Search Results

Search found 1894 results on 76 pages for 'phil factor'.

Page 60/76 | < Previous Page | 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67  | Next Page >

• Is there an high quality natural text reader for the mac?

  - by Another Registered User

  I'm reading about 150 pages of text on screen, every day. I will have to read about 15.000 in the next upcoming months. No joke. Well, the problem is this: I suffer from a sort of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder which forces me to read every sentence up to 10 times until I really get it. Mac OS X Snow Leopard has a built-in text reader with the name "Alex". Although it is already pretty good quality, I know there are far better natural sounding voices out there. I have heard already voices that are absolutely amazing compared to Alex. They're so good, that you can't tell anymore the difference between a real person or a computer. Alex still has this "metal factor" in its voice, which makes my ears hurt after 8 hours of listening. The next problem with Alex is, that he never makes a break after a sentence. Also, it's not possible to think about a sentence and then continue reading. It's also not possible to have him repeat a sentence, without tedious text selection and shortcut usage. Actually, the best tool I can imagine would have the option to read a sentence and move on to the next one after pressing a special key, OR repeating the previously one after pressing a special key. That would help so much! And if that's even with one of those bell lab / AT&T / whatever super-natural voices, even better! But it would be already a great relief if there was just a better tool to control Alex. To let him make breaks after sentences or let him speak big chunks of text sentence-by-sentence with fine-grained control over repetition and moving on. Is there anything?

  Read the article

• How to give wife emergency access to logins, passwords, etc.?

  - by Torben Gundtofte-Bruun

  I'm the digital guru in my household. My wife is good with email and forum websites but she trusts me with all our important digital stuff -- such as online banking and other things that require passwords, but also family photos and the plethora of other digital things in a modern home. We discuss relevant actions but it's always me that executes the actions. If I should get "hit by a bus" then my wife would be thoroughly stranded -- she would have no idea what digital stuff is where on our computer, how to access it, what online accounts we have, and their login credentials are. It would also leave my many public appearances (personal websites, email accounts, social networks, etc.) unresolved. To complicate things, I'm one of those people who don't use password as my password everywhere; I use a mix of SuperGenPass and LastPass, and also two-factor authentication whenever possible. I don't have much hope that she would find her way through a written explanation of all that in a stressful situation. I could just tell her that she should ask my tech-savvy twin brother and then entrust him with my LastPass master passphrase. I feel that would have a high chance of success, but it's inelegant and leaves my wife without control of the information. How can I ensure that my wife has access to my digital remains?

  Read the article

• CentOS 5.5 remote kickstart installation stalls at "Starting install process." How to debug?

  - by ewwhite

  Hello, I'm having a difficult time with a remote CentOS 5.5 kickstart installation on an HP ProLiant DL360 G6. This is in an environment where I maintain an internal CentOS yum repository. The kickstart installation and post scripts have been tested and normally work. This hardware is also common in this environment, so I do not believe that it is a factor. Unfortunately, I'm having problems with a specific server install. The system is remote to the yum repository at a distance of 500 miles. They are connected over a private low-latency 100-megabit layer 2 connection (26ms round-trip). I'm mounting the 10mb CentOS 5 netinstall ISO image via an HP ILO remote console. The initial boot parameters are: linux ks=http://yum.abctrading.com/prop.cfg ksdevice=eth0 ip=x.x.x.x dns=x.x.x.x netmask=255.255.255.0 gateway=x.x.x.x I'm using the url --url http://ks.abctrading.com/5.5/os/x86_64/ method of installation. This quickly boots into the anaconda installer, pulls the kickstart config and formats the drives. The process eventually halts at the screen below, reading "Starting install process.". Going to the other virtual consoles give the second image below. The process stalls at this point and cannot proceed with the rest of the installation. Running the same kickstart config locally works just fine. I've tried mounting the boot ISO from the console as well as from the ILO2 command line pointing to a locally-hosted boot ISO via http. How can I debug this? Are there any options I've overlooked?

