Search Results

Search found 8266 results on 331 pages for 'distributed systems'.

Page 15/331 | < Previous Page | 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22  | Next Page >

  • What can Haskell's type system do that Java's can't?

    - by Matt Fenwick
    I was talking to a friend about the differences between the type systems of Haskell and Java. He asked me what Haskell's could do that Java's couldn't, and I realized that I didn't know. After thinking for a while, I came up with a very short list of minor differences. Not being heavy into type theory, I'm left wondering whether they're formally equivalent. To try and keep this from becoming a subjective question, I'm asking: what are the major, non-syntactical differences between their type systems? I realize some things are easier/harder in one than in the other, and I'm not interested in talking about those. And to make it more specific, let's ignore Haskell type extensions since there's so many out there that do all kinds of crazy/cool stuff.

    Read the article

  • What can Haskell's type system do that Java's can't and vice versa?

    - by Matt Fenwick
    I was talking to a friend about the differences between the type systems of Haskell and Java. He asked me what Haskell's could do that Java's couldn't, and I realized that I didn't know. After thinking for a while, I came up with a very short list of minor differences. Not being heavy into type theory, I'm left wondering whether they're formally equivalent. To try and keep this from becoming a subjective question, I'm asking: what are the major, non-syntactical differences between their type systems? I realize some things are easier/harder in one than in the other, and I'm not interested in talking about those. And to make it more specific, let's ignore Haskell type extensions since there's so many out there that do all kinds of crazy/cool stuff.

    Read the article

  • Deploying Data Mining Models using Model Export and Import, Part 2

    - by [email protected]
    In my last post, Deploying Data Mining Models using Model Export and Import, we explored using DBMS_DATA_MINING.EXPORT_MODEL and DBMS_DATA_MINING.IMPORT_MODEL to enable moving a model from one system to another. In this post, we'll look at two distributed scenarios that make use of this capability and a tip for easily moving models from one machine to another using only Oracle Database, not an external file transport mechanism, such as FTP. The first scenario, consider a company with geographically distributed business units, each collecting and managing their data locally for the products they sell. Each business unit has in-house data analysts that build models to predict which products to recommend to customers in their space. A central telemarketing business unit also uses these models to score new customers locally using data collected over the phone. Since the models recommend different products, each customer is scored using each model. This is depicted in Figure 1.Figure 1: Target instance importing multiple remote models for local scoring In the second scenario, consider multiple hospitals that collect data on patients with certain types of cancer. The data collection is standardized, so each hospital collects the same patient demographic and other health / tumor data, along with the clinical diagnosis. Instead of each hospital building it's own models, the data is pooled at a central data analysis lab where a predictive model is built. Once completed, the model is distributed to hospitals, clinics, and doctor offices who can score patient data locally.Figure 2: Multiple target instances importing the same model from a source instance for local scoring Since this blog focuses on model export and import, we'll only discuss what is necessary to move a model from one database to another. Here, we use the package DBMS_FILE_TRANSFER, which can move files between Oracle databases. The script is fairly straightforward, but requires setting up a database link and directory objects. We saw how to create directory objects in the previous post. To create a database link to the source database from the target, we can use, for example: create database link SOURCE1_LINK connect to <schema> identified by <password> using 'SOURCE1'; Note that 'SOURCE1' refers to the service name of the remote database entry in your tnsnames.ora file. From SQL*Plus, first connect to the remote database and export the model. Note that the model_file_name does not include the .dmp extension. This is because export_model appends "01" to this name.  Next, connect to the local database and invoke DBMS_FILE_TRANSFER.GET_FILE and import the model. Note that "01" is eliminated in the target system file name.  connect <source_schema>/<password>@SOURCE1_LINK; BEGIN  DBMS_DATA_MINING.EXPORT_MODEL ('EXPORT_FILE_NAME' || '.dmp',                                 'MY_SOURCE_DIR_OBJECT',                                 'name =''MY_MINING_MODEL'''); END; connect <target_schema>/<password>; BEGIN  DBMS_FILE_TRANSFER.GET_FILE ('MY_SOURCE_DIR_OBJECT',                               'EXPORT_FILE_NAME' || '01.dmp',                               'SOURCE1_LINK',                               'MY_TARGET_DIR_OBJECT',                               'EXPORT_FILE_NAME' || '.dmp' );  DBMS_DATA_MINING.IMPORT_MODEL ('EXPORT_FILE_NAME' || '.dmp',                                 'MY_TARGET_DIR_OBJECT'); END; To clean up afterward, you may want to drop the exported .dmp file at the source and the transferred file at the target. For example, utl_file.fremove('&directory_name', '&model_file_name' || '.dmp');

