Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

  • View

  • Discuss

  • Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

×

Comment: Re: Tell me about POWER and IBM. (Score 3, Informative) 83

I've been working with AIX since 1990. Prior to that a bit of SunOS. AIX is is different but generally well thought out. Most people who hate it simply aren't used to the differences. Lots of feature that we take for granted in today's Linux existed in AIX 25 years ago.

Tivoli Storage Manager is a dream. I remember setting up a high-availability TSM (well, ADSM at the time) server and having a client backup running during fail over testing. Client connection failed, continued retrying until the server was back up on the other node, then the backup continued where is left off. Transaction backup with rollback and resumption after server fail over! Try that with NetBackup or Networker or Avamar or CommVault.

B

Comment: Re:Can we get a real Linux filesystem, please? (Score 1) 210

by belrick (#42299387) Attached to: Denial-of-Service Attack Found In Btrfs File-System

Btrfs, like ZFS and Netapp's WAFL, use a far more efficient copy-on-write strategy that avoids the write penalty.

WAFL doesn't do copy-on-write. Copy-on-write means a write to a block in a file requires the original block to be read, written elsewhere for the snapshot, then the new block written in the original location. That's exactly what WAFL doesn't do. WAFL writes all changed blocks for multiple files in big RAID stripes, updating pointers to current copies and leaving snapshot pointers pointing to old copies of the updated files. Very efficient for writes, but changes almost all reads, random or sequential (within a file) into random reads (within the filesystem) because file blocks get scattered according to write order, not location of the block within the file. That's why they want lots of spindles in an aggregate and they love RAM cache and flash cache.

But since you say that copy-on-write avoids the write penalty I think you know what is does but simply don't know that it isn't copy-on-write.

Comment: Re:Maintenance and prevention are not always the s (Score 2) 185

by belrick (#38183010) Attached to: Can Maintenance Make Data Centers Less Reliable?

After that blunder, I was asked to check on all the cameras servers once a week and make sure I could actually open up and view recordings from days past. This is a preventative action, but not really a maintenance one.

No, it's not preventative. It does nothing to prevent the problem. It detects the problem earlier (before, say, a business user does). That's monitoring. It's proactive, not reactive - perhaps that's what you mean?

Comment: Re:Only in Canada eh? Pity! (Score 1) 277

by belrick (#33948282) Attached to: Scientists Fight Back In Canada

I guess people are worried that our state of the art igloo geometric designs, dogsled aerodymanics and maple syrup chemistry are in danger if poltical decisions are made without the benefit of science. Luckily there are only 78 of us in the whole country. We can probably sort it out in about a fortnight over a few Molson's beers while watching ice hockey.

duane
"Who won the damn gold medals at the last Olympics anyways?"

Ha! You can tell you aren't Canadian because you put the word ice in front of hockey - that's redundant.

Comment: Jolicloud (Score 1) 1348

by belrick (#33933012) Attached to: Desktop Linux Is Dead

I've installed dozens of Linux distributions side-by-side on my various laptops over the years and invariably I would be booting into the Windows OS of the day (XP, skipped Vista, happy with 7). Partly because of need to access some Windows-only software but also a comfort level. Even though 90% of my laptop use is for web/Internet. This coming from someone who spent his PhD doing everything in CDE (and having an Amiga at home).

But then I tried Jolicloud 1.0. It is based on Ubuntu but feels a lot more like the iPhone in presentation. Applications arrayed on a home screen. Application windows maximized with very little OS clutter. Web applications promoted to feel like full apps.

It boots so fast on my SSD Thinkpad X200 Tablet and it feels comfortable. Perhaps this is the Linux Desktop everyone is waiting for?

Of course, I'm waiting for them to rev the Ubuntu base they are working on so the two-point multi-touch and Wacom pen of the X200 Tablet actually work (they work in Ubuntu 10.04 and 10.10, if I recall correctly). That and supporting tethering to my iPhone (both of which work in Windows).

Comment: Re:Eh? (Score 1) 420

by belrick (#33079424) Attached to: Internal Costs Per Gigabyte — What Do You Pay?

A $50 HDD does not store data by itself. How does the data get from the application to the drive? Cases, CPU, RAM. What about fault tolerance (RAID)? What about backup? What about labour? The figures cited include all that. What about speed? 450 GB 15k RPM verses a 1 TB 7200 RPM. What about advanced features (NetApp FlexClone, that allows copies as differentials, or SnapVault and SnapMirror (i.e. remote copy and syncronization)). What about backup (tape library, tape drives, tapes). What about floor space, racking, AC, Power, UPS, PDU?

Do you even realize all the costs that go into a burdened per GB cost? The physical hard drive may be a trivial part of the cost.

Comment: How is it an unfair trade barrier? (Score 1) 115

by belrick (#31349246) Attached to: Google Asks US For WTO Block On China Censorship

Don't local Chinese companies that compete with Google, such as Baidu, have to comply with the same censorship restrictions? For it to be an unfair trade barrier, don't local companies have to be treated differently?

For example, in Canada food products must be labelled in both English and French. A US company with US-produced food goods must use different packaging that complies with this law to import those goods into Canada, or, as is often the case, slap a sticker that meets the minimum requirements of the law. Since the law treats local and imported goods the same, it is not considered an unfair trade barrier. It doesn't matter that it is inconvenient for a US company to have to modify its manufacturing process to accommodate that law.

Note I'm not making any statement about the censorship laws being fair or moral in and of themselves.

Adding features does not necessarily increase functionality -- it just makes the manuals thicker.

Working...