Search Results

Search found 30804 results on 1233 pages for 'hardware test'.

Page 7/1233 | < Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >

  • Workstation hardware at does your company buy developers?

    - by Bosh
    I'm curious to know what workstation hardware companies are devoting to you, as a developer -- and how much they're spending. I'd consider this thread a big success if I could shed some light on these questions: Do engineers at big companies use substantially different hardware than engineers at start-ups companies? Does a fresh developer recruit at Google get substantially different hardware from someone in the same position at Microsoft or Yahoo!? Do programmers in more senior positions have more powerful hardware on their desks? Does anyone think faster hardware makes more efficient engineers?

    Read the article

  • Feeding a Dog Remotely - hardware?

    - by RobDude
    I'm looking for a way to, remotely, activate some sort of treat dispenser. I'm not a hardware guy, and I'm sure that conceptually, this is very easy. But I don't know how to begin. I haven't found any products designed to do exactly this. Perhaps some sort of beginning robotics kit could do it?

    Read the article

  • HP Proliant G7 hardware RAID configuration automation with ribcl

    - by karthik
    I have been trying to automate hardware RAID configuration of HP proliant machines before OS installation (So I can not use hpacucli) ssh into iLO3 doesn't have option for RAID configuration I use ribcl but there is no command for RAID config, however I see this under the command GET_EMBEDDED_HEALTH. <STORAGE> <CONTROLLER> <LABEL VALUE="Controller on System Board"/> <STATUS VALUE="OK"/> <CONTROLLER_STATUS VALUE="OK"/> <SERIAL_NUMBER VALUE="50014380215F0070"/> <MODEL VALUE="HP Smart Array P420i Controller"/> <FW_VERSION VALUE="3.41"/> <DRIVE_ENCLOSURE> <LABEL VALUE="Port 1I Box 1"/> <STATUS VALUE="OK"/> <DRIVE_BAY VALUE="04"/> </DRIVE_ENCLOSURE> <DRIVE_ENCLOSURE> <LABEL VALUE="Port 2I Box 0"/> <STATUS VALUE="OK"/> <DRIVE_BAY VALUE="01"/> </DRIVE_ENCLOSURE> <LOGICAL_DRIVE> <LABEL VALUE="01"/> <STATUS VALUE="OK"/> <CAPACITY VALUE="68 GB"/> <FAULT_TOLERANCE VALUE="RAID 0"/> <PHYSICAL_DRIVE> <LABEL VALUE="Port 1I Box 1 Bay 3"/> <STATUS VALUE="OK"/> <SERIAL_NUMBER VALUE="6TA0N3SZ0000B231CYDT"/> <MODEL VALUE="EH0072FAWJA"/> <CAPACITY VALUE="68 GB"/> <LOCATION VALUE="Port 1I Box 1 Bay 3"/> <FW_VERSION VALUE="HPDH"/> <DRIVE_CONFIGURATION VALUE="Configured"/> </PHYSICAL_DRIVE> </LOGICAL_DRIVE> </CONTROLLER> </STORAGE> My question is, is there a way I modify/create this xml piece (say I have 2 Logical drive with one spare) and reboot the server it takes effect ? If this approach is not correct are there any other ways to automate hardware raid config ?

    Read the article

  • Diagnosing iMac Hardware?

    - by Covar
    Recently my first generation Intel iMac that I've had since 2006 has begun to lock up and restart on me. Before I run off and spend $1500-$2000 on a new iMac, is there any good way to diagnose the hardware? I would like to know exactly what is going wrong so I know I won't be wasting my money when there is an easier fix.

    Read the article

  • Hardware needed for receiving and recording videcalls in Asterisk

    - by jneves
    I'm planning an Asterisk configuration that should record videocalls and then feed it to an application. From what I've researched, it seems like app_h234m is the way to go (http://www.voip-info.org/wiki/view/Asterisk+app_h324m+compatibility). But it's not clear to me what are the hardware requirements for this. Can someone enlighten me?