    Read the article

  • Are there similarities between operating system kernels and programming language kernels?

    - by rahmu
    I know very little about Smalltalk but I noticed that there's a frequent mention of the "kernel". Dan Ingalls prime maintainer of several implementations of Smalltalk also worked on a Javascript environment called "Lively Kernel" and in Peter Siebel's book he kept mentionning the "kernel". I cannot help but think that it is no coincidence that the creators of Smalltalk used the name of a (central) part of operating systems to refer to a particular component of their language. Was it because Smalltalk intended to act as an operating system? Was it because theory behind programming languages and operating systems have a lot in common? What is the reason behind the common appelation of the two components?

    Read the article

  • What sort of things can cause a whole system to appear to hang for 100s-1000s of milliseconds?

    - by Ogapo
    I am working on a Windows game and while rendering, some computers will experience intermittent pauses ("hitches" for lack of a better term). When profiled they appear in seemingly random places in the code. Eventually I noticed that it wasn't just my process that was affected, but (seemingly) every process on the system. All of the threads in my application hitch at once. The CPU utilization drops during these hitches and it appears as if most processes make no progress. This leads me to believe this may be an Operating System or Driver issue, but it only occurs while playing the game (and only on some systems). What sort of operations might the operating system be doing that would require the kernel to pause all user threads and block. Some kind of I/O? At first I thought of paging but my impression is that would only affect a single process, no? Some systems in use: Windows, DirectX (3d), nVidia cards (unknown if replicates on ATI), using overlapped io for streaming

    Read the article

  • sccm with distributed clients not in AD

    - by alex
    Hi guys, Before I go through learning about sccm can you guys tell me if it is possible to update and organize Pos systems, windows updates, software updates, which are not within an ad domain...How does this work is it workgroup etc. and online links much appreciated.... Cheers

    Read the article

  • One bigger Virtual Machine distributed across many OpenStack nodes [duplicate]

    - by flyer
    This question already has an answer here: Can a virtualized machine have the CPU and RAM resources of multiple underlying physical machines? 2 answers I just setup virtual machines on one hardware with Vagrant. I want to use a Puppet to configure them and next try to setup OpenStack. I am not sure If I am understanding how this should look at the end. Is it possible to have below architecture with OpenStack after all where I will run one Virtual Machine with Linux? ------------------------------- | VM with OS | ------------------------------- | NOVA | NOVA | NOVA | ------------------------------- | OpenStack | ------------------------------- | Node | Node | Node | ------------------------------- More details: In my environment Nodes are just virtual machines, but my question concerns separate Hardware nodes. If we imagine this Nodes(Novas) are placed on a separate machines (e.g. every has 4 cores) can I run one Virtual Machine across many OpenStack Nodes? Is it possible to aggregate the computation power of OpenStack in one virtual distributed operating system?

    Read the article

  • How To Perform Distributed Website Monitoring?

