Search Results

Search found 5853 results on 235 pages for 'vivian short'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 40/235 | < Previous Page | 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47  | Next Page >

  • Using the read function to read in a file.

    - by robUK
    Hello, gcc 4.4.1 I am using the read function to read in a wave file. However, when it gets to the read function. Execution seems to stop and freezes. I am wondering if I am doing anything wrong with this. The file size test-short.wave is: 514K. What I am aiming for is to read the file into the memory buffer chunks at a time. Currently I just testing this. Many thanks for any suggestions, #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <errno.h> #include <fcntl.h> #include <string.h> #include <unistd.h> int main(void) { char buff = malloc(10240); int32_t fd = 0; int32_t bytes_read = 0; char *filename = "test-short.wav"; /* open wave file */ if((fd = (open(filename, O_RDWR)) == -1)) { fprintf(stderr, "open [ %s ]\n", strerror(errno)); return 1; } printf("Opened file [ %s ]\n", filename); printf("sizeof(buff) [ %d ]\n", sizeof(buff)); printf("strlen(buff) [ %d ]\n", strlen(buff)); bytes_read = read(fd, buff, sizeof(buff)); printf("Bytes read [ %d ]\n", bytes_read); return 0; }

    Read the article

  • What are the C# equivalent of these C++ structs

    - by Otake
    typedef union _Value { signed char c; unsigned char b; signed short s; unsigned short w; signed long l; unsigned long u; float f; double *d; char *p; } Value; typedef struct _Field { WORD nFieldId; BYTE bValueType; Value Value; } Field; typedef struct _Packet { WORD nMessageType; WORD nSecurityType; BYTE bExchangeId; BYTE bMarketCenter; int iFieldCount; char cSymbol[20]; Field FieldArr[1]; } Packet; What are the C# equivalent of these C++ structs? I am migrating some code from C++ to C# and having problems to migrate these structures. I had tried a few things but I always ended up having marshalling problems.

    Read the article

  • PHP cache header override

    - by Soyo
    I've been through over 100 answers here, lots to try, NOTHING working?? Have a PHP based site. I need caching OFF for all .php files EXCEPT A SELECT FEW. So, in .htaccess, I have the following: ExpiresActive On # Eliminate caching for certain dynamic files <FilesMatch "\.(php|cgi|pl)$"> ExpiresDefault A0 Header set Cache-Control "no-cache, no-store, must-revalidate, max-age=0, proxy-revalidate, no-transform" Header set Pragma "no-cache" </FilesMatch> Using Firebug, I see the following: Cache-Control no-cache, no-store, must-revalidate, max-age=0, proxy-revalidate, no-transform Connection Keep-Alive Content-Type text/html Date Sun, 02 Sep 2012 19:22:27 GMT Expires Sun, 02 Sep 2012 19:22:27 GMT Keep-Alive timeout=3, max=100 Pragma no-cache Server Apache Transfer-Encoding chunked X-Powered-By PHP/5.2.17 Hey, Looks great! BUT, I have a couple .php pages I need some very short caching on. I thought the simple answer was having this added to the very top of each php page in which I want caching enabled: <?php header("Cache-Control: max-age=360"); ?> Nope. Then I tried various versions of the above. Nope. Then I tried meta http-equiv variations. Nope. Then I tried variations of the .htaccess code along with the above variations, such as limiting it to: # Eliminate caching for certain dynamic files <FilesMatch "\.(php|cgi|pl)$"> Header set Cache-Control "no-cache, max-age=0" </FilesMatch> Nope. It seems nothing I do will allow a single .php to be cache enabled with the .htaccess code in place, short of removing the statements from the .htaccess file altogether. Where am I going wrong? What do I have to do to get individual php pages to be cacheable while the rest remain off?? Thank you for any thoughts.

