Linux-Advocacy Digest #870, Volume #27 Sat, 22 Jul 00 07:13:03 EDT
Contents:
Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it (R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard
))
Re: Some Windows weirdnesses... ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it (R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard
))
Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451748 ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: Star Office to be open sourced (Stefaan A Eeckels)
Mrs Drestin Black (Jacques Guy)
Someone please help Dresden (Jacques Guy)
Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown ("Robert Moir")
Let me help Dresden (Jacques Guy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 08:30:09 GMT
In article <8ko04k$1tst$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (abraxas) wrote:
> In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> >> Oh really now dresden? Why dont you point me in the direction of
> > documentation
> >> that states that windows (in any form) can lode balance 6,000
nodes,
> > beowulf style.
> >
> > Nope. Can't find it. In fact, I don't find any hard set limits...
Just keep
> > throwing more servers into clusters. If you understood how things
worked
> > you'd know that "6,000" is no magic number to either beowulf
>
> Actually, if you understood exactly what beowulf was, you would know
that
> that sentence doesnt even make sense. That is, once again you are
pretending
> that you know what you are talking about, when in actuality you do
not.
>
> > or NTLB -
>
> Actually, there is a limit. 32 nodes, 8 processors per node. Now, it
is
> possible to take an unlimited number of these "domains" (forgive the
term,
> I do not know the windows terminology for such a beast) and make them
all
> talk to eachother---but thats not exactly a 'cluster', thats more like
a
> 'cluster of clusters'.
>
> And thats datacenter.
>
> With beowulf style clustering, you can create and tear down these
"domains"
> as you see fit, and any individual one can be any size. You can do
this live,
> on the fly, while clustered processes are actually happening. The same
is simply
> not possible under windows.
>
> Oddly, the same IS possible under certian kinds of E10000/solaris
configurations,
> S/390 w/VM configurations and a hell of alot of other platforms.
>
> Just not windows. Sorry about that.
>
> > it
> > just happens that google has something about that number of boxes. I
can't
> > imagine needing 6000 boxes to do anything as simply as a lot of text
> > searches,
>
> You have no concept of DB architecture. Thanks for pointing that out
for the class,
> dresden.
>
> > index manipluation and web crawling ... other search engines do
> > just fine without requiring 6000 boxes... and you highlight this as
a "good"
> > thing? hmm...
>
> Actually, most of them go down fairly often, are very slow, and/or do
not have
> nearly the size index of google. Once again, you dont know what youre
talking
> about.
>
> >
> >>
> >> You'll have to look up the beowulf thing yourself. Though I doubt
youll
> > actually
> >> understand it, lets just say that you've your choice of
implementations.
> >
> > again, grow up ...
> >
> >
>
> Apparantly you still dont undertand it. I'm glad you're paying
yourself, dresden,
> because no one in their right mind would hire you.
Microsoft would. They need good spin-doctors. I often have a hard
time telling the difference between Drestin's writings and Microsoft
press releases. Drestin is a good writer, and in any other forum
would find his comments accepting uncritically. Drestin, if you
need a phone number, I may have a good one for you? Seattle is pretty
dreary, but they say you get used to it.
> -----yttrx
>
--
Rex Ballard - Open Source Advocate, Internet
I/T Architect, MIS Director
http://www.open4success.com
Linux - 40 million satisfied users worldwide
and growing at over 5%/month! (recalibrated 7/2/00)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Some Windows weirdnesses...
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 22 Jul 2000 17:51:46 +1000
"Aaron R. Kulkis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>Make a tape dump, or tar the filesystem onto another disk, and then
>reformat the partition with reiserfs. This will give you a clean
>filesystem AND give you the added bonus of doing the equivalent
>of a defragment/pack operation.
Except that in my case, that is *exactly* what I did. Well, I used
"cp" rather than "tar" (and kicked myself after a while ;-), but except
from that...
Made a new reiserfs, copied everything back, and *during the copy*, the
first reiserfs messages started showing up.
>Following this procedure will give you EXTREME peace of mind.
For the moment, keeping backups of everything on the filesystem gives me
peace of mind.
Bernie
--
It is easier to make war than to make peace
Georges Clemenceau
French Prime Minister 1906-09
Verdun, 20 July 1919
------------------------------
From: R.E.Ballard ( Rex Ballard ) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: What I've always said: Netcraft numbers of full of it
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 09:13:05 GMT
In article <nyNc5.21696$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
"Drestin Black" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> "abraxas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:8ko04k$1tst$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
> > In comp.os.linux.advocacy Drestin Black
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > >> Oh really now dresden? Why dont you point me in the direction of
> > > documentation
> > >> that states that windows (in any form) can lode balance 6,000
nodes,
> > > beowulf style.