    - by cballou
    I would like to know how sites like the following perform distributed website monitoring (from multiple checkpoints/countries). pingdom.com, site24x7.com, uptrends.com, siteuptime.com, etc, etc. To be exact, what process would occur in checking if a given domain name went down? If the server finds that the site is down, what is the next step? Would it make a REST API request to a separate server to run the same test and report the results? I have a few theories, including: utilizing host(s) from different countries utilizing proxies from different countries I'm looking for the most proper or correct way to handle this, which can include the usage of servers from multiple countries/hosts.

    Read the article

  • Operative systems on SD cards

    - by HisDudeness
    I was getting some wild ideas the last days, like putting some operative systems into SD cards rather than on my hard drive. I'll go further into details now and explain what lead me to consider this probably abominable decision. I am on a laptop (that means I have a native SD-card reader) which is currently running a cross-distro setup, with a bunch of Linux systems (placed in dedicated ext4 logical partitions into a huge extended one) regulated by an unique GRUB. Since today, my laptop haven't even seen any Windows system with binoculars. I was thinking about placing all the os part of my setup into a Secure Digital to save all my 500 Gb Hard Drive for documents, music, videos and so on, and being able to just remove the SD and boot my system into another computer too, as well as having the possibility of booting other systems into mine by just plugging in another SD, without having to keep it constantly placed in my PC. Also, in the remote case in the near future I just wanted to boot Windows 8 in it, I read it causes major boot incompatibility issues with other systems by needing a digital signature in order for them to start. By having it in a removable drive, I could just get rid of it when I'm needing him and switch its card with Linux one, and so not having any obstacles to their boot. Now, my questions are: I know unlikely traditional rotating disk drives, integrated circuits ones have a limited lifespan in terms of cluster rewriting. Is it an obstacle to that kind of usage? I mean, some Ultrabooks are using SSD now, is it the same issue, or there are some differences between Solid State Drives and Secure Digitals in that sense? Maybe having them to store system files which are in fixed positions (making the even-usage of cluster technology useless) constantly being re-read and updated and similar things just gets them soon unserviceable, do it? Second question: are all motherboards and BIOSes able to boot from SDs just like they are from USB pen drives (I mean, provided card reader is USB-connected, isn't it)? Or can't bootloaders like GRUB be installed on SDs working? If they can't, is it a solution installing GRUB to MBR and making boot option pointing to SD? Will it work? Are there any other problems to installing OSs on a Secure Digital?

    Read the article

  • Distributed Server Monitoring Solution

    - by MaterialEdge
    I belong to an independent IT firm that manages and maintains about 50 business clients networks, ranging from small 5 system networks to 200+ systems. Because we are unable to directly monitor each server at these locations (distributed over a very large area) on a regular basis I am looking for a method to monitor and alert us to any problems that may arise so that we can respond quickly with, hopefully, preventative measures. I'm not sure what solutions are available for this type of situation, but something that utilizes a central server at our business with all client servers sending alerts or logs to it for daily monitoring might work best. All these servers are running a Windows Server OS. In your opinion, what would be the best course of action to accomplish this?

    Read the article

  • One bigger Virtual Machine distributed across many Nodes [on hold]

    - by flyer
    I just setup virtual machines on one hardware with Vagrant (this is just a test environment, not production!). I want to use a Puppet to configure them and next try to setup OpenStack. I am not sure If I am understanding how this should look at the end. Is it possible to have below architecture with OpenStack after all where I will run one Virtual Machine with Linux? ------------------------------- | VM | ------------------------------- | NOVA | NOVA | NOVA | ------------------------------- | OpenStack | ------------------------------- | Node | Node | Node | ------------------------------- (In my environment Nodes are just virtual machines, but my question concerns separate Hardware nodes) After some comments... Is it a language barrier, or? This is only my 'virtual environment'. If we imagine this virtual machines are a separate Nodes (e.g. every has 4 cores) the OpenStack is still the same, right? Can I run one Virtual Machine across many Nodes with OpenStack? Is it possible to aggregate the computation power of separate machines in one virtual distributed operating system?

