Ting actually roams on Verizon. If you want that, you will not be on GSM.
Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
If they had any real intention of competing in this space, they would have bought Page Plus Cellular. Even a purchase of BYO Wireless would make more sense than another Sprint has-been
This is another round of Google Plus - great sound and fury, signifying nothing.
It is not difficult to extinguish your alcoholism if and when you choose.
While either scenario could be true, the x86 score is triple the performance of the next best-performing platform (a DB2 database from IBM). Oracle rules these benchmarks, even after failing to submit a new x86 system for over two years.
If I want Oracle PL/SQL in Postgres, I have to purchase EnterpriseDB. If you can get EnterpriseDB to give away the "deep Oracle compatibility" for free, many Oracle installations might switch. Let me know how that works out for you.
I'd also like to see PostgreSQL in the TPC-C top ten. That's a lot of work, and for people who need scalability, they don't have time to wait.
I agree that free software is a good thing, and so does Oracle, as they give away their RedHat clone for free.
Oracle gives away PostgreSQL, MySQL, SQLLite, and several other databases in their clone, and will support them if that is important to you.
Some applications require scalability, availability, or other features that are beyond the realm of the free databases. In those cases, Oracle database XE is free, standard edition is under $10k, and enterprise is available where performance outweighs cost.
I wholeheartedly concur that it will be a good day when a free database gets on the TPC-C top ten list.
It's up to the vendor to assemble and benchmark a database platform for TPC.
Software licensing for most database servers explicitly prohibit benchmarking, meaning all scores must be released by the vendor. IBM likely has seen fit not to, for reasons of their own.
Ksplice and it's derivatives won't help you if you need to purge bad glibc code from memory, as we did for the recent "ghost" vulnerability.
Still, it could potentially be nasty if exploited so we strongly recommend immediate patching and rebooting. Without a reboot, services using the old library will not be restarted,” Moore concluded.
The Dell server is actually running a Sybase product, which is 98% slower than the SPARC benchmark. It is the newest entry on the list.
If you want an inexpensive database, you might look at Oracle XE, which is free. However, it has some rather tight constraints and limitations, and it only runs on x86.
If you examine the top two best performing database platforms (as benchmarked by TPC-C score) you will discover that they are both sold by Oracle, and that the SPARC version has both higher performance and a lower cost per transaction than the x86-64 version.
You might find this quote to be particularly interesting:
"I am going to make a promise to you," [Larry] Ellison said. "By this time next year, that Sparc microprocessor will run the Oracle database faster than anything on the planet."
...that, while this part of the conversation might not have been the strongest part of the interview, systemd has won an amazing number of technical battles.
FWIW IMHO, absolutely no, a unified development approach is not the main benefit of systemd. The new functionality is absolutely worth the transition pain. Not only can you control (kill) whole classes of processes more simply than ever, but you also get lightweight containers as a door prize.
OpenBSD is trying to move from rc.conf.local and inittab into per-daemon startup/shutdown init.d scripts.
It's a shame that someone didn't swoop in with bare-bones unit file functionality (no cgroups, obviously). At least, with a unit file, PID 1 can launch a non-root process, which is hard with SysVinit (I do wonder if I've written my shim correctly).