  Read the article

• Strange focus bug in Firefox (chrome vs content)

  - by Marius

  Here is a strange bug I'm experiencing in Firefox: I can only use either the chrome, or the content, not both at the same time! For example, I can click on tabs and the toolbar icons, focus the search bar and write in it as well as the address bar, but if I try to click on anything in the content (eg a link or a textfield to write something), then nothing happens. The mouse pointer doesn't change either, it just stays a pointer when I hover over things, and the links I hover don't react either. But if I alt-tab to another program (or click on it in the taskbar), then back to Firefox, then I can use the area that I click on. So if I click somewhere on the webpage to get focus back to Firefox, then I can click on links and write things (like this text), but I cannot click on tabs or refresh or anything else in the chrome. I can't even click on the minimize, restore and close icons! To get focus back on the chrome I have to alt-tab to another program, and then click on the chrome to get back to Firefox to be able to use the chrome again. I've tried closing and starting it again, but the bug is still there. I have experienced this before, but I don't remember what I did to fix it. This bug seems to occur sometimes when I wake up the computer from standby, but I leave by computer in standby all the time, so that is not the only factor.

  Read the article

• Best way to attach 96 tb to workstation

  - by user994179

  I'm running a workstation with dual xeon 5690's (12 physical/24 logical cores), 192 gb of ram (ie, maxed-out), Windows 7 64bit, 5 slots for adapter cards, and 1 tb of internal storage, with 5 more internal bays available. I have an app that creates data files totaling about 88 tbs. These are written once every 14 months, and the rest of the time the app only needs to read them; and 95% of the reads are sequential reads of huge chunks of data. I have some control over how big the individual files are, but ideally they would be between 5 and 8 tbs. The app will be reading from only one drive at a time, and the nature of the data is such that if (when) a drive dies I can restore the data to a new disk from tape. While it would be nice to be able to use the fastest drive/controllers available, at this point size matters more than speed. After doing lots of reading, I am leaning toward buying a bunch of cheap 2tb drives and putting them into a bunch of cheap enclosures. All this stuff is going into my home office, so I need to avoid the raised floor/refrigerated approach. My questions: Is the cheap drive/enclosure solution the best one for this situation? Given the nature of the app and the way the data is used, does RAID make sense? If so, which one? For huge sequential reads, would Usb 3.0 and eSata be a wash performance-wise? For each slot available on the workstation, can I hook up an enclosure that can hold multiple drives? Or is it one controller per drive? If I can have multiple drives on one controller, am I essentially splitting the bandwidth (throughput)? For example, if I have a 12 bay enclosure, is the throughput of the controller reduced by a factor of 12? Are there any Windows 7 volume/drive/capacity limits I should be aware of? Thanks

  Read the article

• How to configure mod_proxy_balancer to gracefully fail under high load

  - by bramp

  We have a system which has one Apache instance in front of multiple tomcats. These tomcats then connect to various databases. We balance the load to the tomcat with mod_proxy_balancer. Currently we are receiving 100 requests a second, the load on the Apache server is quite low, but due to database heavy operations on the tomcats, the load there is roughly 25% (of what I estimate they can handle). In a few weeks there is an event happening and we estimate that our requests will jump significant, maybe by a factor of 10. I'm doing everything I can do reduce the load on our tomcats, but I know we are going to run out of capacity, so I would like to fail gracefully. By this I mean, instead of trying to deal with too many connections which all timeout, I would like Apache to somehow monitor average response time, and as soon as the response time to Tomcat is getting above some threshold, I would like a error page displayed. This means that users who are lucky still get a page rendered quickly, and those who are unlucky get a error page quickly. Instead of everyone waiting far too long for their page, and eventually everyone timing out, and the database being swamped with queries which are never used. Hopefully this makes sense, so I was looking for suggestions on how I could achieve this. thanks