    Read the article

  • How to use Git over multiple similar systems

    - by Spidfire
    I have a system I need to duplicate over several systems and make minor changes like change less/css variables and configuration files. Is there a best practice for these kind of problems? I currently do: git clone repo cp ../default/config.js config.js ... for several files or should I create different branches of the same repo or should I create an repo for the changes? It is currently doable but it will get annoying if I get more than 5 similar systems.

    Read the article

  • NAS device for distributed team

    - by user5959
    We are a distributed team spread across 5 locations. We have a shared drive (1 TB data) at our former location that we are currently accessing via Hamachi VPN. Our shared drive is a network folder on a Windows Server located at one of our locations. The current connection speed is terrible. The upload speed at the current location of the shared drive is very slow. We looking for a NAS device that we can host at another location with better upload speed that all of us can access. I am looking for a NAS device that has these features: Minimal Maintenance as we do not have dedicated IT resources Access data on the device from multiple locations. Ability to create network drive (On Windows Computers Map Network Drive) Upload data from random client computers without having to install software. (Right now, we use LogMeIn Rescue's file manager) Ability handle slow or dropped connections when transferring files (Maximum size 1.5 GB)

    Read the article

  • The SPARC SuperCluster

    - by Karoly Vegh
    Oracle has been providing a lead in the Engineered Systems business for quite a while now, in accordance with the motto "Hardware and Software Engineered to Work Together." Indeed it is hard to find a better definition of these systems.  Allow me to summarize the idea. It is:  Build a compute platform optimized to run your technologies Develop application aware, intelligently caching storage components Take an impressively fast network technology interconnecting it with the compute nodes Tune the application to scale with the nodes to yet unseen performance Reduce the amount of data moving via compression Provide this all in a pre-integrated single product with a single-pane management interface All these ideas have been around in IT for quite some time now. The real Oracle advantage is adding the last one to put these all together. Oracle has built quite a portfolio of Engineered Systems, to run its technologies - and run those like they never ran before. In this post I'll focus on one of them that serves as a consolidation demigod, a multi-purpose engineered system.  As you probably have guessed, I am talking about the SPARC SuperCluster. It has many great features inherited from its predecessors, and it adds several new ones. Allow me to pick out and elaborate about some of the most interesting ones from a technological point of view.  I. It is the SPARC SuperCluster T4-4. That is, as compute nodes, it includes SPARC T4-4 servers that we learned to appreciate and respect for their features: The SPARC T4 CPUs: Each CPU has 8 cores, each core runs 8 threads. The SPARC T4-4 servers have 4 sockets. That is, a single compute node can in parallel, simultaneously  execute 256 threads. Now, a full-rack SPARC SuperCluster has 4 of these servers on board. Remember the keyword demigod.  While retaining the forerunner SPARC T3's exceptional throughput, the SPARC T4 CPUs raise the bar with single performance too - a humble 5x better one than their ancestors.  actually, the SPARC T4 CPU cores run in both single-threaded and multi-threaded mode, and switch between these two on-the-fly, fulfilling not only single-threaded OR multi-threaded applications' needs, but even mixed requirements (like in database workloads!). Data security, anyone? Every SPARC T4 CPU core has a built-in encryption engine, that is, encryption algorithms cast into silicon.  A PCI controller right on the chip for customers who need I/O performance.  Built-in, no-cost Virtualization:  Oracle VM for SPARC (the former LDoms or Logical Domains) is not a server-emulation virtualization technology but rather a serverpartitioning one, the hypervisor runs in the server firmware, and all the VMs' HW resources (I/O, CPU, memory) are accessed natively, without performance overhead.  This enables customers to run a number of Solaris 10 and Solaris 11 VMs separated, independent of each other within a physical server II. For Database performance, it includes Exadata Storage Cells - one of the main reasons why the Exadata Database Machine performs at diabolic speed. What makes them important? They provide DB backend storage for your Oracle Databases to run on the SPARC SuperCluster, that is what they are built and tuned for DB performance.  