer-grade drive.
It's the Microsoft Volume Shadow Service. It's not the same thing as Sharepoint. FYI: A Sharepoint admin recently told me "If you are just using Sharepoint as a way to share files, then you are using it's weakest most awful feature."
Can ZFS actually do versioning on every file close?
The versioning filesystem that Windows Server provides does not version at every file close. It does it via snapshots. So that shouldn't be part of the submitter's requirements.
Cisco is very much a "configure it yourself" type of deal. In fact their whole certification track above the CCENT level revolves heavily around knowing the IOS command syntax.
You can substitute their routers for Linux, but NOT their layer 3 switches, unless you really don't give a shit about performance in an enterprise environment.
It looks like Amnesty International: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Coincidentally, there are 116M housing units in the US, median size say 4-5 rooms. If you had one person per room in every house, we could house everyone easily--318 million people in the US vs. 464M rooms. But the market isn't doing that.
That seems to be working under the assumption that, for example, the exact number of people who need to occupy an empty room and/or house want to live in the location of said room/house. I know that Detroit has a lot of unoccupied space, but I can't think of many people who would actually want to live in that turd. Personally I'd much rather be homeless than live there.
That only explains why you didn't throw out a warning call for organic food. Why did you throw out a warning call for GMO food?
And I just love how others make wildly inaccurate assumptions about my views on agriculture in general based solely on my misgivings about one technique.
So knowing that organic food does cause actual harm and plenty of evidence to back it up, with zero evidence that GMO food causes any actual harm, what prompted you to throw out a warning call for the potential damages of GMO food, as opposed to making a warning call about organic food?
Let's hear it.
Neutrinos have bad breadth.