    Read the article

  • The Product Owner

    - by Robert May
    In a previous post, I outlined the rules of Scrum.  This post details one of those rules. Picking a most important part of Scrum is difficult.  All of the rules are required, but if there were one rule that is “more” required that every other rule, its having a good Product Owner.  Simply put, the Product Owner can make or break the project. Duties of the Product Owner A Product Owner has many duties and responsibilities.  I’ll talk about each of these duties in detail below. A Product Owner: Discovers and records stories for the backlog. Prioritizes stories in the Product Backlog, Release Backlog and Iteration Backlog. Determines Release dates and Iteration Dates. Develops story details and helps the team understand those details. Helps QA to develop acceptance tests. Interact with the Customer to make sure that the product is meeting the customer’s needs. Discovers and Records Stories for the Backlog When I do Scrum, I always use User Stories as the means for capturing functionality that’s required in the system.  Some people will use Use Cases, but the same rule applies.  The Product Owner has the ultimate responsibility for figuring out what functionality will be in the system.  Many different mechanisms for capturing this input can be used.  User interviews are great, but all sources should be considered, including talking with Customer Support types.  Often, they hear what users are struggling with the most and are a great source for stories that can make the application easier to use. Care should be taken when soliciting user stories from technical types such as programmers and the people that manage them.  They will almost always give stories that are very technical in nature and may not have a direct benefit for the end user.  Stories are about adding value to the company.  If the stories don’t have direct benefit to the end user, the Product Owner should question whether or not the story should be implemented.  In general, technical stories should be included as tasks in User Stories.  Technical stories are often needed, but the ultimate value to the user is in user based functionality, so technical stories should be considered nothing more than overhead in providing that user functionality. Until the iteration prior to development, stories should be nothing more than short, one line placeholders. An exercise called Story Planning can be used to brainstorm and come up with stories.  I’ll save the description of this activity for another blog post. For more information on User Stories, please read the book User Stories Applied by Mike Cohn. Prioritizes Stories in the Product Backlog, Release Backlog and Iteration Backlog Prioritization of stories is one of the most difficult tasks that a Product Owner must do.  A key concept of Scrum done right is the need to have the team working from a single set of prioritized stories.  If the team does not have a single set of prioritized stories, Scrum will likely fail at your organization.  The Product Owner is the ONLY person who has the responsibility to prioritize that list.  The Product Owner must be very diplomatic and sincerely listen to the people around him so that he can get the priorities correct. Just listening will still not yield the proper priorities.  Care must also be taken to ensure that Return on Investment is also considered.  Ultimately, determining which stories give the most value to the company for the least cost is the most important factor in determining priorities.  Product Owners should be willing to look at cold, hard numbers to determine the order for stories.  Even when many people want a feature, if that features is costly to develop, it may not have as high of a return on investment as features that are cheaper, but not as popular. The act of prioritization often causes conflict in an environment.  Customer Service thinks that feature X is the most important, because it will stop people from calling.  Operations thinks that feature Y is the most important, because it will stop servers from crashing.  Developers think that feature Z is most important because it will make writing software much easier for them.  All of these are useful goals, but the team can have only one list of items, and each item must have a priority that is different from all other stories.  The Product Owner will determine which feature gives the best return on investment and the other features will have to wait their turn, which means that someone will not have their top priority feature implemented first. A weak Product Owner will refuse to do prioritization.  I’ve heard from multiple Product Owners the following phrase, “Well, it’s all got to be done, so what does it matter what order we do it in?”  If your product owner is using this phrase, you need a new Product Owner.  Order is VERY important.  In Scrum, every release is potentially shippable.  If the wrong priority items are developed, then the value added in each release isn’t what it should be.  Additionally, the Product Owner with this mindset doesn’t understand Agile.  A product is NEVER finished, until the company has decided that it is no longer a going concern and they are no longer going to sell the product.  Therefore, prioritization isn’t an event, its something that continues every day.  The logical extension of the phrase “It’s all got to be done” is that you will never ship your product, since a product is never “done.”  Once stories have been prioritized, assigning them to the Release Backlog and the Iteration Backlog becomes relatively simple.  The top priority items are copied into the respective backlogs in order and the task is complete.  The team does have the right to shuffle things around a little in the iteration backlog.  For example, they may determine that working on story C with story A is appropriate because they’re related, even though story B is technically a higher priority than story C.  Or they may decide that story B is too big to complete in the time available after Story A has tasks created, so they’ll work on Story C since it’s smaller.  They can’t, however, go deep into the backlog to pick stories to implement.  The team and the Product Owner should work together to determine what’s best for the company. Prioritization is time consuming, but its one of the most important things a Product Owner does. Determines Release Dates and Iteration Dates Product owners are responsible for determining release dates for a product.  A common misconception that Product Owners have is that every “release” needs to correspond with an actual release to customers.  This is not the case.  In general, releases should be no more than 3 months long.  You  may decide to release the product to the customers, and many companies do release the product to customers, but it may also be an internal release. If a release date is too far away, developers will fall into the trap of not feeling a sense of urgency.  The date is far enough away that they don’t need to give the release their full attention.  Additionally, important tasks, such as performance tuning, regression testing, user documentation, and release preparation, will not happen regularly, making them much more difficult and time consuming to do.  The more frequently you do these tasks, the easier they are to accomplish. The Product Owner will be a key participant in determining whether or not a release should be sent out to the customers.  The determination should be made on whether or not the features contained in the release are valuable enough  and complete enough that the customers will see real value in the release.  Often, some features will take more than three months to get them to a state where they qualify for a release or need additional supporting features to be released.  The product owner has the right to make this determination. In addition to release dates, the Product Owner also will help determine iteration dates.  In general, an iteration length should be chosen and the team should follow that iteration length for an extended period of time.  If the iteration length is changed every iteration, you’re not doing Scrum.  Iteration lengths help the team and company get into a rhythm of developing quality software.  Iterations should be somewhere between 2 and 4 weeks in length.  Any shorter, and significant software will likely not be developed.  Any longer, and the team won’t feel urgency and planning will become very difficult. Iterations may not be extended during the iteration.  Companies where Scrum isn’t really followed will often use this as a strategy to complete all stories.  They don’t want to face the harsh reality of what their true performance is, and looking good is more important than seeking visibility and improving the process and team.  Companies like this typically don’t allow failure.  This is unhealthy.  Failure is part of life and unless we learn from it, we can’t improve.  I would much rather see a team push out stories to the next iteration and then have healthy discussions about why they failed rather than extend the iteration and not deal with the core problems. If iteration length varies, retrospectives become more difficult.  For example, evaluating the performance of the team’s estimation efforts becomes much more difficult if the iteration length varies.  Also, the team must have a velocity measurement.  If the iteration length varies, measuring velocity becomes impossible and upper management no longer will have the ability to evaluate the teams performance.  People external to the team will no longer have the ability to determine when key features are likely to be developed.  Variable iterations cause the entire company to fail and likely cause Scrum to fail at an organization. Develops Story Details and Helps the Team Understand Those Details A key concept in Scrum is that the stories are nothing more than a placeholder for a conversation.  Stories should be nothing more than short, one line statements about the functionality.  The team will then converse with the Product Owner about the details about that story.  The product owner needs to have a very good idea about what the details of the story are and needs to be able to help the team understand those details. Too often, we see this requirement as being translated into the need for comprehensive documentation about the story, including old fashioned requirements documentation.  The team should only develop the documentation that is required and should not develop documentation that is only created because their is a process to do so. In general, what we see that works best is the iteration before a team starts development work on a story, the Product Owner, with other appropriate business analysts, will develop the details of that story.  They’ll figure out what business rules are required, potentially make paper prototypes or other light weight mock-ups, and they seek to understand the story and what is implied.  Note that the time allowed for this task is deliberately short.  The Product Owner only has a single iteration to develop all of the stories for the next iteration. If more than one iteration is used, I’ve found that teams will end up with Big Design Up Front and traditional requirements documents.  This is a waste of time, since the team will need to then have discussions with the Product Owner to figure out what the requirements document says.  Instead of this, skip making the pretty pictures and detailing the nuances of the requirements and build only what is minimally needed by the team to do development.  If something comes up during development, you can address it at that time and figure out what you want to do.  The goal is to keep things as light weight as possible so that everyone can move as quickly as possible. Helps QA to Develop Acceptance Tests In Scrum, no story can be counted until it is accepted by QA.  Because of this, acceptance tests are very important to the team.  In general, acceptance tests need to be developed prior to the iteration or at the very beginning of the iteration so that the team can make sure that the tasks that they develop will fulfill the acceptance criteria. The Product Owner will help the team, including QA, understand what will make the story acceptable.  Note that the Product Owner needs to be careful about specifying that the feature will work “Perfectly” at the end of the iteration.  In general, features are developed a little bit at a time, so only the bit that is being developed should be considered as necessary for acceptance. A weak Product Owner will make statements like “Do it right the first time.”  Not only are these statements damaging to the team (like they would try to do it WRONG the first time . . .), they’re also ignoring the iterative nature of Scrum.  Additionally, a weak product owner will seek to add scope in the acceptance testing.  For example, they will refuse to determine acceptance at the beginning of the iteration, and then, after the team has planned and committed to the iteration, they will expand scope by defining acceptance.  This often causes the team to miss the iteration because scope that wasn’t planned on is included.  There are ways that the team can mitigate this problem.  For example, include extra “Product Owner” time to deal with the uncertainty that you know will be introduced by the Product Owner.  This will slow the perceived velocity of the team and is not ideal, since they’ll be doing more work than they get credit for. Interact with the Customer to Make Sure that the Product is Meeting the Customer’s Needs Once development is complete, what the team has worked on should be put in front of real live people to see if it meets the needs of the customer.  One of the great things about Agile is that if something doesn’t work, we can revisit it in a future iteration!  This frees up the team to make the best decision now and know that if that decision proves to be incorrect, the team can revisit it and change that decision. Features are about adding value to the customer, so if the customer doesn’t find them useful, then having the team make tweaks is valuable.  In general, most software will be 80 to 90 percent “right” after the initial round and only minor tweaks are required.  If proper coding standards are followed, these tweaks are usually minor and easy to accomplish.  Product Owners that are doing a good job will encourage real users to see and use the software, since they know that they are trying to add value to the customer. Poor product owners will think that they know the answers already, that their customers are silly and do stupid things and that they don’t need customer input.  If you have a product owner that is afraid to show the team’s work to real customers, you probably need a different product owner. Up Next, “Who Makes a Good Product Owner.” Followed by, “Messing with the Team.” Technorati Tags: Scrum,Product Owner