These storage cells are SQL-aware.  That is, if a SPARC T4 database compute node executes a query, it doesn't simply request tons of raw datablocks from the storage, filters the received data, and throws away most of it where the statement doesn't apply, but provides the SQL query to the storage node too. The storage cell software speaks SQL, that is, it is able to prefilter and through that transfer only the relevant data. With this, the traffic between database nodes and storage cells is reduced immensely. Less I/O is a good thing - as they say, all the CPUs of the world do one thing just as fast as any other - and that is waiting for I/O.  They don't only pre-filter, but also provide data preprocessing features - e.g. if a DB-node requests an aggregate of data, they can calculate it, and handover only the results, not the whole set. Again, less data to transfer.  They support the magical HCC, (Hybrid Columnar Compression). That is, data can be stored in a precompressed form on the storage. Less data to transfer.  Of course one can't simply rely on disks for performance, there is Flash Storage included there for caching.  III. The low latency, high-speed backbone network: InfiniBand, that interconnects all the members with: Real High Speed: 40 Gbit/s. Full Duplex, of course. Oh, and a really low latency.  RDMA. Remote Direct Memory Access. This technology allows the DB nodes to do exactly that. Remotely, directly placing SQL commands into the Memory of the storage cells. Dodging all the network-stack bottlenecks, avoiding overhead, placing requests directly into the process queue.  You can also run IP over InfiniBand if you please - that's the way the compute nodes can communicate with each other.  IV. Including a general-purpose storage too: the ZFSSA, which is a unified storage, providing NAS and SAN access too, with the following features:  NFS over RDMA over InfiniBand. Nothing is faster network-filesystem-wise.  All the ZFS features onboard, hybrid storage pools, compression, deduplication, snapshot, replication, NFS and CIFS shares Storageheads in a HA-Cluster configuration providing availability of the data  DTrace Live Analytics in a web-based Administration UI Being a general purpose application data storage for your non-database applications running on the SPARC SuperCluster over whichever protocol they prefer, easily replicating, snapshotting, cloning data for them.  There's a lot of great technology included in Oracle's SPARC SuperCluster, we have talked its interior through. As for external scalability: you can start with a half- of full- rack SPARC SuperCluster, and scale out to several racks - that is, stacking not separate full-rack SPARC SuperClusters, but extending always one large instance of the size of several full-racks. Yes, over InfiniBand network. Add racks as you grow.  What technologies shall run on it? SPARC SuperCluster is a general purpose scaleout consolidation/cloud environment. You can run Oracle Databases with RAC scaling, or Oracle Weblogic (end enjoy the SPARC T4's advantages to run Java). Remember, Oracle technologies have been integrated with the Oracle Engineered Systems - this is the Oracle on Oracle advantage. But you can run other software environments such as SAP if you please too. Run any application that runs on Oracle Solaris 10 or Solaris 11. Separate them in Virtual Machines, or even Oracle Solaris Zones, monitor and manage those from a central UI. Here the key takeaways once again: The SPARC SuperCluster: Is a pre-integrated Engineered System Contains SPARC T4-4 servers with built-in virtualization, cryptography, dynamic threading Contains the Exadata storage cells that intelligently offload the burden of the DB-nodes  Contains a highly available ZFS Storage Appliance, that provides SAN/NAS storage in a unified way Combines all these elements over a high-speed, low-latency backbone network implemented with InfiniBand Can grow from a single half-rack to several full-rack size Supports the consolidation of hundreds of applications To summarize: All these technologies are great by themselves, but the real value is like in every other Oracle Engineered System: Integration. All these technologies are tuned to perform together. Together they are way more than the sum of all - and a careful and actually very time consuming integration process is necessary to orchestrate all these for performance. The SPARC SuperCluster's goal is to enable infrastructure operations and offer a pre-integrated solution that can be architected and delivered in hours instead of months of evaluations and tests. The tedious and most importantly time and resource consuming part of the work - testing and evaluating - has been done.  Now go, provide services.   -- charlie  

