Not in Linux.
That's a mix of 2/3 read, 1/3 write.
With just pure read, it's 123k IOPS.
With just pure write, it's 43k IOPS.
This. People just don't get this.
Typical smallish RAID array is 16 drives.
RAID 5 IOPS for 7.2k drives - 675
RAID 5 IOPS for 15k drives - 1642
RAID 5 IOPS for SSD drive - 84,211
In an environment running lots of small disk IO, like having a VM or fifty, only one of the above will give you good performance.
Man, I wish I was a scientist.
So I could be bought off by the Koch brothers.
Shit, if that's more than 20x, I'll eat one.
Nicer, my ass.
That doesn't answer siddesu's question at all.
Unfortunately, that's always the end result of having ads pay for journalism. At some point, there's always a conflict. And money will always will.
Also, that's a big "if" (screening causes cancer). I'm guessing the MD was trying to make a point about stupid anti-medical opinions.
Which tails very nicely into this conversation.
And a shit search bar.
And half assed access to settings.
I guess you haven't heard that the phrase 'spaghetti code' was invented for Windows 95.
So 'exceeding authorized access' isn't breaking access?
I said going through an unlocked AND open door wasn't B&E. Didn't mention trespassing or that it was legal.
Read again, illiterate fuck.
Please let us know what authorization scheme was broken.
Or what AT&T put into place to ensure authorization was occurring.
Except that the law *requires* authorization be broken.
If your door is unlocked AND open, it's not B&E.
Uh, yeah, the law works perfectly pedantically. Sorry for your obvious ignorance.
neither Auernheimer nor his co-conspirator
Spitler performed any “essential conduct element” of the
underlying CFAA violation
If that's not a 'not guilty' by a court that's not passing actual judgement, I don't know what is.
He did so by tricking AT&T's servers into thinking he was someone other than himself.
That doesn't mean UNauthorized.
he knew he wasn't entitled to access the information.
And yet there's no legal requirement for 'entitlement'. Just unauthorized access.
Again, there was no authorization process in AT&T's system, so he could NOT have accessed without authorization. AT&T's systems were set up with explicit full authorization in place. Everybody can access everything. Just enter the code.