    Read the article

  • Selling Federal Enterprise Architecture (EA)

    - by TedMcLaughlan
    Selling Federal Enterprise Architecture A taxonomy of subject areas, from which to develop a prioritized marketing and communications plan to evangelize EA activities within and among US Federal Government organizations and constituents. Any and all feedback is appreciated, particularly in developing and extending this discussion as a tool for use – more information and details are also available. "Selling" the discipline of Enterprise Architecture (EA) in the Federal Government (particularly in non-DoD agencies) is difficult, notwithstanding the general availability and use of the Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework (FEAF) for some time now, and the relatively mature use of the reference models in the OMB Capital Planning and Investment (CPIC) cycles. EA in the Federal Government also tends to be a very esoteric and hard to decipher conversation – early apologies to those who agree to continue reading this somewhat lengthy article. Alignment to the FEAF and OMB compliance mandates is long underway across the Federal Departments and Agencies (and visible via tools like PortfolioStat and ITDashboard.gov – but there is still a gap between the top-down compliance directives and enablement programs, and the bottom-up awareness and effective use of EA for either IT investment management or actual mission effectiveness. "EA isn't getting deep enough penetration into programs, components, sub-agencies, etc.", verified a panelist at the most recent EA Government Conference in DC. Newer guidance from OMB may be especially difficult to handle, where bottom-up input can't be accurately aligned, analyzed and reported via standardized EA discipline at the Agency level – for example in addressing the new (for FY13) Exhibit 53D "Agency IT Reductions and Reinvestments" and the information required for "Cloud Computing Alternatives Evaluation" (supporting the new Exhibit 53C, "Agency Cloud Computing Portfolio"). Therefore, EA must be "sold" directly to the communities that matter, from a coordinated, proactive messaging perspective that takes BOTH the Program-level value drivers AND the broader Agency mission and IT maturity context into consideration. Selling EA means persuading others to take additional time and possibly assign additional resources, for a mix of direct and indirect benefits – many of which aren't likely to be realized in the short-term. This means there's probably little current, allocated budget to work with; ergo the challenge of trying to sell an "unfunded mandate". Also, the concept of "Enterprise" in large Departments like Homeland Security tends to cross all kinds of organizational boundaries – as Richard Spires recently indicated by commenting that "...organizational boundaries still trump functional similarities. Most people understand what we're trying to do internally, and at a high level they get it. The problem, of course, is when you get down to them and their system and the fact that you're going to be touching them...there's always that fear factor," Spires said. It is quite clear to the Federal IT Investment community that for EA to meet its objective, understandable, relevant value must be measured and reported using a repeatable method – as described by GAO's recent report "Enterprise Architecture Value Needs To Be Measured and Reported". What's not clear is the method or guidance to sell this value. In fact, the current GAO "Framework for Assessing and Improving Enterprise Architecture Management (Version 2.0)", a.k.a. the "EAMMF", does not include words like "sell", "persuade", "market", etc., except in reference ("within Core Element 19: Organization business owner and CXO representatives are actively engaged in architecture development") to a brief section in the CIO Council's 2001 "Practical Guide to Federal Enterprise Architecture", entitled "3.3.1. Develop an EA Marketing Strategy and Communications Plan." Furthermore, Core Element 19 of the EAMMF is advised to be applied in "Stage 3: Developing Initial EA Versions". This kind of EA sales campaign truly should start much earlier in the maturity progress, i.e. in Stages 0 or 1. So, what are the understandable, relevant benefits (or value) to sell, that can find an agreeable, participatory audience, and can pave the way towards success of a longer-term, funded set of EA mechanisms that can be methodically measured and reported? Pragmatic benefits from a useful EA that can help overcome the fear of change? And how should they be sold? Following is a brief taxonomy (it's a taxonomy, to help organize SME support) of benefit-related subjects that might make the most sense, in creating the messages and organizing an initial "engagement plan" for evangelizing EA "from within". An EA "Sales Taxonomy" of sorts. We're not boiling the ocean here; the subjects that are included are ones that currently appear to be urgently relevant to the current Federal IT Investment landscape. Note that successful dialogue in these topics is directly usable as input or guidance for actually developing early-stage, "Fit-for-Purpose" (a DoDAF term) Enterprise Architecture artifacts, as prescribed by common methods found in most EA methodologies, including FEAF, TOGAF, DoDAF and our own Oracle Enterprise Architecture Framework (OEAF). The taxonomy below is organized by (1) Target Community, (2) Benefit or Value, and (3) EA Program Facet - as in: "Let's talk to (1: Community Member) about how and why (3: EA Facet) the EA program can help with (2: Benefit/Value)". Once the initial discussion targets and subjects are approved (that can be measured and reported), a "marketing and communications plan" can be created. A working example follows the Taxonomy. Enterprise Architecture Sales Taxonomy Draft, Summary Version 1. Community 1.1. Budgeted Programs or Portfolios Communities of Purpose (CoPR) 1.1.1. Program/System Owners (Senior Execs) Creating or Executing Acquisition Plans 1.1.2. Program/System Owners Facing Strategic Change 1.1.2.1. Mandated 1.1.2.2. Expected/Anticipated 1.1.3. Program Managers - Creating Employee Performance Plans 1.1.4. CO/COTRs – Creating Contractor Performance Plans, or evaluating Value Engineering Change Proposals (VECP) 1.2. Governance & Communications Communities of Practice (CoP) 1.2.1. Policy Owners 1.2.1.1. OCFO 1.2.1.1.1. Budget/Procurement Office 1.2.1.1.2. Strategic Planning 1.2.1.2. OCIO 1.2.1.2.1. IT Management 1.2.1.2.2. IT Operations 1.2.1.2.3. Information Assurance (Cyber Security) 1.2.1.2.4. IT Innovation 1.2.1.3. Information-Sharing/ Process Collaboration (i.e. policies and procedures regarding Partners, Agreements) 1.2.2. Governing IT Council/SME Peers (i.e. an "Architects Council") 1.2.2.1. Enterprise Architects (assumes others exist; also assumes EA participants aren't buried solely within the CIO shop) 1.2.2.2. Domain, Enclave, Segment Architects – i.e. the right affinity group for a "shared services" EA structure (per the EAMMF), which may be classified as Federated, Segmented, Service-Oriented, or Extended 1.2.2.3. External Oversight/Constraints 1.2.2.3.1. GAO/OIG & Legal 1.2.2.3.2. Industry Standards 1.2.2.3.3. Official public notification, response 1.2.3. Mission Constituents Participant & Analyst Community of Interest (CoI) 1.2.3.1. Mission Operators/Users 1.2.3.2. Public Constituents 1.2.3.3. Industry Advisory Groups, Stakeholders 1.2.3.4. Media 2. Benefit/Value (Note the actual benefits may not be discretely attributable to EA alone; EA is a very collaborative, cross-cutting discipline.) 