    Read the article

  • Hibernate Distributed Cache

    - by DD
    Hi, I'm looking to setup Hibernate with distributed cache where I have one application writing to the DB and another one reading from the DB. Is there an easy way to notify the reading application when the writing one has written through Hibernate? The distributed cache will invalidate the cache but I need the reading application to know a change has been made to refresh its data immediately. Thanks, D

    Read the article

  • Oracle’s New Memory-Optimized x86 Servers: Getting the Most Out of Oracle Database In-Memory

    - by Josh Rosen, x86 Product Manager-Oracle
    With the launch of Oracle Database In-Memory, it is now possible to perform real-time analytics operations on your business data as it exists at that moment – in the DRAM of the server – and immediately return completely current and consistent data. The Oracle Database In-Memory option dramatically accelerates the performance of analytics queries by storing data in a highly optimized columnar in-memory format.  This is a truly exciting advance in database technology.As Larry Ellison mentioned in his recent webcast about Oracle Database In-Memory, queries run 100 times faster simply by throwing a switch.  But in order to get the most from the Oracle Database In-Memory option, the underlying server must also be memory-optimized. This week Oracle announced new 4-socket and 8-socket x86 servers, the Sun Server X4-4 and Sun Server X4-8, both of which have been designed specifically for Oracle Database In-Memory.  These new servers use the fastest Intel® Xeon® E7 v2 processors and each subsystem has been designed to be the best for Oracle Database, from the memory, I/O and flash technologies right down to the system firmware.Amongst these subsystems, one of the most important aspects we have optimized with the Sun Server X4-4 and Sun Server X4-8 are their memory subsystems.  The new In-Memory option makes it possible to select which parts of the database should be memory optimized.  You can choose to put a single column or table in memory or, if you can, put the whole database in memory.  The more, the better.  With 3 TB and 6 TB total memory capacity on the Sun Server X4-4 and Sun Server X4-8, respectively, you can memory-optimize more, if not your entire database.   Sun Server X4-8 CMOD with 24 DIMM slots per socket (up to 192 DIMM slots per server) But memory capacity is not the only important factor in selecting the best server platform for Oracle Database In-Memory.  As you put more of your database in memory, a critical performance metric known as memory bandwidth comes into play.  The total memory bandwidth for the server will dictate the rate in which data can be stored and retrieved from memory.  In order to achieve real-time analysis of your data using Oracle Database In-Memory, even under heavy load, the server must be able to handle extreme memory workloads.  With that in mind, the Sun Server X4-8 was designed with the maximum possible memory bandwidth, providing over a terabyte per second of total memory bandwidth.  Likewise, the Sun Server X4-4 also provides extreme memory bandwidth in an even more compact form factor with over half a terabyte per second, providing customers with scalability and choice depending on the size of the database.Beyond the memory subsystem, Oracle’s Sun Server X4-4 and Sun Server X4-8 systems provide other key technologies that enable Oracle Database to run at its best.  The Sun Server X4-4 allows for up 4.8 TB of internal, write-optimized PCIe flash while the Sun Server X4-8 allows for up to 6.4 TB of PCIe flash.  This enables dramatic acceleration of data inserts and updates to Oracle Database.  And with the new elastic computing capability of Oracle’s new x86 servers, server performance can be adapted to your specific Oracle Database workload to ensure that every last bit of processing power is utilized.Because Oracle designs and tests its x86 servers specifically for Oracle workloads, we provide the highest possible performance and reliability when running Oracle Database.  To learn more about Sun Server X4-4 and Sun Server X4-8, you can find more details including data sheets and white papers here. Josh Rosen is a Principal Product Manager for Oracle’s x86 servers, focusing on Oracle’s operating systems and software.  He previously spent more than a decade as a developer and architect of system management software. Josh has worked on system management for many of Oracle's hardware products ranging from the earliest blade systems to the latest Oracle x86 servers. 