  Read the article

• Replicated MongoDB server slower than simple shards

  - by displayName

  I tried to compare the performance of a sharded configuration against a sharded and replicated configuration. The sharded configuration consists of 8 shards each running on three different machines thereby constituting a total of 24 shards. All 8 of these shards run in the same partition on each machine. The sharded and replicated version is 8 shards again just like plain sharding, and all 8 mongods run on the same partition in each machine. But apart from this, each of these three machine now run additional 16 threads on another partition which serve as the secondary for the 8 mongods running on other machines. This is the way I prepared a sharded and replicated configuration with data chunks having replication factor of 3. Important point to note is that once the data has been loaded, it is not modified. So after primary and secondaries have synchronized then it doesn't matter which one i read from. To run the queries, I use an entirely different machine (let's call it config) which runs mongos and this machine's only purpose is to receive queries and run them on the cluster. Contrary to my expectations, plain sharding of 8 threads on each machine (total = 3 * 8 = 24) is performing better for queries than the sharded + replicated configuration. I have a script written to perform the query. So in order to time the scripts, I use time ./testScript and see the result. I tried changing the reading preference for replicated cluster by logging to mongo of config and run db.getMongo().setReadPref('secondary') and then exit the shell and run the queries like time ./testScript. The questions are: Where am i going wrong in the replication? Why is it slower than its plain sharding version? Does the db.getMongo().ReadPref('secondary') persist when i leave the shell and try to perform the query? All the four machines are running Linux and i have already increased the ulimit -n to 2048 from initial value of 1024 to allow more connections. The collections are properly distributed and all the mongods have equal number of chunks. Goes without saying that indices in both configurations are the same.

  Read the article

• How to configure mod_proxy_balancer to gracefully fail under high load

  - by bramp

  We have a system which has one Apache instance in front of multiple tomcats. These tomcats then connect to various databases. We balance the load to the tomcat with mod_proxy_balancer. Currently we are receiving 100 requests a second, the load on the Apache server is quite low, but due to database heavy operations on the tomcats, the load there is roughly 25% (of what I estimate they can handle). In a few weeks there is an event happening and we estimate that our requests will jump significant, maybe by a factor of 10. I'm doing everything I can do reduce the load on our tomcats, but I know we are going to run out of capacity, so I would like to fail gracefully. By this I mean, instead of trying to deal with too many connections which all timeout, I would like Apache to somehow monitor average response time, and as soon as the response time to Tomcat is getting above some threshold, I would like a error page displayed. This means that users who are lucky still get a page rendered quickly, and those who are unlucky get a error page quickly. Instead of everyone waiting far too long for their page, and eventually everyone timing out, and the database being swamped with queries which are never used. Hopefully this makes sense, so I was looking for suggestions on how I could achieve this. thanks

  Read the article

• Windows 2008 server smart card security module problem

  - by chris13work

  Hi, I've got a smart card reader and a server application using it as a security module. If I run it under DOS prompt, everything is fine. The server is running and clients can connect to it. I tried to install the server as window service and start it. The server starts but always gives back authentication error because it cannot call the smart card to do encryption. Then I tried to start it with task scheduler and set the trigger factor as "on startup". The server starts also but still cannot access the smart card reader. Then I tried remote desktop to the machine and run the server application under DOS prompt. Same error is returned. The situation is that the smart card reader only works under active console desktop environment. In the server application, WINSCARD API is used to access the smart card reader. Any suggestion so that we can access the smart card reader in running services? OS: Windows Server 2008 Smart Card Driver: Windows USB smart card Reader Smart Card API: WINSCARD

  Read the article

• Windows 2008 server smart card security module problem

  - by chris13work

  Hi, I've got a smart card reader and a server application using it as a security module. If I run it under DOS prompt, everything is fine. The server is running and clients can connect to it. I tried to install the server as window service and start it. The server starts but always gives back authentication error because it cannot call the smart card to do encryption. Then I tried to start it with task scheduler and set the trigger factor as "on startup". The server starts also but still cannot access the smart card reader. Then I tried remote desktop to the machine and run the server application under DOS prompt. Same error is returned. The situation is that the smart card reader only works under active console desktop environment. In the server application, WINSCARD API is used to access the smart card reader. Any suggestion so that we can access the smart card reader in running services? OS: Windows Server 2008 Smart Card Driver: Windows USB smart card Reader Smart Card API: WINSCARD

  Read the article

• Is the APC BR700G UPS (or similar) compatible with Active PFC power supplies?