2.1. Program Costs – EA enables sound decisions regarding... 2.1.1. Cost Avoidance – a TCO theme 2.1.2. Sequencing – alignment of capability delivery 2.1.3. Budget Instability – a Federal reality 2.2. Investment Capital – EA illuminates new investment resources via... 2.2.1. Value Engineering – contractor-driven cost savings on existing budgets, direct or collateral 2.2.2. Reuse – reuse of investments between programs can result in savings, chargeback models; avoiding duplication 2.2.3. License Refactoring – IT license & support models may not reflect actual or intended usage 2.3. Contextual Knowledge – EA enables informed decisions by revealing... 2.3.1. Common Operating Picture (COP) – i.e. cross-program impacts and synergy, relative to context 2.3.2. Expertise & Skill – who truly should be involved in architectural decisions, both business and IT 2.3.3. Influence – the impact of politics and relationships can be examined 2.3.4. Disruptive Technologies – new technologies may reduce costs or mitigate risk in unanticipated ways 2.3.5. What-If Scenarios – can become much more refined, current, verifiable; basis for Target Architectures 2.4. Mission Performance – EA enables beneficial decision results regarding... 2.4.1. IT Performance and Optimization – towards 100% effective, available resource utilization 2.4.2. IT Stability – towards 100%, real-time uptime 2.4.3. Agility – responding to rapid changes in mission 2.4.4. Outcomes –measures of mission success, KPIs – vs. only "Outputs" 2.4.5. Constraints – appropriate response to constraints 2.4.6. Personnel Performance – better line-of-sight through performance plans to mission outcome 2.5. Mission Risk Mitigation – EA mitigates decision risks in terms of... 2.5.1. Compliance – all the right boxes are checked 2.5.2. Dependencies –cross-agency, segment, government 2.5.3. Transparency – risks, impact and resource utilization are illuminated quickly, comprehensively 2.5.4. Threats and Vulnerabilities – current, realistic awareness and profiles 2.5.5. Consequences – realization of risk can be mapped as a series of consequences, from earlier decisions or new decisions required for current issues 2.5.5.1. Unanticipated – illuminating signals of future or non-symmetric risk; helping to "future-proof" 2.5.5.2. Anticipated – discovering the level of impact that matters 3. EA Program Facet (What parts of the EA can and should be communicated, using business or mission terms?) 3.1. Architecture Models – the visual tools to be created and used 3.1.1. Operating Architecture – the Business Operating Model/Architecture elements of the EA truly drive all other elements, plus expose communication channels 3.1.2. Use Of – how can the EA models be used, and how are they populated, from a reasonable, pragmatic yet compliant perspective? What are the core/minimal models required? What's the relationship of these models, with existing system models? 3.1.3. Scope – what level of granularity within the models, and what level of abstraction across the models, is likely to be most effective and useful? 3.2. Traceability – the maturity, status, completeness of the tools 3.2.1. Status – what in fact is the degree of maturity across the integrated EA model and other relevant governance models, and who may already be benefiting from it? 3.2.2. Visibility – how does the EA visibly and effectively prove IT investment performance goals are being reached, with positive mission outcome? 3.3. Governance – what's the interaction, participation method; how are the tools used? 3.3.1. Contributions – how is the EA program informed, accept submissions, collect data? Who are the experts? 3.3.2. Review – how is the EA validated, against what criteria?  Taxonomy Usage Example:   1. To speak with: a. ...a particular set of System Owners Facing Strategic Change, via mandate (like the "Cloud First" mandate); about... b. ...how the EA program's visible and easily accessible Infrastructure Reference Model (i.e. "IRM" or "TRM"), if updated more completely with current system data, can... c. ...help shed light on ways to mitigate risks and avoid future costs associated with NOT leveraging potentially-available shared services across the enterprise... 2. ....the following Marketing & Communications (Sales) Plan can be constructed: a. Create an easy-to-read "Consequence Model" that illustrates how adoption of a cloud capability (like elastic operational storage) can enable rapid and durable compliance with the mandate – using EA traceability. Traceability might be from the IRM to the ARM (that identifies reusable services invoking the elastic storage), and then to the PRM with performance measures (such as % utilization of purchased storage allocation) included in the OMB Exhibits; and b. Schedule a meeting with the Program Owners, timed during their Acquisition Strategy meetings in response to the mandate, to use the "Consequence Model" for advising them to organize a rapid and relevant RFI solicitation for this cloud capability (regarding alternatives for sourcing elastic operational storage); and c. Schedule a series of short "Discovery" meetings with the system architecture leads (as agreed by the Program Owners), to further populate/validate the "As-Is" models and frame the "To Be" models (via scenarios), to better inform the RFI, obtain the best feedback from the vendor community, and provide potential value for and avoid impact to all other programs and systems. --end example -- Note that communications with the intended audience should take a page out of the standard "Search Engine Optimization" (SEO) playbook, using keywords and phrases relating to "value" and "outcome" vs. "compliance" and "output". Searches in email boxes, internal and external search engines for phrases like "cost avoidance strategies", "mission performance metrics" and "innovation funding" should yield messages and content from the EA team. This targeted, informed, practical sales approach should result in additional buy-in and participation, additional EA information contribution and model validation, development of more SMEs and quick "proof points" (with real-life testing) to bolster the case for EA. The proof point here is a successful, timely procurement that satisfies not only the external mandate and external oversight review, but also meets internal EA compliance/conformance goals and therefore is more transparently useful across the community. In short, if sold effectively, the EA will perform and be recognized. EA won’t therefore be used only for compliance, but also (according to a validated, stated purpose) to directly influence decisions and outcomes. The opinions, views and analysis expressed in this document are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Oracle.