    Read the article

  • Need a hardware solution for remote controling a PC

    - by ShacharWeis
    Hello We have kiosk computers scattered around the country, and are using VNC to control them. But VNC has limitations (only works if the OS is intact, for instance). I want to be able to control the computer even if it is stuck in boot. Is there a cheap hardware solution for remote controlling a PC ? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Oracle Linux and Oracle VM Hardware Certification Program

    - by Durgam Vahia
    The Oracle Linux and Oracle VM are continuing to see growth in IHV (Independent Hardware Vendor) ecosystem. The Oracle Linux and Oracle VM Hardware Certification Program, also referred as HCL, provides a formal means for hardware vendors to work with Oracle to establish high quality support for the certified hardware platform. Since the beginning of the program, number of hardware partners have certified range of server platforms on Oracle Linux and Oracle VM. Currently, HCL lists over 400 certifications from 10 server vendors and the list continues to grow at a rapid pace. New hardware certification involves close collaboration between Oracle and server partner to ensure that adequate testing is performed on the target server and results are thoroughly reviewed. This rigorous process ensures that when new hardware platform is listed on HCL, it has full support from both Oracle and the respective partner. Additionally, once a certification is achieved with Oracle Linux with the current version of Unbreakable Enterprise Kernel, future minor updates of the software continue to carry over the certification, reducing the need for a re-certification. For the complete list of certified hardware, please visit Oracle Linux and Oracle VM Certified Hardware. Also refer to Frequently Asked Questions for more information.

    Read the article

  • XSD: how to use 'unique' & 'key'/'keyref' with element values?