  - by David Zaslavsky

  I'm looking at getting a UPS for my home computer. So far the APC BR700G looks very promising, except for one thing: one of the reviews on Newegg says that this UPS does not work with a power supply with Active PFC. Pros: Unit looks great, built well, very heavy, was excited to use it. Cons: Didn't research enough - many newer power supplies like my corsair 750w (and yes dells and other mainstreamers sell them too) that I bought last year have a feature called active pfc (power factor corrected). The signal for this backup battery doesn't fully support that feature and can cause issues. You can find an article on APCs site if you search their user forums for PFC. And the power supply in my computer is, in fact, an Active PFC PSU. I've already found one answer on this site claiming that it's not an issue, that "most quality supplies these days have PFC and work just fine with a UPS." That disagrees with the review on Newegg. Can someone explain this discrepancy? Also, what is it exactly about a UPS that makes it incompatible with an Active PFC PSU? (if anything) Is there some way to tell based on the technical specifications, or do I just have to hunt for reviews online to avoid wasting my money? While any input would be appreciated, I would prefer to get an answer from someone with actual experience with similar UPS's and Active PFC power supplies, who can tell me whether it works or not.

  Read the article

• Comprehensive solution for managing patches, event viewing, change management, inventory, etc

  - by Holocryptic

  I'm looking for a solution that incorporates most or all of the following: Patch Management, Server event viewing/tracking, AD change management, ticketing and internal/external kb, remote access - ability to shadow user sessions or create new ones, imaging, and inventory. Our environments contains Windows Servers and ESXi Hosts (We're not completely virtual, but we're moving that direction). Various Cisco and Linksys switches and firewalls. This is a tall order, and I don't know if it can be done on a reasonable budget. I've looked and found some questions on SF that deal with some of this: http://serverfault.com/questions/72015/active-directory-management-tools-for-medium-sized-forest-less-than-1000-users http://serverfault.com/questions/4021/are-there-any-tools-to-do-change-management-with-active-directory-group-policy http://serverfault.com/questions/21752/what-is-a-good-patch-update-management-server What I'm ideally looking for is a reasonably cheap solution that integrates the features into a central interface. We're a non-profit, so money is a limiting factor (the cheaper, the better; but we have a max of $15k). What we are trying to avoid is having to deal with multiple vendors, while maintaining scalability (we're creating more sites that we'll have to manage). Is this possible, or will we have to cobble together something to make it work for us?

  Read the article

• What is the peak theoretical WiFi G user density? [closed]

  - by Bigbio2002

  I've seen a few WiFi capacity planning questions, and this one is related, but hopefully different enough not to be closed. Also, this is related specifically to 802.11g, but a similar question could be made for N. In order to squeeze more WiFi users into a space, the transmit power on the APs need to be reduced and the APs squeezed closer together. My question is, how far can you practically take this before the network becomes unusable? There will come a point where the transmit power is so weak that nobody will actually be able to pick up a connection, or be constantly roaming to/from APs spaced a few feet apart as they walk around. There are also only 3 available channels to use as well, which is a factor to consider. After determining the peak AP density, then multiply by users-per-AP, which should be easier to find out. After factoring all of this in and running some back-of-the-envelope calculations, I'd like to be able to get a figure of "XX users per 10ft^2" or something. This can be considered the physical limit of WiFi, and will keep people from asking about getting 3,000 people in a ballroom conference on WiFi. Can anyone with WiFi experience chime in, or better yet, provide some calculations for a more accurate figure? Assumptions: Let's assume an ideal environment with no reflection (think of a big, square, open room, with the APs spaced out on a plane), APs are placed on the ceiling so humans won't absorb the waves, and the only interference are from the APs themselves and the devices. As for what devices specifically, that's irrelevant for the first point of the question (AP density, so only channel and transmit power should matter). User experience: Wikipedia states that Wireless G has about 22Mbps maximum effective throughput, or about 2.75MB/s. For the purpose of this question, anything below 100KB/s per user can be deemed to be a poor user experience. As for roaming, I'll assume the user is standing in the same place, so hopefully that will be a non-issue.

