On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 02:33:30PM -0600, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
to noun v. 1. To use a word as a noun rather than its standard grammatical
role. Most often applied to verbs and adjectives. When a word is used this
way, the implied meaning is someone or something filling the role of
On Wednesday 2008 December 17 15:11:39 Chris Bannister wrote:
On Sun, Dec 14, 2008 at 02:33:30PM -0600, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
to noun v. 1. To use a word as a noun rather than its standard
grammatical role. Most often applied to verbs and adjectives. When a
word is used this way,
--- On Sun, 12/14/08, Chris Bannister mockingb...@earthlight.co.nz wrote:
From: Chris Bannister mockingb...@earthlight.co.nz
Subject: Re: [OT] Server for Debian + MySQL
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Date: Sunday, December 14, 2008, 6:32 AM
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 10:02:14AM -0600, Boyd
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 10:02:14AM -0600, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/disconnect
I don't know how long the noun usage has been around, but I remember hearing
it as a child (20 years ago), so I'd say you just need to update your
dictionary. (1913 Websters,
Chris Bannister wrote:
Yeah, apparently awful originally meant full of awe
This is the perfect time for a Terry Pratchett quote:
Elves are wonderful. They provoke wonder.
Elves are marvellous. They cause marvels.
Elves are fantastic. They create fantasies.
Elves are glamorous. They project
Chris Bannister wrote:
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 10:02:14AM -0600, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/disconnect
I don't know how long the noun usage has been around, but I remember hearing
it as a child (20 years ago), so I'd say you just need to update your
On 12/14/08 05:32, Chris Bannister wrote:
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 10:02:14AM -0600, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/disconnect
I don't know how long the noun usage has been around, but I remember hearing
it as a child (20 years ago), so I'd say you just need to
On Sunday 2008 December 14 05:32:16 Chris Bannister wrote:
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 10:02:14AM -0600, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/disconnect
I don't know how long the noun usage has been around, but I remember
hearing it as a child (20 years ago), so I'd say you
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 07:10:52AM -0600, Ron Johnson wrote:
On 12/11/08 02:02, Adrian Chapela wrote:
Ron Johnson escribi?:
On 12/10/08 20:09, kj wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
Large systems (meaning mainframes and traditional minicomputers
running legacy OSs) are never dedicated. They run
I think that the disconnect here is when one compares two different
types of computer based only on a comparision of their computational
power. Sure, the 1980-vintage 1.6 MIPS machine only had 6 MB ram (and
a...@tosh:~$ apt-cache show
On Friday 2008 December 12 09:08:15 Arc Roca wrote:
I think that the disconnect here is when one compares two different
Disconnect Dis`con*nect, v. t. [imp. p. p. Disconnected;
p. pr. vb. n. Disconnecting.]
To dissolve the union or
On 12/12/08 10:02, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
[snip]
Also, particularly where I come from (U.S.; specifically The South), English
speakers don't follow the formal rules of grammar well.
But at least we know that gals aren't guys -- or sheep -- and that
counts for a whole lot!
Ron Johnson escribió:
On 12/10/08 20:09, kj wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
Large systems (meaning mainframes and traditional minicomputers
running legacy OSs) are never dedicated. They run application
software as well as RDBMSs.
OK, we're talking about two different things.
Translating that
On 12/11/08 02:02, Adrian Chapela wrote:
Ron Johnson escribió:
On 12/10/08 20:09, kj wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
Large systems (meaning mainframes and traditional minicomputers
running legacy OSs) are never dedicated. They run application
software as well as RDBMSs.
OK, we're talking about
Ron Johnson escribió:
On 12/11/08 02:02, Adrian Chapela wrote:
Ron Johnson escribió:
On 12/10/08 20:09, kj wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
Large systems (meaning mainframes and traditional
minicomputers running legacy OSs) are never dedicated. They run
application software as well as RDBMSs.
Ron Johnson wrote:
The grumpy geezer in me says you make a dedicated DB server only if
your hardware and/or OS isn't up to snuff, or your RDBMS is a horrible
pig, and that any modern desktop PC should have enough juice to
support an RDBMS, dozens applications and 10,000 OLTP users.