    Read the article

  • Change EXT3 stride and stripe-width settings post-install on CentOS 5.3

    - by Justin Ellison
    Is there a way to change the stride and stripe-width options on an ext3 file system under CentOS/RHEL 5.3? There's no way to specify it via anaconda during installation that I saw, and while I see the -E option to tune2fs available under Ubuntu, I don't see it in the manpage on CentOS. I did try to use the -E flag on CentOS and it rejects the flag as unknown if I try to use it. Anyone have any way to do this short of reinstallation?

    Read the article

  • how to make a multiboot usb key ?

    - by zillion
    I wanna cut my 8 gb usb key into several partitions to use wintoflash for a windows xp (maybe nlited before) and I wanna put also the Framakey ubuntu-fr remix pack into it has the second bootable OS and tweak and mod it a little cause if I can I wanna switch ubuntu 9.04 included to the LTS version ... So someone know how to do it easily ??? IMP : in short I wanna make a dual-boot usb key with windows xp sp3 and ubuntu 8.04.3 LTS ...

    Read the article

  • What is the difference between safety and security?

    - by Lernkurve
    Question What is the difference between safety and security in the context of information management or computer science? Elaboration This could be the canonical answer for people searching for it. Let me know if superuser.com is the wrong site for this question. I have, of course, googled it and haven't found an answer that seemed short and to the point. Wikipedia wasn't very helpful either: safety, information security.

    Read the article

  • Why does only "network" appear in Startup Disks on my Mac?

    - by nbolton
    I have a Linux dual boot setup with my Mac (with Leopard). When I open System Preferences Startup Disk I only see "Network Startup" and no HDD or BOOTCAMP as expected. So now, annoyingly, because "Network Startup" is the only option, it tries to start using the network (the flashing globe) for a short while rather than booting directly into Mac OS X. Is there a way to either fix Startup Disk or manually hack this?