  Read the article

• Netflix streaming stops loading at 98% on Revo 3700

  - by Martin Harris

  I'm trying to stream Netflix on an Acer Revo 3700 running Windows 7 Home Premium, but it hangs on the loading screen at 98% (after it has formatted the player to the right aspect ratio and added the controls, but before the video starts) with no error messages or failures. I have two other machines on the same network, one running Windows 7 Home Premium and another running XP, which both stream faultlessly. Things I have tried: Both a wired and wireless connection to the router Upgrading the video and audio drivers IE, Chrome and Firefox Boxee software Connecting with a VGA cable instead of HDMI (in case it is a HDCP thing) Uninstalling and reinstalling Silverlight. Getting someway into loading a HD movie and turning "Allow HD" off Does anyone know what Netflix is doing at the 98% load mark? Are there any log files? Anything else worth trying? Full disclosure: I'm using Netflix from the UK through a US based VPN. I've tried multiple VPNs and the problem is exactly the same, also the other machines on the same network through the same VPN work fine so I don't think this is the issue, but it might be a factor. The region check happens at around 7% and I get past that.

  Read the article

• Windows media scaling/interpolation method

  - by MichaelH

  Usually in Windows, if videos or other media is upscaled from a certain resolution to a higher resolution (e.g. "monitor size"), a bilinear filtering algorithm or similar is used, such that the upscaled material doesn't look blocky. On my system however, the used interpolation algorithm changed from 'bilinear' to 'nearest neighbor' at some point, with the effect that upscaled videos (e.g. viewed in MPC or WMP, and also Skype video streams) and games (e.g. from PopCap) appear rather blocky. Not sure what the common factor between those is, could be DirectShow(?). I am not aware of having changed any setting that could have affected this state, in fact I am not even aware such a setting exists. I'm guesing that some installed software must have changed something on my computer. My computer is running Windows 7, but I had already experienced the same effect on an XP machine some while ago, where it changed back again to the more pleasing bilinear interpolation after a while, as magically as the first time. What could be wrong with this installation, and how can I change this upscaling interpolation behavior?

  Read the article

• Configure a Windows PC as network appliance w/o monitor, keyboard and mouse

  - by Joshua Lim

  I intend to use a small form factor PC with Windows 7 Professional installed as a network appliance attached directly to my customer's LAN without connecting a monitor, keyboard or mouse. How should I configure the networking for my PC so that I can access it via say my laptop? I figure that I can do it 2 ways. Attach my laptop to the PC using a crossover cable? Connect via RDP and configure networking. Configure an IP address on the PC before I deliver it to the customer place. At the customer's place, attach the PC to LAN and connect to the IP address which I previously configured from my laptop or from one of the customer's workstations. I know the first way is doable, but is the second way possible? I'm sorry if this question sounds ridiculous - I am Delphi programmer but a novice on networking. Finally, if possible, I hope to make the configuration process web based as I wouldn't like to reveal the fact that I am using Win7 Pro for the network appliance!

  Read the article

• How to force mdadm to stop RAID5 array?