> > >
> > > Nope. Can't find it. In fact, I don't find any hard set limits...
Just
> keep
> > > throwing more servers into clusters. If you understood how things
worked
> > > you'd know that "6,000" is no magic number to either beowulf
> >
> > Actually, if you understood exactly what beowulf was, you would know
that
> > that sentence doesnt even make sense. That is, once again you are
> pretending
> > that you know what you are talking about, when in actuality you do
not.
>
> ahhh good ol abracadabra, stomping and pissing and moaning but again
> providing exactly NO technical knowledge or content whatsoever.
Attempting
> to insult but nothing backing it... yawn...
Good point. Here's a good "starter link".
http://www.beowulf.org/
IBM has built 1000 processor clusters that have ranked as the fastest
systems in the world. A notable achievement of Beowulf is that it
was able to track the path of several hurricanes more accurately
and effectively than numerous other more expensive systems.
> >
> > > or NTLB -
> >
> > Actually, there is a limit. 32 nodes, 8 processors per node.
> > Now, it is possible to take an unlimited number of these
> > "domains" (forgive the term, I do not know the windows
> > terminology for such a beast) and make them all
> > talk to eachother---but thats not exactly a 'cluster',
> > thats more like a 'cluster of clusters'.
Actually, that's NT 4.0 with SP5.
> > And thats datacenter.
>
> Well,l that paragraph explains just
> how much you know about this - fucking
> nothing. 32 "Nodes" per cluster,
> up to 32 processors per node.
Microsoft just loves to beat this SMP thing to death.
The problem with the SMP model is that as you add more
processors to a share memory pool, the more contention
you have for shared memory. You can run 32 processors
per node, but this requires huge L1 cache and cache-control.
This was discussed for nearly 10 years in the comp.arch groups
(and net.arch before that).
The 32 node clusters are basically a function of the SCSI-II
bus correct? I was hoping than Win2K would support fire-wire
clustering. In Linux/UNIX the processors are so cheap that we
just mirror NFS servers across multiple servers using software-raid.
> And unlimited number of clusters.
> > With beowulf style clustering, you can
> > create and tear down these "domains"
> > as you see fit, and any individual one
> > can be any size. You can do this live,
> > on the fly, while clustered processes are
> > actually happening.
> > The same is simply not possible under windows.
>
> You are wrong, completely and categorically wrong.
> You can change the size and configuration of the
> clusters without ever taking it down.
A bit of fine print here. With beowulf, especially in the PVM
model, you can start the process, change configurations, and
still have the process continue without missing more than a
few beats. Win2K can do this too, but it takes more thinking
to clear out threads that have attached themselves to a
processor that is to be taken down.
> On the fly, you can add or remove nodes as you'd like.
> Even down to individual CPUs.
> All from a single remote MMC plugin.
> There was a demonstration of this during
> the W2K rollout in Feb, did it live across several servers with
> multiprocessors. Included load balancing and fall over demonstrations
Both MSMQ and MQSeries give NT the ability to cluster many machines.
Of course, on MQSeries, I have the option of mixing and matching
NT, UNIX, MVS, and Linux in the same MQ cluster. MSMQ is pretty much
a Win2K-only affair (WNT with some effort), and the level 8 bridge
slows things to a crawl.
> <snip> > it
> > > just happens that google has
> > > something about that number of boxes.
> > > I can't imagine needing 6000 boxes to
> > > do anything as simply as a lot of text
> > > searches,
The big problem his is that you have to index 15 million servers
keep new content updated and indexed, and flush old content. Most
search engines either rely on publisher input, discover new input,
or search other search engines (built in feature of the underlying
WAIS engine).
To be honest, if google really intends to make the content of all
15 million servers, roughly 15 billion pages of documents, available
to 1 billion users (about where the internet would be in 2001), then
6000 is pretty good.
> > You have no concept of DB architecture.
> > Thanks for pointing that out for the class,
> > dresden.
>
> empty statements - that is what you have a concept of. I surely do
> understand DB architecture but explaining it is worthless to you.
Text search engines are more complex than traditional relational
database search engines. You have to parse free form text, index
what might be interesting, and enable queries that produce meaningful
results.
> > > index manipluation and web crawling ...
> > > other search engines do just fine without
> > > requiring 6000 boxes...
Other web crawlers go through selected sites every few weeks. Google
is going after millions of sites every few days. I get the google
pulls every few days on my sight and they don't miss anything.