    Read the article

  • Failing Sata HDD

    - by DaveCol
    I think my HDD is fried... Could someone confirm or help me restore it? I was using Hardware RAID 1 Configuration [2 x 160GB SATA HDD] on a CentOS 4 Installation. All of a sudden I started seeing bad sectors on the second HDD which stopped being mirrored. I have removed the RAID array and have tested with SMART which showed the following error: 187 Unknown_Attribute 0x003a 001 001 051 Old_age Always FAILING_NOW 4645 I have no clue what this means, or if I can recover from it. Could someone give me some ideas on how to fix this, or what HDD to get to replace this? Complete SMART report: Smartctl version 5.33 [i686-redhat-linux-gnu] Copyright (C) 2002-4 Bruce Allen Home page is http://smartmontools.sourceforge.net/ === START OF INFORMATION SECTION === Device Model: GB0160CAABV Serial Number: 6RX58NAA Firmware Version: HPG1 User Capacity: 160,041,885,696 bytes Device is: Not in smartctl database [for details use: -P showall] ATA Version is: 7 ATA Standard is: ATA/ATAPI-7 T13 1532D revision 4a Local Time is: Tue Oct 19 13:42:42 2010 COT SMART support is: Available - device has SMART capability. SMART support is: Enabled === START OF READ SMART DATA SECTION === SMART overall-health self-assessment test result: PASSED See vendor-specific Attribute list for marginal Attributes. General SMART Values: Offline data collection status: (0x82) Offline data collection activity was completed without error. Auto Offline Data Collection: Enabled. Self-test execution status: ( 0) The previous self-test routine completed without error or no self-test has ever been run. Total time to complete Offline data collection: ( 433) seconds. Offline data collection capabilities: (0x5b) SMART execute Offline immediate. Auto Offline data collection on/off support. Suspend Offline collection upon new command. Offline surface scan supported. Self-test supported. No Conveyance Self-test supported. Selective Self-test supported. SMART capabilities: (0x0003) Saves SMART data before entering power-saving mode. Supports SMART auto save timer. Error logging capability: (0x01) Error logging supported. General Purpose Logging supported. Short self-test routine recommended polling time: ( 2) minutes. Extended self-test routine recommended polling time: ( 54) minutes. SMART Attributes Data Structure revision number: 10 Vendor Specific SMART Attributes with Thresholds: ID# ATTRIBUTE_NAME FLAG VALUE WORST THRESH TYPE UPDATED WHEN_FAILED RAW_VALUE 1 Raw_Read_Error_Rate 0x000f 100 253 006 Pre-fail Always - 0 3 Spin_Up_Time 0x0002 097 097 000 Old_age Always - 0 4 Start_Stop_Count 0x0033 100 100 020 Pre-fail Always - 152 5 Reallocated_Sector_Ct 0x0033 095 095 036 Pre-fail Always - 214 7 Seek_Error_Rate 0x000f 078 060 030 Pre-fail Always - 73109713 9 Power_On_Hours 0x0032 083 083 000 Old_age Always - 15133 10 Spin_Retry_Count 0x0013 100 100 097 Pre-fail Always - 0 12 Power_Cycle_Count 0x0033 100 100 020 Pre-fail Always - 154 184 Unknown_Attribute 0x0032 038 038 000 Old_age Always - 62 187 Unknown_Attribute 0x003a 001 001 051 Old_age Always FAILING_NOW 4645 189 Unknown_Attribute 0x0022 100 100 000 Old_age Always - 0 190 Unknown_Attribute 0x001a 061 055 000 Old_age Always - 656408615 194 Temperature_Celsius 0x0000 039 045 000 Old_age Offline - 39 (Lifetime Min/Max 0/22) 195 Hardware_ECC_Recovered 0x0032 070 059 000 Old_age Always - 12605265 197 Current_Pending_Sector 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 1 198 Offline_Uncorrectable 0x0000 100 100 000 Old_age Offline - 0 199 UDMA_CRC_Error_Count 0x0000 200 200 000 Old_age Offline - 62 SMART Error Log Version: 1 ATA Error Count: 4645 (device log contains only the most recent five errors) CR = Command Register [HEX] FR = Features Register [HEX] SC = Sector Count Register [HEX] SN = Sector Number Register [HEX] CL = Cylinder Low Register [HEX] CH = Cylinder High Register [HEX] DH = Device/Head Register [HEX] DC = Device Command Register [HEX] ER = Error register [HEX] ST = Status register [HEX] Powered_Up_Time is measured from power on, and printed as DDd+hh:mm:SS.sss where DD=days, hh=hours, mm=minutes, SS=sec, and sss=millisec. It "wraps" after 49.710 days. Error 4645 occurred at disk power-on lifetime: 15132 hours (630 days + 12 hours) When the command that caused the error occurred, the device was active or idle. After command completion occurred, registers were: ER ST SC SN CL CH DH -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 40 51 00 7b 86 b1 ea Error: UNC at LBA = 0x0ab1867b = 179406459 Commands leading to the command that caused the error were: CR FR SC SN CL CH DH DC Powered_Up_Time Command/Feature_Name -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ---------------- -------------------- c8 00 02 7b 86 b1 ea 00 00:38:52.796 READ DMA ec 03 45 00 00 00 a0 00 00:38:52.796 IDENTIFY DEVICE ef 03 45 00 00 00 a0 00 00:38:52.794 SET FEATURES [Set transfer mode] ec 00 00 7b 86 b1 a0 00 00:38:49.991 IDENTIFY DEVICE c8 00 04 79 86 b1 ea 00 00:38:49.935 READ DMA Error 4644 occurred at disk power-on lifetime: 15132 hours (630 days + 12 hours) When the command that caused the error occurred, the device was active or idle. After command completion occurred, registers were: ER ST SC SN CL CH DH -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 40 51 00 7b 86 b1 ea Error: UNC at LBA = 0x0ab1867b = 179406459 Commands leading to the command that caused the error were: CR FR SC SN CL CH DH DC Powered_Up_Time Command/Feature_Name -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ---------------- -------------------- c8 00 04 79 86 b1 ea 00 00:38:41.517 READ DMA ec 03 45 00 00 00 a0 00 00:38:41.515 IDENTIFY DEVICE ef 03 45 00 00 00 a0 00 00:38:41.515 SET FEATURES [Set transfer mode] ec 00 00 7b 86 b1 a0 00 00:38:49.991 IDENTIFY DEVICE c8 00 06 77 86 b1 ea 00 00:38:49.935 READ DMA Error 4643 occurred at disk power-on lifetime: 15132 hours (630 days + 12 hours) When the command that caused the error occurred, the device was active or idle. After command completion occurred, registers were: ER ST SC SN CL CH DH -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 40 51 00 7b 86 b1 ea Error: UNC at LBA = 0x0ab1867b = 179406459 Commands leading to the command that caused the error were: CR FR SC SN CL CH DH DC Powered_Up_Time Command/Feature_Name -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ---------------- -------------------- c8 00 06 77 86 b1 ea 00 00:38:41.517 READ DMA ec 03 45 00 00 00 a0 00 00:38:41.515 IDENTIFY DEVICE ef 03 45 00 00 00 a0 00 00:38:41.515 SET FEATURES [Set transfer mode] ec 00 00 7b 86 b1 a0 00 00:38:41.513 IDENTIFY DEVICE c8 00 06 77 86 b1 ea 00 00:38:38.706 READ DMA Error 4642 occurred at disk power-on lifetime: 15132 hours (630 days + 12 hours) When the command that caused the error occurred, the device was active or idle. After command completion occurred, registers were: ER ST SC SN CL CH DH -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 40 51 00 7b 86 b1 ea Error: UNC at LBA = 0x0ab1867b = 179406459 Commands leading to the command that caused the error were: CR FR SC SN CL CH DH DC Powered_Up_Time Command/Feature_Name -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ---------------- -------------------- c8 00 06 77 86 b1 ea 00 00:38:41.517 READ DMA ec 03 45 00 00 00 a0 00 00:38:41.515 IDENTIFY DEVICE ef 03 45 00 00 00 a0 00 00:38:41.515 SET FEATURES [Set transfer mode] ec 00 00 7b 86 b1 a0 00 00:38:41.513 IDENTIFY DEVICE c8 00 06 77 86 b1 ea 00 00:38:38.706 READ DMA Error 4641 occurred at disk power-on lifetime: 15132 hours (630 days + 12 hours) When the command that caused the error occurred, the device was active or idle. After command completion occurred, registers were: ER ST SC SN CL CH DH -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 40 51 00 7b 86 b1 ea Error: UNC at LBA = 0x0ab1867b = 179406459 Commands leading to the command that caused the error were: CR FR SC SN CL CH DH DC Powered_Up_Time Command/Feature_Name -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ---------------- -------------------- c8 00 06 77 86 b1 ea 00 00:38:41.517 READ DMA ec 03 45 00 00 00 a0 00 00:38:41.515 IDENTIFY DEVICE ef 03 45 00 00 00 a0 00 00:38:41.515 SET FEATURES [Set transfer mode] ec 00 00 7b 86 b1 a0 00 00:38:41.513 IDENTIFY DEVICE c8 00 06 77 86 b1 ea 00 00:38:38.706 READ DMA SMART Self-test log structure revision number 1 Num Test_Description Status Remaining LifeTime(hours) LBA_of_first_error # 1 Short offline Completed without error 00% 15131 - # 2 Short offline Completed without error 00% 15131 - SMART Selective self-test log data structure revision number 1 SPAN MIN_LBA MAX_LBA CURRENT_TEST_STATUS 1 0 0 Not_testing 2 0 0 Not_testing 3 0 0 Not_testing 4 0 0 Not_testing 5 0 0 Not_testing Selective self-test flags (0x0): After scanning selected spans, do NOT read-scan remainder of disk. If Selective self-test is pending on power-up, resume after 0 minute delay.