    Read the article

  • Distributed development staff needing a common IP range

    - by bakasan
    I work on a development staff that is geographically distributed, mostly all throughout the state of CA, but several key members also must travel frequently. We rely quite heavily on a 3rd party provider API for a great deal of our subsystems (can't get into who it is or what they do). The 3rd party however is quite stringent on network access and have no notion of a development sandbox. Access is restricted to 2, 3 IP numbers and that's about it. Once we account for our production servers, that leaves us with an IP or two to spare for our dev team--which is still problematic as people's home IP changes, people travel, we have more than 2 devs, etc. Wide IP blocks are not permitted by the 3rd party. Nor will they allow dynamic DNS type services. There is no simple console to swap IPs on the fly either (e.g. if a dev's IP at home changes or they are on the road). As none of us are deep network experts, I'm wondering what our viable options are? Are there such things as 3rd party hosts to VPNs? Generally I think of a VPN as a mechanism to gain access to a home office, but the notion would be a 3rd party VPN that we'd all connect to and we'd register this as an IP origin w/ our 3rd party. We've considered using Amazon EC2 to effectively host a dev environment for each dev and using that to connect. Amazon only gives you so many static IPs however (I believe 5?) so this would only be a stop gap solution until our team size out strips our IP count at Amazon. Those were the only viable thoughts that I had, but again, I'm far from a networking guy. Tried searching for similar threads, but I'm not even sure I know the right vernacular to look around for.

    Read the article

  • Simple Distributed Disconnected way to sync a directory

    - by Rory
    I want to start regularly backup my home directory on my ubuntu laptop, machine X. Suppose I have access to 2 different remote (linux) servers that I can backup to, machines A & B. Machine X will be the master, and should be synced to A and B. I could just regularly run rsync from X to A and then from X to B. That's all I need. However I'm curious if there's a more bandwidth effecient, and hence faster way to do it. Assuming X is going to be on residential style broadband lines, and since I don't want to soak up the bandwidth, I would limit the transfer from X. A and B will be on all the time, however X, will not be, so I'd also like to reduce the amount of time that X is transfering, potentially allowing A and B to spend more time transfering. Also, X won't be connected all the time. What's the best way to do this? rsync from X to A, then from A to B? Timing that right could be troublesome. I don't want to keep old files around, so if I was to rsync, then the --del option would be used. Could that mean something might get tranfered from A to B, then deleted from B, then transfered from A to B again? That's suboptimal. I know there are fancy distributed filesystems like gluster, but I think that's overkill in this case, and might not fit with the disconnected nature.