Google has been finding stuff even I had forgotten about.
And by the way, most of these other sites run on clusters of SP/2
or Enterprise 10000 boxes. Each of these boxes runs 64 processors
or more, all in the "Ultra" class. Most of these are high end 64 bit
processors with gigabit switches built in, and clusters of EMC raid
arrays. A 6000 node Linux cluster is pretty aggressive (is this all in
one location?). I know I wouldn't want to be anywhere near that OC5
trunk when this puppy goes data-sucking :-). This monster shoud
be able to index several gigabytes/minute and serve several
gigabytes/second. It definitely looks "juicy".
> > > and you highlight this as a "good"
> > > thing? hmm...
> >
> > Actually, most of them go down fairly often,
> > are very slow, and/or do not have
> > nearly the size index of google.
> > Once again, you dont know what youre talking
> > about.
>
> and you do? how is it that you know
> everything without revealing a single
> shred of any evidence that you are anything
> but a fucking stupid lump of
> crap? but you knew that too...
By the way Drestin. Do you remember the attempt Lycos made
at trying to run it's site using NT servers. Users were given
the option of choosing either server, and later were just sent
randomly to each server. Eventually Lycos pulled the plug on NT
because it couldn't hold up.
If anyone would know, I'm sure you would, which major search engines
are running on Windows NT or Windows 2000? Obviously your "top ten"
would be most interesting".
--
Rex Ballard - Open Source Advocate, Internet
I/T Architect, MIS Director
http://www.open4success.com
Linux - 40 million satisfied users worldwide
and growing at over 5%/month! (recalibrated 7/2/00)
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
Crossposted-To:
comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Tinman digest, volume 2451748
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 09:40:47 GMT
Here's today's Tinman digest:
1> On the contrary.
Even more pontification.
1> Still you don't know what that word means.
How ironic, coming from the person who doesn't know what that word
means. Maybe some day you will realize that you provided no
reasoning for your contrary position, which represents pontification.
1> ('
What's that supposed to mean?
1> I disagree.
Without basis.
1> Illogical and incorrect.
Even more pontification.
1> Yes, the way you spell it is incorrect.
Identify the alleged spelling error, if you think you can, Tinman.
Otherwise, you're merely engaging in -- yep, you guessed it --
more pontification.
1> Unecessary.
On what basis do you claim it to be unecessary to substantiate your
claim, Tinman?
1> It's obvious you spend a lot of time tholenating across usenet,
On what basis do you claim that it is "obvious", Tinman? Yet another
example of your pontification.
How much is "a lot" of time, Tinman?
How does one "tholenate", Tinman?
How is that relevant to your claim that I waste more time?
1> and very little time engaging in actual conversation.
How much is "very little" time, Tinman?
What do you regard as "actual conversation", Tinman?
And exactly how did you go about measuring what you consider to be my
"actual conversation" across USENET?
1> Of course. That's what he did to start a new one.
On what basis do you claim that he started a new one, Tinman? His
jump was into an existing discussion, not a new one.
1> He wasn't tholenating.
How does one "tholenate", Tinman?
How does that, whatever it is, make it a different discussion, Tinman?
1> Incorrect.
How ironic, coming from someone who just pontificated again.
1> And you're merely tholenating.
How does one "tholenate", Tinman?
Yet another example of your pontification.
1> Incorrect.
How ironic, coming from someone who just pontificated again.
1> And you're merely tholenating.
How does one "tholenate", Tinman?
Yet another example of your pontification.
1> Incorrect.
How ironic, coming from someone who just pontificated again.
1> And you're merely tholenating.
How does one "tholenate", Tinman?
Yet another example of your pontification.
1> Isn't cut and paste wonderful?
Irrelevant, Tinman.
1> Experience.
Even more pontification. What alleged experiences provide your basis,
Tinman?
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Stefaan A Eeckels)
Crossposted-To: gnu.misc.discuss,comp.sys.sun.misc,comp.os.ms-windows.advocacy
Subject: Re: Star Office to be open sourced
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 10:23:12 +0200
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (phil hunt) writes:
> On 21 Jul 2000 16:58:35 +0100, Phillip Lord <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>I mean seriously have computers actually made people happier?
>
> Seriously, I doubt it.
>
> I also seriously doubt whether agriculture, the wheel, writing, antibiotics,
> the motor car, or any other technology made people happier.
The human potential for unhappiness is unlimited, and not
influenced by material posessions.