    Read the article

  • Disc2vhd and partitions question

    - by dotnetdev
    Hi, I am using Disc2Vhd to make a vhd of my drive. Does the tool support partitions? My partitions of C:\ are listed as both drives and volumes. In short, is there any issue when I select both partitions that make one physical drive? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Wamp virtualhost with supporting of remote access

    - by Farid
    To cut the long story short, I've setup a Wamp server with local virtual host for domain like sample.dev, now I've bind my static IP and port 80 to my Apache and asked the client to make some changes in his hosts file and add x.x.x.x sample.dev , I've also configured my httpd virtual host like this : <VirtualHost *:80> ServerAlias sample.dev DocumentRoot 'webroot_directory' </VirtualHost> Client can reach to my web server using the direct access by ip address, but when he tries using the sample domain looks like he gets in to some infinite loop. The firewall is off too. What would be the problem?! Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Why do Ping and Dig provide different IP address than nslookup?

    - by user1032531
    When pinging my domain name which points to my home public IP from two different servers on my LAN, it shows them pinging different IP. Further investigation shows dig and nslookup providing different results. See below. A little history. My IP used to be 11.22.33.444 and is hosted by Comcast. I changed routers, and it somehow got changed to 55.66.77.888. I've since updated my 1and1 domain name to point to the 55.66.77.888. desktop is a basic server, runs the web server, and connects wirelessly to my LAN. laptop is a GUI and connected via CAT5. Both operate Centos6.4. My old router was a D-Link, and used their "Virtual Server" feature to pass port 80 to desktop. My new router is a Linksys, and I use their "Port Forwarding" feature to pass port 80 to desktop (however, I haven't gotten this part working yet). What is going on??? Why the different IPs? Obviously, it most somehow be stored on the server, but why does the actual machine even know the public IP since it is on a LAN? How do I purge the old IP? [root@desktop etc]# dig +short myDomain.com 11.22.33.444 [root@desktop etc]# nslookup www.myDomain.com Server: 8.8.8.8 Address: 8.8.8.8#53 Non-authoritative answer: Name: www.myDomain.com Address: 55.66.77.888 [root@desktop etc]# dig myDomain.com ; <<>> DiG 9.8.2rc1-RedHat-9.8.2-0.17.rc1.el6_4.6 <<>> myDomain.com ;; global options: +cmd ;; Got answer: ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 13822 ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 0 ;; QUESTION SECTION: ;myDomain.com. IN A ;; ANSWER SECTION: myDomain.com. 16031 IN A 11.22.33.444 ;; Query time: 21 msec ;; SERVER: 8.8.8.8#53(8.8.8.8) ;; WHEN: Mon Oct 21 04:36:52 2013 ;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 44 [root@desktop etc]# [root@laptop ~]# dig +short myDomain.com 55.66.77.888 [root@laptop ~]# nslookup www.myDomain.com Server: 192.168.0.1 Address: 192.168.0.1#53 Non-authoritative answer: Name: www.myDomain.com Address: 55.66.77.888 [root@laptop ~]#

    Read the article

  • Linux buffer cache effect on IO writes?