    - by Koohoolinn
    I trying to use and / with element values but I just can't get it to work. If I do it with attrubute values it works like a charm. Test.xml <test:config xmlns:test="http://www.example.org/Test" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.example.org/Test Test.xsd "> <test:location id="id1" path="/path2"> <test:roles> <test:role>role1</test:role> <test:role>role2</test:role> <test:role>role2</test:role> <!-- DUPLICATE: FAIL VALIDATION --> </test:roles> <test:action name="action1"> <test:roles> <test:role>role1</test:role> <test:role>role1</test:role> <!-- DUPLICATE: FAIL VALIDATION --> <test:role>role3</test:role> <!-- NOT DEFINED: FAIL VALIDATION --> </test:roles> </test:action> </test:location> </test:config> I want ensure that roles are only defined once and that the roles defined under the action element are only those defined at the upper level. Test.xsd <xs:element name="config"> <xs:complexType> <xs:sequence> <xs:element ref="test:location" maxOccurs="unbounded" /> </xs:sequence> </xs:complexType> </xs:element> <xs:element name="location" type="test:LocationType"> <xs:key name="keyRole"> <xs:selector xpath="test:roles" /> <xs:field xpath="test:role" /> </xs:key> <xs:keyref name="keyrefRole" refer="test:keyRole"> <xs:selector xpath="test:action/test:roles" /> <xs:field xpath="test:role" /> </xs:keyref> </xs:element> <xs:complexType name="LocationType"> <xs:sequence> <xs:element ref="test:roles" minOccurs="0" /> <xs:element name="action" type="test:ActionType" minOccurs="0" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> </xs:sequence> <xs:attribute name="id" type="xs:string" use="required"/> <xs:attribute name="path" type="xs:string" use="required"/> </xs:complexType> <xs:element name="roles" type="test:RolesType"> <xs:unique name="uniqueRole"> <xs:selector xpath="." /> <xs:field xpath="test:role" /> </xs:unique> </xs:element> <xs:complexType name="RolesType"> <xs:sequence> <xs:element name="role" type="xs:string" maxOccurs="unbounded"/> </xs:sequence> </xs:complexType> <xs:complexType name="ActionType"> <xs:sequence> <xs:element ref="test:roles" /> </xs:sequence> <xs:attribute name="name" type="xs:string" use="required" /> </xs:complexType> The validation fails with these messages: Description Resource Path Location Type cvc-identity-constraint.3: Field "./test:role" of identity constraint "keyrefRole" matches more than one value within the scope of its selector; fields must match unique values. Test.xml /filebrowser-ejb/src/test/resources line 15 XML Problem cvc-identity-constraint.3: Field "./test:role" of identity constraint "keyrefRole" matches more than one value within the scope of its selector; fields must match unique values. Test.xml /filebrowser-ejb/src/test/resources line 16 XML Problem cvc-identity-constraint.3: Field "./test:role" of identity constraint "keyRole" matches more than one value within the scope of its selector; fields must match unique values. Test.xml /filebrowser-ejb/src/test/resources line 9 XML Problem cvc-identity-constraint.3: Field "./test:role" of identity constraint "keyRole" matches more than one value within the scope of its selector; fields must match unique values. Test.xml /filebrowser-ejb/src/test/resources line 10 XML Problem cvc-identity-constraint.3: Field "./test:role" of identity constraint "uniqueRole" matches more than one value within the scope of its selector; fields must match unique values. Test.xml /filebrowser-ejb/src/test/resources line 9 XML Problem cvc-identity-constraint.3: Field "./test:role" of identity constraint "uniqueRole" matches more than one value within the scope of its selector; fields must match unique values. Test.xml /filebrowser-ejb/src/test/resources line 10 XML Problem cvc-identity-constraint.3: Field "./test:role" of identity constraint "uniqueRole" matches more than one value within the scope of its selector; fields must match unique values. Test.xml /filebrowser-ejb/src/test/resources line 15 XML Problem cvc-identity-constraint.3: Field "./test:role" of identity constraint "uniqueRole" matches more than one value within the scope of its selector; fields must match unique values. Test.xml /filebrowser-ejb/src/test/resources line 16 XML Problem cvc-identity-constraint.4.1: Duplicate unique value [role1] declared for identity constraint "uniqueRole" of element "roles". Test.xml /filebrowser-ejb/src/test/resources line 9 XML Problem cvc-identity-constraint.4.1: Duplicate unique value [role1] declared for identity constraint "uniqueRole" of element "roles". Test.xml /filebrowser-ejb/src/test/resources line 15 XML Problem cvc-identity-constraint.4.2.2: Duplicate key value [role1] declared for identity constraint "keyRole" of element "location". Test.xml /filebrowser-ejb/src/test/resources line 9 XML Problem cvc-identity-constraint.4.3: Key 'keyrefRole' with value 'role3' not found for identity constraint of element 'location'. Test.xml /filebrowser-ejb/src/test/resources line 19 XML Problem If I comment out the lines that should fail, validation still fails now with these messages: Description Resource Path Location Type cvc-identity-constraint.3: Field "./test:role" of identity constraint "keyRole" matches more than one value within the scope of its selector; fields must match unique values. Test.xml /filebrowser-ejb/src/test/resources line 10 XML Problem cvc-identity-constraint.3: Field "./test:role" of identity constraint "uniqueRole" matches more than one value within the scope of its selector; fields must match unique values. Test.xml /filebrowser-ejb/src/test/resources line 10 XML Problem What am I doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • “It’s only test code…”