I'm quite sure that in almost all circumstances, no matter how
difficult, some are happy, and mamy are unhappy. It's improvements
that manage to make a large(r) percentange of people happy, for
a while. Then we get used to the situation, define a new baseline,
and revert to our previous mix of happiness and unhappiness.
I guess that's why the pursuit of happiness is a human right,
not happiness itself.
--
Stefaan
--
Ninety-Ninety Rule of Project Schedules:
The first ninety percent of the task takes ninety percent of
the time, and the last ten percent takes the other ninety percent.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 10:18:27 +0000
From: Jacques Guy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Mrs Drestin Black
Copied and pasted from Mr Drestin Black's URL:
http://drestinb.ic.net/private.htm
Not bad-looking at all, Osin, and... dressed in black!
I am a bit disappointed by that particular URL, though.
Although it was produced with Microsoft Frontpage 4.0,
it lacks Dresden's dreaded profession of faith:
<!-- Linux SUX -->
which you can see at
http://drestinb.ic.net/hideout.htm
immediately below:
<meta name="ProgId" content=FrontPage.Editor.Document">
and before:
<title>Drestin Black's Hideout</title>
On second thought, perhaps it makes sense. Linux SUX on:
http://drestinb.ic.net/hideout.htm
and Osin (aka Mrs Drestin Black) takes over on:
http://drestinb.ic.net/private.htm
===============begin quote==============================
*If you are already a member - click here to login.
(You have entered the "code" blue zone.)
There are two sides to every story and to our websites too! You've
all seen the
public, free side - well, now there is "The Private Side." Exclusive
photos
unavailable anywhere else! All original content photographed by
Drestin Black of
the Teasin' Osin. Here she is to your left all dressed up for a photo
session with
waiting for you inside.
But, know what's so great? When you join - you get a free 640 meg
CD-ROM
containing all of Osin's hot pictures as well as the full length
video of her stripping
and teasing, up-skirt, pantyhose, heels, stockings and let us not
forget playing
available on-line. Membership is cheap and we give you a lot!
If you would like to read about how you can receive a free CD-ROM just
by
joining - click here!
Wondering what sort of things you'll find inside? Check out The
Hideout and
Osin's Teasin' Treasures for what we're really like! Members get
access to
exclusive photos not only of Osin, but we also post amateur guest
appearances.
Plus we offer NO SPAM, NO CONSOLES OR JAVA!
All of this and much more awaits ... just click the button below to
gain instant
access via your credit card and our secure server.
Join The Private Side Now!
30 day membership to The Private Side $12
60 day membership plus Osin's CD-ROM Vol. II $30
You can also order via US Mail by visiting our mail-order page and
printing it out. Fill this out and mail it to the address given. Your
order will be processed by
Osin personally and we will ship within a week of receiving your
order. For that reason, only money orders or cashiers checks in US
funds (no personal checks) will
be accepted by this method!
========================end quote==========================
Somewhere else on the Net Mr Osin (aka Drestin Black) claims
to have been a computer "guru" since 1963.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 10:53:37 +0000
From: Jacques Guy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Someone please help Dresden
>From DejaNews
http://x62.deja.com/[ST_rn=ap]/getdoc.xp?AN=540283844&CONTEXT=964262787.51970098&hitnum=0
>> Forum: alt.binaries.multimedia.erotica.d
>> Thread: Request: Becky Sunshine videos
>> Message 1 of 1
Subject: Request: Becky Sunshine videos
Date: 10/25/1999
Author: Drestin Black <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I met Becky during the Giffy Girls days... would love to see what
she's up to today...
===========================================================
Does she suck better than Linux, Dresden?
------------------------------
From: "Robert Moir" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.ms-windows.nt.advocacy
Subject: Re: The Failure of the USS Yorktown
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 11:56:33 +0100
"KLH" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:Ct1e5.124187$[EMAIL PROTECTED]...
[...]
> >
> > So, does Unix share this success record? A SINGLE failure *during
testing*
>
> Dude, all computers crash.
I think that was the point he was trying to make
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2000 11:12:04 +0000
From: Jacques Guy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Let me help Dresden
Following your message of 10/25/1999 on
alt.binaries.multimedia.erotica.d
inquiring about Becky Sunshine videos,
here, Dresden:
http://www.beckysunshine.com/bsunfrm.htm
Which would you like, Dresden?
#10 Becky's tongue bath?
or would you prefer
#13 Becky's Bald Beaver?
For a computer guru since 1963, you are not
too clued up as to how to use a search engine,
Dresden.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.advocacy) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Advocacy Digest
******************************