    - by Patrick LeBoutillier
    I'm copying large files (3 x 30G) between 2 filesystems on a Linux server (kernel 2.6.37, 16 cores, 32G RAM) and I'm getting poor performance. I suspect that the usage of the buffer cache is killing the I/O performance. To try and narrow down the problem I used fio directly on the SAS disk to monitor the performance. Here is the output of 2 fio runs (the first with direct=1, the second one direct=0): Config: [test] rw=write blocksize=32k size=20G filename=/dev/sda # direct=1 Run 1: test: (g=0): rw=write, bs=32K-32K/32K-32K, ioengine=sync, iodepth=1 Starting 1 process Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W] [100.0% done] [0K/205M /s] [0/6K iops] [eta 00m:00s] test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=4667 write: io=20,480MB, bw=199MB/s, iops=6,381, runt=102698msec clat (usec): min=104, max=13,388, avg=152.06, stdev=72.43 bw (KB/s) : min=192448, max=213824, per=100.01%, avg=204232.82, stdev=4084.67 cpu : usr=3.37%, sys=16.55%, ctx=655410, majf=0, minf=29 IO depths : 1=100.0%, 2=0.0%, 4=0.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, >=64=0.0% submit : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% complete : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% issued r/w: total=0/655360, short=0/0 lat (usec): 250=99.50%, 500=0.45%, 750=0.01%, 1000=0.01% lat (msec): 2=0.01%, 4=0.02%, 10=0.01%, 20=0.01% Run status group 0 (all jobs): WRITE: io=20,480MB, aggrb=199MB/s, minb=204MB/s, maxb=204MB/s, mint=102698msec, maxt=102698msec Disk stats (read/write): sda: ios=0/655238, merge=0/0, ticks=0/79552, in_queue=78640, util=76.55% Run 2: test: (g=0): rw=write, bs=32K-32K/32K-32K, ioengine=sync, iodepth=1 Starting 1 process Jobs: 1 (f=1): [W] [100.0% done] [0K/0K /s] [0/0 iops] [eta 00m:00s] test: (groupid=0, jobs=1): err= 0: pid=4733 write: io=20,480MB, bw=91,265KB/s, iops=2,852, runt=229786msec clat (usec): min=16, max=127K, avg=349.53, stdev=4694.98 bw (KB/s) : min=56013, max=1390016, per=101.47%, avg=92607.31, stdev=167453.17 cpu : usr=0.41%, sys=6.93%, ctx=21128, majf=0, minf=33 IO depths : 1=100.0%, 2=0.0%, 4=0.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, >=64=0.0% submit : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% complete : 0=0.0%, 4=100.0%, 8=0.0%, 16=0.0%, 32=0.0%, 64=0.0%, >=64=0.0% issued r/w: total=0/655360, short=0/0 lat (usec): 20=5.53%, 50=93.89%, 100=0.02%, 250=0.01%, 500=0.01% lat (msec): 2=0.01%, 4=0.01%, 10=0.01%, 20=0.01%, 50=0.12% lat (msec): 100=0.38%, 250=0.04% Run status group 0 (all jobs): WRITE: io=20,480MB, aggrb=91,265KB/s, minb=93,455KB/s, maxb=93,455KB/s, mint=229786msec, maxt=229786msec Disk stats (read/write): sda: ios=8/79811, merge=7/7721388, ticks=9/32418456, in_queue=32471983, util=98.98% I'm not knowledgeable enough with fio to interpret the results, but I don't expect the overall performance using the buffer cache to be 50% less than with O_DIRECT. Can someone help me interpret the fio output? Are there any kernel tunings that could fix/minimize the problem? Thanks a lot,

    Read the article

  • List all symbolic links on a directory

    - by Mathias
    Hey, a short question: is it possible to list all symbolic links onto a directory other than running a find over the whole filesystem? Background: I have a directory containing a lot of different versions of a library and I'd like to do some cleanup work and delete the versions which weren't used in any projects. Thanks, Mathias

    Read the article

  • How is incoming SMTP mail being delivered despite blocked port

    - by Josh
    I setup a MX mail server, everything works despite port 25 being blocked, I'm stumped as to why I am able to receive email with this setup, and what the consequences might be if I leave it this way. Here are the details: Connections to SMTP over port 25 and 587 both reliably connect over my local network. Connections to SMTP over port 25 are blocked from external IPs (the ISP is blocking the port). Connections to Submission SMTP over port 587 from external IPs are reliable. Emails sent from gmail, yahoo, and a few other addresses all are being delivered. I haven't found an email provider that fails to deliver mail to my MX. So, with port 25 blocked, I am assuming other MTA servers fallback to port 587, otherwise I can't imagine how the mail is received. I know port 25 shouldn't be blocked, but so far it works. Are there mail servers that this will not work with? Where can I find more about how this is working? -- edit More technical detail, to validate that I'm not missing something silly. Obviously in the transcript below I've replaced my actual domain with example.com. # DNS MX record points to the A record. $ dig example.com MX +short 1 example.com $ dig example.com A +short <Public IP address> # From a public server (not my ISP hosting the mail server) # We see port 25 is blocked, but port 587 is open $ telnet example.com 25 Trying <public ip>... telnet: Unable to connect to remote host: Connection refused # Let's try openssl $ openssl s_client -starttls smtp -crlf -connect example.com:25 connect: Connection refused connect:errno=111 # Again from a public server, we see port 587 is open $ telnet example.com 587 Trying <public ip>... Connected to example.com. Escape character is '^]'. 220 example.com ESMTP Postfix ehlo example.com 250-example.com 250-PIPELINING 250-SIZE 10485760 250-VRFY 250-ETRN 250-STARTTLS 250-ENHANCEDSTATUSCODES 250-8BITMIME 250-DSN 250-BINARYMIME 250 CHUNKING quit 221 2.0.0 Bye Connection closed by foreign host. Here is a portion from the mail log when receiving a message from gmail: postfix/postscreen[93152]: CONNECT from [209.85.128.49]:48953 to [192.168.0.10]:25 postfix/postscreen[93152]: PASS NEW [209.85.128.49]:48953 postfix/smtpd[93160]: connect from mail-qe0-f49.google.com[209.85.128.49] postfix/smtpd[93160]: 7A8C31C1AA99: client=mail-qe0-f49.google.com[209.85.128.49] The log shows that a connection was made to the local IP on port 25 (I'm not doing any port mapping, so it is port 25 on the public IP too). Seeing this leads me to hypothesize that the ISP block on port 25 only occurs when a connection is made from an IP address that is not known to be a mail server. Any other theories?

    Read the article

  • Cheat Sheets for System Administrators?

    - by splattne
    I'd like to start a collection of good, free cheat sheet resources for system administrators. Please add your favorite ones. From the Wikipedia "cheat sheet" article: In more general usage, a "cheat sheet" is any short (one or two page) reference to terms, commands, or symbols where the user is expected to understand the use of such terms etc but not necessarily to have memorized all of them.

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to limit how much CPU a virtual machine can use with VMWare Player?

    - by Raz
    Is it possible to limit how much CPU a virtual machine can use with VMWare Player? I use VMWare to run a Windows XP virtual machine. I want to keep it on in the background all the time. The real computer runs Windows 7 and is sometimes a little bit short of memory. That's why I want to check if I can throttle the VM down to the bare minimum to keep it running in the background constantly without interfering too much.

    Read the article

  • Change default itunes store

    - by Midhat
    I installed iTunes in Italy, (and I am outta there long ago) now it just connects to the italian itunes store. Is there any way short of renistalling, that I can convert it back to the english itunes store

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47  | Next Page >