    - by Chris George
    “Let me hack this in, it’s only test code”, “Don’t worry about getting it reviewed, it’s only test code”, “It doesn’t have to be elegant or efficient, it’s only test code”… do these phrases sound familiar? Chances are if you’ve working with test automation, at one point or other you will have heard these phrases, you have probably even used them yourself! What is certain is that code written under this “it’s only test code” mantra will come back and bite you in the arse! I’ve recently encountered a case where a test was giving a false positive, therefore hiding a real product bug because that test code was very badly written. Firstly it was very difficult to understand what the test was actually trying to achieve let alone how it was doing it, and this complexity masked a simple logic error. These issues are real and they do happen. Let’s take a step back from this and look at what we are trying to do. We are writing test code that tests product code, and we do this to create a suite of tests that will help protect our software against regressions. This test code is making sure that the product behaves as it should by employing some sort of expected result verification. The simple cases of these are generally not a problem. However, automation allows us to explore more complex scenarios in many more permutations. As this complexity increases then so does the complexity of the test code. It is at this point that code which has not been architected properly will cause problems.   Keep your friends close… So, how do we make sure we are doing it right? The development teams I have worked on have always had Test Engineers working very closely with their Software Engineers. This is something that I have always tried to take full advantage of. They are coding experts! So run your ideas past them, ask for advice on how to structure your code, help you design your data structures. This may require a shift in your teams viewpoint, as contrary to this section title and folklore, Software Engineers are not actually the mortal enemy of Test Engineers. As time progresses, and test automation becomes more and more ingrained in what we do, the two roles are converging more than ever. Over the 16 years I have spent as a Test Engineer, I have seen the grey area between the two roles grow significantly larger. This serves to strengthen the relationship and common bond between the two roles which helps to make test code activities so much easier!   Pair for the win Possibly the best thing you could do to write good test code is to pair program on the task. This will serve a few purposes. you will get the benefit of the Software Engineers knowledge and experience the Software Engineer will gain knowledge on the testing process. Sharing the love is a wonderful thing! two pairs of eyes are always better than one… And so are two brains. Between the two of you, I will guarantee you will derive more useful test cases than if it was just one of you.   Code reviews Another policy which certainly pays dividends is the practice of code reviews. By having one of your peers review your code before you commit it serves two purposes. Firstly, it forces you to explain your code. Just the act of doing this will often pick up errors in your code. Secondly, it gets yet another pair of eyes on your code! I cannot stress enough how important code reviews are. The benefits they offer apply as much to product code as test code. In short, Software and Test Engineers should all be doing them! It can be extended even further by getting test code reviewed by a Software Engineer and a Test Engineer, and likewise product code. This serves to keep both functions in the loop with changes going on within your code base.   Learn from your devs I briefly touched on this earlier but I’d like to go into more detail here. Pairing with your Software Engineers when writing your test code is such an amazing opportunity to improve your coding skills. As I sit here writing this article waiting to be called into court for jury service, it reminds me that it takes a lot of patience to be a Test Engineer, almost as much as it takes to be a juror! However tempting it is to go rushing in and start writing your automated tests, resist that urge. Discuss what you want to achieve then talk through the approach you’re going to take. Then code it up together. I find it really enlightening to ask questions like ‘is there a better way to do this?’ Or ‘is this how you would code it?’ The latter question, especially, is where I learn the most. I’ve found that most Software Engineers will be reluctant to show you the ‘right way’ to code something when writing tests because they perceive the ‘right way’ to be too complicated for the Test Engineer (e.g. not mentioning LINQ and instead doing something verbose). So by asking how THEY would code it, it unleashes their true dev-ness and advanced code usually ensues! I would like to point out, however, that you don’t have to accept their method as the final answer. On numerous occasions I have opted for the more simple/verbose solution because I found the code written by the Software Engineer too advanced and therefore I would find it unreadable when I return to the code in a months’ time! Always keep the target audience in mind when writing clever code, and in my case that is mostly Test Engineers.  