  - by lucek

  I have /dev/md127 RAID5 array that consisted of four drives. I managed to hot remove them from the array and currently /dev/md127 does not have any drives: cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [raid10] md0 : active raid1 sdd1[0] sda1[1] 304052032 blocks super 1.2 [2/2] [UU] md1 : active raid0 sda5[1] sdd5[0] 16770048 blocks super 1.2 512k chunks md127 : active raid5 super 1.2 level 5, 512k chunk, algorithm 2 [4/0] [____] unused devices: <none> and mdadm --detail /dev/md127 /dev/md127: Version : 1.2 Creation Time : Thu Sep 6 10:39:57 2012 Raid Level : raid5 Array Size : 8790402048 (8383.18 GiB 9001.37 GB) Used Dev Size : 2930134016 (2794.39 GiB 3000.46 GB) Raid Devices : 4 Total Devices : 0 Persistence : Superblock is persistent Update Time : Fri Sep 7 17:19:47 2012 State : clean, FAILED Active Devices : 0 Working Devices : 0 Failed Devices : 0 Spare Devices : 0 Layout : left-symmetric Chunk Size : 512K Number Major Minor RaidDevice State 0 0 0 0 removed 1 0 0 1 removed 2 0 0 2 removed 3 0 0 3 removed I've tried to do mdadm --stop /dev/md127 but: mdadm --stop /dev/md127 mdadm: Cannot get exclusive access to /dev/md127:Perhaps a running process, mounted filesystem or active volume group? I made sure that it's unmounted, umount -l /dev/md127 and confirmed that it indeed is unmounted: umount /dev/md127 umount: /dev/md127: not mounted I've tried to zero superblock of each drive and I get (for each drive): mdadm --zero-superblock /dev/sde1 mdadm: Unrecognised md component device - /dev/sde1 Here's output of lsof|grep md127: lsof|grep md127 md127_rai 276 root cwd DIR 9,0 4096 2 / md127_rai 276 root rtd DIR 9,0 4096 2 / md127_rai 276 root txt unknown /proc/276/exe What else can I do? LVM is not even installed so it can't be a factor.

  Read the article

• Strange network connectivity problem

  - by Marc

  Here is my network connectivity: cable modem | |(WAN) wrt54g (default gateway, 192.168.1.1) -- earth |(LAN) | Simple Switch1 | | | | | SimpleSwitch2- neptune | | | | mars mercury | |- venus | |- laptop | saturn (Windows AD DC) simpleSwitch2 was hanging off the wrt54g. I moved it to SW1 during troubleshooting. Nothing described below was any different. earth is connected via wireless to the wrt54g. I can ping from laptop to mars, neptune & mercury. I can ping from earth to venus, saturn & laptop. However, pinging mars, mercury or neptune from earth gives the following result. Pinging mars.XXX.XXX [192.168.1.105] with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 192.168.1.122: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.1.122: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.1.122: Destination host unreachable. Reply from 192.168.1.122: Destination host unreachable. Ping statistics for 192.168.1.105: Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss), .122 is the address of the machine from which I am pinging. earth is a Vista machine. Windows firewall is off. saturn is my DNS & DHCP server. Can anyone give me any ideas what the h*ll is going on? Clearly the topology is a factor And yes, I am a space geek.

  Read the article

• Recommended drive encryption solution

  - by Chris Driver

  Hello, I will soon be purchasing a number of laptops running Windows 7 for our mobile staff. Due to the nature of our business I will need drive encryption. Windows BitLocker seems the obvious choice, but it looks like I need to purchase either Windows 7 Enterprise or Ultimate editions to get it. Can anyone offer suggestions on the best course of action: a) Use BitLocker, bite the bullet and pay to upgrade to Enterprise/Ultimate b) Pay for another 3rd party drive encryption product that is cheaper (suggestions appreciated) c) Use a free drive encryption product such as TrueCrypt Ideally I am also interested in 'real world' experience from people who are using drive encryption software and any pitfalls to look out for. Many thanks in advance... UPDATE Decided to go with TrueCrypt for the following reasons: a) The product has a good track record b) I am not managing a large quantity of laptops so integration with Active Directory, Management consoles etc is not a huge benefit c) Although eks did make a good point about Evil Maid (EM) attacks, our data is not that desirable to consider it a major factor d) The cost (free) is a big plus but not the primary motivator The next problem I face is imaging (Acronis/Ghost/..) encrypted drives will not work unless I perform sector-by-sector imaging. That means an 80Gb encrypted partition creates an 80Gb image file :(

  Read the article

• Low-profile, PCI Express, x1 video card with VGA-out?

