Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: nonsense on 25 Feb 2007 13:52 Ken Smith wrote: > In article <4f62c$45e0c567$cdd08488$22846(a)DIALUPUSA.NET>, > nonsense(a)unsettled.com <nonsense(a)unsettled.com> wrote: > >>Ken Smith wrote: > > [...] > >>>>You are not talking about swapping; you are talking about the >>>>working set of pages. You do NOT have to swap code if the >>>>storage disk is as fast as the swapping disk. >>> >>> >>>What the devil are you talking about? You were sort of making sense until >>>you got to this. The "swapping" under discussion is between the swap >>>volume and the physical RAM. The swap volume can never be anything like >>>as fast as the RAM. A VM system makes it appear that there is more RAM >>>than is physically there by using the swap volume. >>> >>>Do you think that computers still use drum storage or mumble tanks for the >>>memory. >> >>It could just be her shorthand but she still talks about >>"core" which I remember well, and differing speeds of >>hard drives, diskpacks, and so on. I wonder if she is still >>using an 80ms full sized hard drive on her home system. > > > It was "high speed" drum drives that were used for swap space in the > distant past. They were much faster than the disk drives of the era. > > > >>That being said, a great deal of what she has been writing >>attaches to really elementary computer and OS design which, >>offhand, reading both of you going at it, she seems to >>understand better. It seems to me you're a level or few away > >>from the sots of internals she worked with during her career. > > She doesn't have the grasp of hardware and when she tries to get into that > area, she doesn't realize that she is outside her area of knowledge. > Remember that most of this has been about device drivers and VM > implementations etc. In these areas you have a large insection between > the hardware and software. > > [....] > >>Most of those essentials haven't changed all that much. AFAIK >>the linux systems we're running continue to organize the hard >>drives much as early Unix organized tape magnetic storage. > > > Do you mean the hardware or the logical content. In either case you are > wrong about how things are done on most Linux boxes today. The Reiser > file system is what is used for the logical contents. The hardware is > typically SATA. > > The partitioning is still as it was in DOS days partly because the Linux > folks want to be able to work with DOS/Windows drives. Looks like Dennis Ritchie doesn't remember. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inode ReiserFS isn't universal among Unix/Linux systems. Reiser has been arrested for murdering his wife. http://www.ninareiser.com/ The FS may be at its end. See also http://www.ontrack.com/special/200501-LinuxReiserFS.aspx
From: MassiveProng on 25 Feb 2007 13:54 On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 10:08:15 -0800, The Ghost In The Machine <ewill(a)sirius.tg00suus7038.net> Gave us: > >Tape-based storage is still used, though nowadays the >"tapes" are a far different structure than the old 1/2" >reels commonly portrayed in old movies, or even the 1/4" >cartridge units some may be familiar with. Today's units >are weird-looking and designed to be used with automated >storage systems ("jukeboxes"). DAT, dude. Get a clue.
From: nonsense on 25 Feb 2007 13:55 Ken Smith wrote: > In article <ers29b$8qk_003(a)s1016.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>, > <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote: > >>In article <erpmth$c02$1(a)blue.rahul.net>, >> kensmith(a)green.rahul.net (Ken Smith) wrote: > > [.....] > >>>It isn't a corral. A corral implies a loss of freedom. I can still write >>>a check or see a teller if I want. >> >>For now. > > > ... and thus it will remain. > > >>>I can pay a bill while I'm at work of >>>on vacation. I have lost nothing. >> >>You have lost the physical paper trail. Doesn't it bother you >>that electronic checks can be applied against your account without >>any physical permission written by you? > > > The physical permission can be forged more easily than the electronic one. > When it gets to the bank, they do all the work electronically. As a > result, whether I do on line banking or not, the actual work is done > electronically. If the security in the bank and broken, not using on line > banking will not protect me. If you have a paper audit trail you have clear evidence of all your transactions in your hands. All other arguments are without substance.
From: MassiveProng on 25 Feb 2007 14:21 On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 17:08:37 -0600, "nonsense(a)unsettled.com" <nonsense(a)unsettled.com> Gave us: >Certainly that was true as recently as 5-7 years ago, but I >haven't messed with Linux on those levels in some time so >that *might* have changed though I see no reason why it >should have. (That and a buck will get you a cup of coffee.) > This from the idiot that said that the only proper Linux install is one where all available volumes get used by the OS, for the OS.
From: MassiveProng on 25 Feb 2007 14:42
On Sun, 25 Feb 07 12:27:46 GMT, jmfbahciv(a)aol.com Gave us: >No. It is memory whose addressing is larger than available physical >memory. It means that code segments that would be in MEMORY has to be offloaded onto slower, more permanent (intended for) storage mediums to be recalled later. The system takes a speed hit with VM, but is permitted to do tasks that would otherwise not be doable. All you have proven is that you know how to use a search engine. |