    Read the article

  • Testing Workflows &ndash; Test-First

    - by Timothy Klenke
    Originally posted on: http://geekswithblogs.net/TimothyK/archive/2014/05/30/testing-workflows-ndash-test-first.aspxThis is the second of two posts on some common strategies for approaching the job of writing tests.  The previous post covered test-after workflows where as this will focus on test-first.  Each workflow presented is a method of attack for adding tests to a project.  The more tools in your tool belt the better.  So here is a partial list of some test-first methodologies. Ping Pong Ping Pong is a methodology commonly used in pair programing.  One developer will write a new failing test.  Then they hand the keyboard to their partner.  The partner writes the production code to get the test passing.  The partner then writes the next test before passing the keyboard back to the original developer. The reasoning behind this testing methodology is to facilitate pair programming.  That is to say that this testing methodology shares all the benefits of pair programming, including ensuring multiple team members are familiar with the code base (i.e. low bus number). Test Blazer Test Blazing, in some respects, is also a pairing strategy.  The developers don’t work side by side on the same task at the same time.  Instead one developer is dedicated to writing tests at their own desk.  They write failing test after failing test, never touching the production code.  With these tests they are defining the specification for the system.  The developer most familiar with the specifications would be assigned this task. The next day or later in the same day another developer fetches the latest test suite.  Their job is to write the production code to get those tests passing.  Once all the tests pass they fetch from source control the latest version of the test project to get the newer tests. This methodology has some of the benefits of pair programming, namely lowering the bus number.  This can be good way adding an extra developer to a project without slowing it down too much.  The production coder isn’t slowed down writing tests.  The tests are in another project from the production code, so there shouldn’t be any merge conflicts despite two developers working on the same solution. This methodology is also a good test for the tests.  Can another developer figure out what system should do just by reading the tests?  This question will be answered as the production coder works there way through the test blazer’s tests. Test Driven Development (TDD) TDD is a highly disciplined practice that calls for a new test and an new production code to be written every few minutes.  There are strict rules for when you should be writing test or production code.  You start by writing a failing (red) test, then write the simplest production code possible to get the code working (green), then you clean up the code (refactor).  This is known as the red-green-refactor cycle. The goal of TDD isn’t the creation of a suite of tests, however that is an advantageous side effect.  The real goal of TDD is to follow a practice that yields a better design.  The practice is meant to push the design toward small, decoupled, modularized components.  This is generally considered a better design that large, highly coupled ball of mud. TDD accomplishes this through the refactoring cycle.  Refactoring is only possible to do safely when tests are in place.  In order to use TDD developers must be trained in how to look for and repair code smells in the system.  Through repairing these sections of smelly code (i.e. a refactoring) the design of the system emerges. For further information on TDD, I highly recommend the series “Is TDD Dead?”.  It discusses its pros and cons and when it is best used. Acceptance Test Driven Development (ATDD) Whereas TDD focuses on small unit tests that concentrate on a small piece of the system, Acceptance Tests focuses on the larger integrated environment.  Acceptance Tests usually correspond to user stories, which come directly from the customer. The unit tests focus on the inputs and outputs of smaller parts of the system, which are too low level to be of interest to the customer. ATDD generally uses the same tools as TDD.  However, ATDD uses fewer mocks and test doubles than TDD. ATDD often complements TDD; they aren’t competing methods.  A full test suite will usually consist of a large number of unit (created via TDD) tests and a smaller number of acceptance tests. Behaviour Driven Development (BDD) BDD is more about audience than workflow.  BDD pushes the testing realm out towards the client.  Developers, managers and the client all work together to define the tests. Typically different tooling is used for BDD than acceptance and unit testing.  This is done because the audience is not just developers.  Tools using the Gherkin family of languages allow for test scenarios to be described in an English format.  Other tools such as MSpec or FitNesse also strive for highly readable behaviour driven test suites. Because these tests are public facing (viewable by people outside the development team), the terminology usually changes.  You can’t get away with the same technobabble you can with unit tests written in a programming language that only developers understand.  For starters, they usually aren’t called tests.  Usually they’re called “examples”, “behaviours”, “scenarios”, or “specifications”. This may seem like a very subtle difference, but I’ve seen this small terminology change have a huge impact on the acceptance of the process.  Many people have a bias that testing is something that comes at the end of a project.  When you say we need to define the tests at the start of the project many people will immediately give that a lower priority on the project schedule.  But if you say we need to define the specification or behaviour of the system before we can start, you’ll get more cooperation.   Keep these test-first and test-after workflows in your tool belt.  With them you’ll be able to find new opportunities to apply them.

    Read the article

  • CPU Usage at 100% with "Hardware Interrupts"

    - by eventualEntropy
    After turning on my desktop one day, I found that my CPU usage was maxed out at 100%, with 99% of that going to hardware "Interrupts". I tried to enable/disable all my devices one by one through the device manager, and found that I could get the CPU usage used by the Interrupts down to 50% by disabling all devices labelled "USB Host Controller" (except the ones for the mouse/keyboard). I found that I also got 10-20% more from disabling "High Definition Audio Controller". Following the tutorial at: http://www.msfn.org/board/topic/140263-how-to-get-the-cause-of-high-cpu-usage-by-dpc-interrupt/ Led me to similar conclusions (that is, that the culprit is mostly "USB Host Controller"): I've tried updating my asus motherboard driver and my video card driver. This is on Windows 7 64 bit. I've spent hours trying to figure this out and I'm running out of ideas short of formatting (which might still not fix it!).