  - by Dandy

  I just bought an Acer Aspire EasyStore H340 system (http://us.acer.com/acer/productv.do?LanguageISOCtxParam=en&kcond61e.c2att101=54825&sp=page16e&ctx2.c2att1=25&link=ln438e&CountryISOCtxParam=US&ctx1g.c2att92=450&ctx1.att21k=1&CRC=936243954) It comes with Windows Home Server, which I don't particularly care for (too dumbed down for my liking)--I bought the box mainly for the form factor, and intend to install Server 2008 on it and have it run as a small domain controller. The geniuses at Acer however went out of their way to ensure you can only run Home Server--you can only connect to it via the Home Server Connector software, as it has no video-out whatsoever (so essentially, there's no way to even get into the BIOS). It only has a low-profile, PCI Express x1 slot. It turns out to be way harder than I thought to locate a video card that both has an x1 connector, and is low-profile (I'd really rather not snip the bracket at the back just so it'll fit the case). I know they're out there, and I've seen one with Display Port outputs, but I don't have a monitor with this connection. So to reiterate, it needs to be: - x1 connector - low profile - VGA out (though DVI would be okay; I have some spare adapters) Can anyone recommend anything at all?

  Read the article

• Can't start Windows 7 after cloning HDD

  - by Paul

  Brief description: cloned HDD1 - HDD2 HDD1 partition 1 boots HDD1 partition 2 boots HDD2 partition 1 boots HDD2 partition 2 doesn't boot Windows, but is bootable in general Now verbosely: In all the cases computer is the same. I have two Windows 7 installations on HDD1 - both are booting fine. I choose between them using standard Windows 7 boot loader menu. Technically there are 4 partitions: 100 MB Boot loader partition (active), Windows 7 copy 1 (25 GB), Windows 7 copy 2 (150 GB) and Working partition. All are primary. In past few days I tried to clone the whole HDD1 to HDD2 of the same size (but 2,5 inch form factor) as is using Minitool Partition wizard. Everything has been copied, all files are accessible, no faults in file system structure, even boot loader wasn't damaged and I hadn't to repair it. But I can boot only first installation of Windows 7 (it boots without issues). When I choose the second installation, I get immediately a completely black screen without any texts, cursors and other data. HDD isn't accessed after that. This black screen is sensitive to Ctrl-Alt-Delete which causes computer reboot. I did some experimenting: Installed Windows 7 to that partition - it booted fine. Then I renamed "Windows" to "Windows.old" and copied Windows directory from HDD1 as it was, using Far Manager, and got the same troubles - black screen. (Of course I performed renaming and copying from other copy of Windows). So, it seems that problems are inside this installation of Windows, somewhere in its files.

  Read the article

• At what point does the performance gap between GPU & CPU become so great that the CPU is holding back a system?

  - by Matthew Galloway

  I know that generally speaking for gaming performance the GPU is the primary factor which holds back performance, with everything else such as RAM/motherboard/PSU/CPU being secondary in importance to the graphics card. But at some point the other components ARE going to be significant in holding back the whole system! For instance nobody would be silly enough to play modern games with 512MB RAM and the very latest graphics cards (such as an HD7970) as I bet the performance increase over such a system with only 512MB but a mid range card would be non-existent! Thus it would be a "waste" for such a person to buy any high end graphics card without resolving first the system's other problems. The same point applies to other components, such as if it only had a Pentium II a current high end graphics card would be wasted on it! So my core question is how do you determine at what point for your system is spending on extra GPU power be completely "wasted"? (also, a slightly more nuanced question is trying work out at what point might the extra graphics power not be "wasted" but would be "sub optimal" value for money, when the expenditure should then be split around graphics card and other components. As obviously a gamer shouldn't always just spend on upgrading the graphics card! But needs to balance it out)