Like I
Ron Johnson escribió:
On 12/09/08 03:49, kj wrote:
Anoop Aryal wrote:
Just curious, how big of a difference (indeed, what difference) does
64bit make?
It will make all the difference on a box with 16GB. On a 32bit
machine, you can use a PAE enabled kernel to allow the operating
system to
Ron Johnson wrote:
On 12/09/08 03:49, kj wrote:
Anoop Aryal wrote:
Just curious, how big of a difference (indeed, what difference) does
64bit make?
It will make all the difference on a box with 16GB. On a 32bit
machine, you can use a PAE enabled kernel to allow the operating
system to
On 12/10/08 05:34, kj wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
On 12/09/08 03:49, kj wrote:
Anoop Aryal wrote:
Just curious, how big of a difference (indeed, what difference) does
64bit make?
It will make all the difference on a box with 16GB. On a 32bit
machine, you can use a PAE enabled kernel to
Ron Johnson wrote:
If the box is a dedicated DB server, then there aren't (shouldn't be)
any other applications running other than the essentials.
As a large systems developer, this (pervasive) attitude really
distresses me.
Why?
Maybe I should have said presumably, there won't be much
On 12/10/08 10:20, kj wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
If the box is a dedicated DB server, then there aren't (shouldn't be)
any other applications running other than the essentials.
As a large systems developer, this (pervasive) attitude really
distresses me.
Why?
Maybe I should have said
Ron Johnson wrote:
Large systems (meaning mainframes and traditional minicomputers
running legacy OSs) are never dedicated. They run application software
as well as RDBMSs.
OK, we're talking about two different things.
Translating that into modern times, a Linux box *should* be able to
On 12/10/08 20:09, kj wrote:
Ron Johnson wrote:
Large systems (meaning mainframes and traditional minicomputers
running legacy OSs) are never dedicated. They run application
software as well as RDBMSs.
OK, we're talking about two different things.
Translating that into modern times, a
Anoop Aryal escribió:
On Mon, 2008-12-08 at 13:18 +, kj wrote:
Adrian Chapela wrote:
I am thinking on a new server for my mision critical database server.
This server will have Debian OS and MySQL database server. Requisites:
2 CPU (minimun), 32 GB RAM, 2 TB for mysql data files
Anoop Aryal wrote:
Just curious, how big of a difference (indeed, what difference) does
64bit make?
It will make all the difference on a box with 16GB. On a 32bit machine,
you can use a PAE enabled kernel to allow the operating system to
address all the memory, but you're still stuck with
kj escribió:
Anoop Aryal wrote:
Just curious, how big of a difference (indeed, what difference) does
64bit make?
It will make all the difference on a box with 16GB. On a 32bit
machine, you can use a PAE enabled kernel to allow the operating
system to address all the memory, but you're
Adrian Chapela wrote:
kj escribió:
Anoop Aryal wrote:
Just curious, how big of a difference (indeed, what difference) does
64bit make?
It will make all the difference on a box with 16GB. On a 32bit
machine, you can use a PAE enabled kernel to allow the operating
system to address all the
On 12/09/08 03:49, kj wrote:
Anoop Aryal wrote:
Just curious, how big of a difference (indeed, what difference) does
64bit make?
It will make all the difference on a box with 16GB. On a 32bit machine,
you can use a PAE enabled kernel to allow the operating system to
address all the
Adrian Chapela wrote:
I am thinking on a new server for my mision critical database server.
This server will have Debian OS and MySQL database server. Requisites:
2 CPU (minimun), 32 GB RAM, 2 TB for mysql data files on SAS Hard
Disks, 500 GB for mysql binlog + system on SAS Hard Disks, RAID
On Mon, 2008-12-08 at 13:18 +, kj wrote:
Adrian Chapela wrote:
I am thinking on a new server for my mision critical database server.
This server will have Debian OS and MySQL database server. Requisites:
2 CPU (minimun), 32 GB RAM, 2 TB for mysql data files on SAS Hard
Disks, 500
30 matches
Mail list logo