    Read the article

  • Virtual server hardware to simulate 3-4 node web farm

    - by frankadelic
    I would like to get a dedicated server to run VMWare, VirtualBox, or similar. On this box, I would like to host 3-4 virtual instances of Linux, to act as nodes in a web farm. Performance is not that important, this would only be for testing and experimenting. I need something sub $1000 (including tax/shipping). Can someone recommend a pre-built server that would do the trick? I am pretty ignorant of hardware so building one is not going to work for me. Also, would I need multiple network cards to simulate a web farm or can the virtualization software handle that for me. Thanks

    Read the article

  • How to Diagnose a Pre-Operating System Load or Hardware Issue

    - by soandos
    How can I find out if my problem is hardware based? If it is, how can I figure out what component is to blame How can I fix other pre-operating system issues? As an aside, what are all of these components responsible for, and if they break, what can go wrong? (This question comes up frequently, and the suggested solutions are usually the same. This community wiki is an attempt to serve as the definitive, most comprehensive answer possible. Feel free to add your contributions via edits.)

    Read the article

  • Hardware asset management systems

    - by Dave
    I need to track a bunch of specialized testing tools, They are hardware devices used for testing other equipement. Each device has a serial number and is sent out for use in testing. Occasionally they break and have to be sent to the manufacture for repair. I'm looking for an open source application (preferably a webapp) to help manage them. Right now we're using Excel and it's not scaling as we get more tools. They aren't computers so all the standard IT asset management systems don't really fit the bill. I found h-harmony, but that project seems dead?

    Read the article

  • VirtualBox won't use any kind of hardware acceleration

    - by burnersk
    I see an problem with VirtualBox hardware acceleration functionality... My system configuration: MSI PH67A-C43 (B3) (BIOS: 2.70) Intel Core i5-2400 Windows 7 Professional SP1 64-bit Oracle VirtualBox 4.1.10 Oracle VirtualBox Extension Pack 4.1.10 I can select the individual acceleration options such as PAE/NX, VT-x/VMD-V or Nested Paging within VM-Settings but if I start the VM the accelerations will be disabled as of the tooltip from CPU (right next to shared folders). Each acceleration is "Disabled". Does this sounds familar to anybody? How can I solve this?

    Read the article

  • Rules to choose hardware for OLTP systems (sql server)

    - by Roman Pokrovskij
    Ok. We know database size, number of concurrent users, number of transactions per minute; should choose number of processors, RAID, RAM, mirroring and clustering. There are no exact rule.. but may be there are no rules at all? In my practice in every case I have "legacy" system, and after some inspections and interview I can form an opinion how hardware and design can be improved. But every time when I meet "absolutely" new system (I guess there are no new systems, but sometimes are such tasks) I can't say anything trustful. So I'm interesting how people deal with such tasks? They map task on theirs experience or have some base formulas?

    Read the article

  • Server 2008 R2 Datacenter (and all other version) not detecting hardware

    - by Mitchell Skurnik
    I upgraded my ASUS KFN32-D SLI/SAS motherboard to the latest BIOS version and swapped out the 2 dual-core procs with 2 quad core procs. After installing Server 2008 Datacenter onto the system I noticed that it was not connected to the network. I open device manager and see no network adapters. I have to go up to View - Show hidden devices to even see the virtual WAN Miniport adapters. This problem happens in Vista and Windows 7 (all x64). What is even stranger is it all works in x86 mode. What in x64 could be causing windows to not even detect hardware that works in x86? Is the boot manager possibly the culprit?

    Read the article

  • Windows 2008 Server on VMWare (hardware)