  Read the article

• Slower/cached Linux file system required

  - by Chopper3

  I know it sounds odd but I need a slower or cached filesystem. I have a lot of firewalls that are syslog'ing their data to a pair of Linux VMs which write these files to their 'local' (actually FC SAN attached) ext3-formatted disks and also forward the messages to our Splunk servers. The problem is that the syslog server is writing these syslog messages as hundreds, sometimes thousands, of tiny ~4k writes per second back to our FC SAN - which can handle this workload right now but our FW traffic's going to be growing by at least a factor of 5000% (really) in coming months and that'll be a pain for the SAN, I want to fix the root cause before it's a problem. So I need some help figuring out a way of getting these writes cached or held-off in some way from the 'physical' disks so that the VMs fire off larger, but less frequent, writes - there's no way of avoiding these writes but there's no need for it to do so many tiny ones. I've looked at the various ext3 options, setting noatime and nodiratime but that's not made much of a dent in the problem. Obviously I'm investigating other file systems but thought I'd throw this out in case others have the same problem in the future. Oh and I can't just forward these messages to Splunk, our firewall team insist they're in their original format for diag purposes.

  Read the article

• Why is my rsync so slow?

  - by iblue

  My Laptop and my workstation are both connected to a Gigabit Switch. Both are running Linux. But when I copy files with rsync, it performs badly. I get about 22 MB/s. Shouldn't I theoretically get about 125 MB/s? What is the limiting factor here? EDIT: I conducted some experiments. Write performance on the laptop The laptop has a xfs filesystem with full disk encryption. It uses aes-cbc-essiv:sha256 cipher mode with 256 bits key length. Disk write performance is 58.8 MB/s. iblue@nerdpol:~$ LANG=C dd if=/dev/zero of=test.img bs=1M count=1024 1073741824 Bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 18.2735 s, 58.8 MB/s Read performance on the workstation The files I copied are on a software RAID-5 over 5 HDDs. On top of the raid is a lvm. The volume itself is encrypted with the same cipher. The workstation has a FX-8150 cpu that has a native AES-NI instruction set which speeds up encryption. Disk read performance is 256 MB/s (cache was cold). iblue@raven:/mnt/bytemachine/imgs$ dd if=backup-1333796266.tar.bz2 of=/dev/null bs=1M 10213172008 bytes (10 GB) copied, 39.8882 s, 256 MB/s Network performance I ran iperf between the two clients. Network performance is 939 Mbit/s iblue@raven $ iperf -c 94.135.XXX ------------------------------------------------------------ Client connecting to 94.135.XXX, TCP port 5001 TCP window size: 23.2 KByte (default) ------------------------------------------------------------ [ 3] local 94.135.XXX port 59385 connected with 94.135.YYY port 5001 [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 1.09 GBytes 939 Mbits/sec

  Read the article

• Inexpensive (used) hardware for Xen virtualization test?

  - by Jason Antman

  Virtualization is one of the areas where I could really use some experience. I also run quite a few services (web, mail, dns, etc.) out of my home. Since most of my hardware is getting a bit old (I'm running on stuff that was surplused years ago...) I decided that it's about time I start renewing some things, and also play around with virtualization a bit more. My plan is to setup a SAN box (simple iSCSI target, relatively inexpensive gigE switch), get a pair (for starters) of new servers, and start building some new stuff with Xen, specifically planning on playing with live migration and full virtualization. Does anyone have recommendations for used, older "servers" (really anything in a rack-mount form factor, I'm not too worried about things like iLO/iLOM for the test nodes) that support VT-x/AMD-V? I'm biased to HP, but it looks like they didn't make Proliants with VT-x/Vanderpool processors until G6 (for the DL360) or so, which is way out of my price range. I'm looking in the sub-$300 range (or less, if possible), used, probably Ebay. Any recommendations are greatly appreciated. Edit:And, to catch this before the comments start coming - these are personal systems. I have first-generation Proliants still in use (I got them as corporate surplus in 05, they've been running since then, and probably were running since 01 or 02 prior to being sold). I don't need anything shiny and new - I've got a bunch of old boxes, at least one complete replacement for every model in use, and that's fine for me (and easy on the wallet).

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67  | Next Page >