    Read the article

  • Windows 7 boot manager not localized on UEFI systems

    - by Massimo
    I originally posted this on SuperUser because I discovered this behaviour on my home computer, but this seems to be a general issue on UEFI systems, thus I'm posting here too; I also hope someone here can shed some light on what's going on. Italian version of Windows 7 x64 SP1, same installation media used for both situations. When running on BIOS systems, the boot manager is fully localized, both for the loading screen and for the F8 boot menu. When running on UEFI systems, the boot manager always runs in English, even if it's correctly configured to use the it-IT locale, as BCDEDIT clearly shows: Windows Boot Manager -------------------- identificatore {bootmgr} device partition=\Device\HarddiskVolume1 path \EFI\Microsoft\Boot\bootmgfw.efi description Windows Boot Manager locale it-IT inherit {globalsettings} default {current} resumeobject {9ef36aa6-4188-11e3-909d-d32f0c3871c8} displayorder {current} toolsdisplayorder {memdiag} timeout 30 Caricatore di avvio di Windows ------------------- identificatore {current} device partition=C: path \Windows\system32\winload.efi description Windows 7 locale it-IT inherit {bootloadersettings} recoverysequence {9ef36aa8-4188-11e3-909d-d32f0c3871c8} recoveryenabled Yes osdevice partition=C: systemroot \Windows resumeobject {9ef36aa6-4188-11e3-909d-d32f0c3871c8} nx OptIn I also noticed something strange here; the motherboard setup shows "Windows Boot Manager" as the main boot option, while the actual boot disk is listed as the second one. Looks like the Windows Boot Manager is actually being loaded from somewhere else than the first partition of the first disk... what's going on here? Update I've also checked the EFI boot manager using bcdedit /enum FIRMWARE. That one looks correctly localized, too: Boot Manager per firmware --------------------- identificatore {fwbootmgr} displayorder {bootmgr} {9ef36aa4-4188-11e3-909d-d32f0c3871c8} {a30e8550-47e4-11e3-9ad1-806e6f6e6963} timeout 1 Windows Boot Manager -------------------- identificatore {bootmgr} device partition=\Device\HarddiskVolume1 path \EFI\Microsoft\Boot\bootmgfw.efi description Windows Boot Manager locale it-IT inherit {globalsettings} default {current} resumeobject {9ef36aa6-4188-11e3-909d-d32f0c3871c8} displayorder {current} toolsdisplayorder {memdiag} timeout 30 Applicazione firmware (101fffff) ------------------------------- identificatore {9ef36aa4-4188-11e3-909d-d32f0c3871c8} description CD/DVD Drive Applicazione firmware (101fffff) ------------------------------- identificatore {a30e8550-47e4-11e3-9ad1-806e6f6e6963} description Hard Drive

    Read the article

  • Distributed Nagios Installation

    - by kruczkowski
    I'm looking for a plug-in or product that will act as a remote probe and perform tests then send back the results to the central Nagios server. Reason for this is that I'd like to monitor internal systems and servers at customers, but don't want to allow all the traffic passing the firewalls. Ideally I'd like a soft-probe that would be installed and then perform the tests and send back the results (via SSH) to the central Nagios installation. Does anyone know of a product or plug-in that would offer such service? If not Nagios, is there any other monitoring system that does such a thing (ideally open-source)?

    Read the article

  • Is this distributed database server idea feasible?

    - by David
    I often use SQLite for creating simple programs in companies. The database is placed on a file server. This works fine as long as there are not more than about 50 users working towards the database concurrently (though depending on whether it is reads or writes). Once there are more than this, they will notice a slowdown if there are a lot of concurrent writing on the server as lots of time is spent on locks, and there is nothing like a cache as there is no database server. The advantage of not needing a database server is that the time to set up something like a company Wiki or similar can be reduced from several months to just days. It often takes several months because some IT-department needs to order the server and it needs to conform with the company policies and security rules and it needs to be placed on the outsourced server hosting facility, which screws up and places it in the wrong localtion etc. etc. Therefore, I thought of an idea to create a distributed database server. The process would be as follows: A user on a company computer edits something on a Wiki page (which uses this database as its backend), to do this he reads a file on the local harddisk stating the ip-address of the last desktop computer to be a database server. He then tries to contact this computer directly via TCP/IP. If it does not answer, then he will read a file on the file server stating the ip-address of the last desktop computer to be a database server. If this server does not answer either, his own desktop computer will become the database server and register its ip-address in the same file. The SQL update statement can then be executed, and other desktop computers can connect to his directly. The point with this architecture is that, the higher load, the better it will function, as each desktop computer will always know the ip-address of the database server. Also, using this setup, I believe that a database placed on a fileserver could serve hundreds of desktop computers instead of the current 50 or so. I also do not believe that the load on the single desktop computer, which has become database server will ever be noticable, as there will be no hard disk operations on this desktop, only on the file server. Is this idea feasible? Does it already exist? What kind of database could support such an architecture?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22  | Next Page >