    - by Bill
    I want to setup a single server to run a few virtual servers for our datacenter. I do not have a lot of money to spend so I am trying to gain bang for the buck. My budget is around $2,000. So I was thinking about building the following as the VMWare physical server: Intel iCore 7 950 (LGA1366, 4 cores,8 threads) Gigabyte GA-X58-USB3 LGA 1366 X58 ATX Intel Motherboard 24 GB of Viper II Series, Sector 7 Edition, Extreme Performance DDR3-1600 (PC3-12800) CL9 Triple Channel Memory VelociRaptor 300GB 10,000 RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s 3.5" Internal Hard Drive I am planning on running the newest version of VMWare ESXi (64-bit). On these I am planning on running a few various servers: Windows 2008 Server R2 w/ IIS (several custom built ASP.NET Apps) Windows 2008 Server R2 w/ MS SQL 2008 Database Server Linux Web Server w/ Several WordPress Blogs (XAMPP?) Windows 2008 Server R2 w/ IIS (DEV ENVIRONMENT) Windows 2008 Server R2 w/ MS SQL 2008 Database Server (DEV ENVIRONMENT) In your opinion, will this hardware be sufficient to run the above load with room for possible 2-3 more virtual machines (probably lightweight web servers)?

    Read the article

  • Hardware specs for web cache

    - by Raj
    I am looking for recommendations for hardware specs for a server that needs to be a web cache for a user population of about 2,000 concurrent connections. The clients are viewing segmented HTTP video in bitrates ranging from 150kbps to 2mbps. Most video is "live" meaning segments of 2-10 secs each, of which 100 or so are maintained at a time. There are also some pre-recorded fixed length videos. How would I go about doing the provisioning calculation for such a server: What kind of HDD (SSD?), how many NICs how much RAM etc? I am thinking of using Varnish on Linux, all the RAM I can get my hands on, 2 CPUs with 6-8 cores each.

    Read the article

  • Does programmable hardware exist to allow hardware to be programmed by computers?

    - by agentbanks217
    I am a programmer and I have never really dealt with the hardware of anything, only software. I want to start building things that I can control from my computer using programming. My question is are there such devices on the market that have a programmable interface or API? For example, I want to build a automated window blinds opening/closing device, and I would like to be able to control it from my computer e.g. writing an app or some code to schedule them when to open and close. I would like to know if there are any devices that can be programmed to do that (the computer part)? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • ext4 filesystem corruption -- maybe hardware error?

    - by pts
    I'm getting these errors in dmesg after about half an hour after I turn on the computer: [ 1355.677957] EXT4-fs error (device sda2): htree_dirblock_to_tree: inode #1318420: (comm updatedb.mlocat) bad entry in directory: directory entry across blocks - block=5251700offset=0(0), inode=1802725748, rec_len=179136, name_len=32 [ 1355.677973] Aborting journal on device sda2-8. [ 1355.678101] EXT4-fs (sda2): Remounting filesystem read-only [ 1355.690144] EXT4-fs error (device sda2): htree_dirblock_to_tree: inode #1318416: (comm updatedb.mlocat) bad entry in directory: directory entry across blocks - block=5251699offset=0(0), inode=2194783952, rec_len=53280, name_len=152 [ 1356.864720] EXT4-fs error (device sda2): htree_dirblock_to_tree: inode #1312795: (comm updatedb.mlocat) bad entry in directory: directory entry across blocks - block=5251176offset=1460(13748), inode=1432317541, rec_len=208208, name_len=119 /dev/sda is an SSD, and it's using the noop scheduler. /etc/fstab entry: UUID=acb4eefa-48ff-4ee1-bb5f-2dccce7d011f / ext4 errors=remount-ro,noatime,discard,user_xattr 0 1 System information: $ cat /proc/mounts | grep /dev/sd /dev/sda1 /boot ext2 rw,noatime,errors=continue 0 0 $ cat /etc/lsb-release DISTRIB_ID=Ubuntu DISTRIB_RELEASE=10.04 DISTRIB_CODENAME=lucid DISTRIB_DESCRIPTION="Ubuntu 10.04.3 LTS" $ uname -a Linux leetpad 2.6.35-30-generic-pae #61~lucid1-Ubuntu SMP Thu Oct 13 21:14:29 UTC 2011 i686 GNU/Linux I've run memtest for 7 hours, it didn't found any memory errors. Any obvious ideas what can go wrong in this case? The most reasonable thing I can imagine is that the SSD is silently dropping some write requests, which eventually leads to an EXT4 filesystem inconsistency (but no disk I/O errors). How can this happen? Is there a relevant configuration option I should ensure to be set correctly? What tools should I use to diagnose the hardware failures? Would it be possible to diagnose the SSD failure without overwriting data?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >