Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-15 Thread krad
On 14 February 2011 23:55, Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com wrote:
 On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 03:32:30PM -0800, Chuck Swiger wrote:

 From what I understand (a quick review of wikipedia helps :), modern
 flash cards are now typically rated for 100K writes, include ECC bits
 to actually correct or at least detect errors and try to remap bad
 blocks to unused blocks, and implement wear-leveling techniques of
 varying degrees of effectiveness.

 Regards,
 --
 -Chuck

 PS: Reposted from a NetBSD thread, was
 d5af2a8e-fef0-467e-be4a-b01243e21...@mac.com

 Just make sure you double-check the rating for the specific SSD storage
 hardware you're actually using.  The fact the state of the art is better
 now than it was does not mean you are using state of the art hardware.

 --
 Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]


We have the main DB server on our portal running directly on some of
these http://www.oracle.com/us/043970.pdf. Its a high volume site so
we really needed the speed. They are supposed to last 6 years but we
shall see. We have the 1 TB version, all mirrored giving us 500 GB. We
run solaris 10 on top with zfs, so we should see any data corruption
very quickly if it starts to happen. The cluster has been running for
about a year now
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-14 Thread Polytropon
On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 22:10:47 -0800, per...@pluto.rain.com wrote:
 Chip Camden sterl...@camdensoftware.com wrote:
 
  But for users who do not wish to learn anything ...
  the Microsoft Way fits the bill.
 ^
 
 Of course.  It's his company.  But does it fit anyone else?

It perfectly fits the round depot G. :-)

It's a common misbelief that Windows doesn't involve learning.
IT DOES. Furthermore, this misbelief is strenghtened by the
typical habit of Windows users to delegate problems they
encounter to others (who then solve the problems, or even do
the pending work). You would wonder how many problem people
have who have never seen a Windows before and are now forced
to try to do any serious work with that. Even the relation
between the foot pedal and the white triangle, let
alone the letter board, is too complicated for many.
I could see that in reality...



-- 
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-14 Thread David Brodbeck
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 10:12 AM, Frank Shute fr...@shute.org.uk wrote:
 Agreed. I posted my short experience of using an SSD as a workstation
 drive and I'd be interested in hearing the experience of any other
 users. Problems? Praise? Let's hear it.

While not quite a workstation application, in a previous job I helped
maintain industrial PCs that booted cut-down Windows 95 installs off
of 128 megabyte CompactFlash cards.  As SSDs go this was pretty
primitive stuff.  We had very few problems with this setup.  This was
just FAT, no special SSD support.

I also have a netbook with an SSD I've used heavily for the last three
years with no problems.  My only complaint about that one is the write
performance is rather slow, it being an SSD optimized for power
consumption instead of speed.

I would be curious to hear stories from people who actually *have* run
into SSD failures related to write limitations.  I've heard a lot of
speculation but no actual anecdotes.  I'm sure they're out there; but
I also know people are more likely to complain when things go wrong
than talk about things going right, so my suspicion is it must be
rare.
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-14 Thread Chuck Swiger
Hi--

On Feb 14, 2011, at 3:17 PM, David Brodbeck wrote:
 I would be curious to hear stories from people who actually *have* run
 into SSD failures related to write limitations.  I've heard a lot of
 speculation but no actual anecdotes.  I'm sure they're out there; but
 I also know people are more likely to complain when things go wrong
 than talk about things going right, so my suspicion is it must be
 rare.

Back around 2005 / 2006, we were using a bunch of Soekris 4511's, IIRC, running 
NetBSD and a network IDS we'd been working on, which possibly generated 100s of 
MB to a few GB of logging per day.  Whoever did the initial setup didn't 
realize that the flash cards of that timeframe were limited to 10K writes or 
so, and after a few months you started getting 16K chunks of old logfile data, 
or 16K chunks of new and old logfile data corrupted together-- looked to be a 
binary OR of the 0 bits.

Nothing reported that writes were failing-- evidently the flash cards didn't 
notice an error and thus didn't report it back to the system.  Switching /var 
to tmpfs resolved the issue for us.

From what I understand (a quick review of wikipedia helps :), modern flash 
cards are now typically rated for 100K writes, include ECC bits to actually 
correct or at least detect errors and try to remap bad blocks to unused 
blocks, and implement wear-leveling techniques of varying degrees of 
effectiveness.

Regards,
-- 
-Chuck

PS: Reposted from a NetBSD thread, was 
d5af2a8e-fef0-467e-be4a-b01243e21...@mac.com
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-14 Thread Chad Perrin
On Mon, Feb 14, 2011 at 03:32:30PM -0800, Chuck Swiger wrote:
 
 From what I understand (a quick review of wikipedia helps :), modern
 flash cards are now typically rated for 100K writes, include ECC bits
 to actually correct or at least detect errors and try to remap bad
 blocks to unused blocks, and implement wear-leveling techniques of
 varying degrees of effectiveness.
 
 Regards,
 -- 
 -Chuck
 
 PS: Reposted from a NetBSD thread, was
 d5af2a8e-fef0-467e-be4a-b01243e21...@mac.com

Just make sure you double-check the rating for the specific SSD storage
hardware you're actually using.  The fact the state of the art is better
now than it was does not mean you are using state of the art hardware.

-- 
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]


pgpZEg3483gtE.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-13 Thread Odhiambo Washington
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com wrote:

 On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 07:12:08PM +0300, Odhiambo Washington wrote:
 
  I fail to understand why manufacturers would let people install SSDs on
  machines when their life is so much in question.

 I fail to see why a manufacturer would *not* want your hardware to wear
 out faster, since that would mean you would have to buy replacement
 hardware sooner.


 
  Can someone please enlighten me on the dangers faced by those who opt to
 get
  their laptops installed with SSDs?

 In many cases, particularly where there is quite a lot of RAM installed
 in the system and where people use a netbook the way it was intended to
 be used when designed (typically involving a lot of Web browsing and not
 much else), SSDs might be the best option -- especially given the rapid
 obsolescence of low-performance, ultra-portable units.  If you expect
 your hardware to last a long time, overrun physical RAM into swap space
 a lot, and (as you might with FreeBSD) compile code an awful lot, the
 heavier storage-write load might make more of a difference in the
 expected lifetime of the hardware.

 With FreeBSD, installing everything from binary packages can help
 mitigate the possible problems of shortening the life of your SSDs.

 Of course, if you care about having lots of storage, it's worth keeping
 in mind the fact that SSDs still cost a lot more per gigabyte of storage
 than rotating magnetic media (HDDs).


 
  I personally have one, with a Toshiba 128GB SSD (THNS128GG4BAAA-NonFDE).
 I
  am running Windows 7 on it.
 
  Should I stop and buy a SATA disk?:)

 Probably not.  You already have the SSD storage, and its improved
 performance for many operations (as well as improved durability under
 stress in the short term) can still be of benefit.  Just be sure you know
 when the usable lifespan of your SSD approaches, keep good backups (as
 you always should anyway), and be happy.

 You'd surely be happier with a better OS on it, though -- right?


Hehee,

Chad, on the Desktop, I'd rather run the ratware from Redmond than try
FreeBSD! The second choice would be Linusware (not that I know much about
it, but just because it seems to support certain aspects which would
otherwise be painful to get to work with FreeBSD). Third option is PC-BSD
(which is what you mean with better OS). All my servers run FreeBSD
though. The better OS is not so better at the Desktop, hence the choice of
ratware:-)

-- 
Best regards,
Odhiambo WASHINGTON,
Nairobi,KE
+254733744121/+254722743223
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Damn!!
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-13 Thread Chad Perrin
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 11:53:18AM +0300, Odhiambo Washington wrote:
 On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com wrote:
 
  You'd surely be happier with a better OS on it, though -- right?
 
 Chad, on the Desktop, I'd rather run the ratware from Redmond than try
 FreeBSD! The second choice would be Linusware (not that I know much about
 it, but just because it seems to support certain aspects which would
 otherwise be painful to get to work with FreeBSD). Third option is PC-BSD
 (which is what you mean with better OS). All my servers run FreeBSD
 though. The better OS is not so better at the Desktop, hence the choice of
 ratware:-)

You clearly have a different opinion of what constitutes a good OS than I
have.  I prefer a desktop/laptop OS that is stable, reasonably securable,
and productivity enhancing.  I do not find immense and unnecessary bloat,
a fundamentally broken approach to things like privilege separation, and
a GUI so pervasively bound to interfere that CPU can spike to near 100%
just by moving the mouse across the screen to meet those needs.

Perhaps the fact that I use my desktop/laptop systems for things like
writing code and articles rather than playing Guild Wars all day colors
my perceptions.

-- 
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]


pgpcWT52CVqfd.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-13 Thread Jerry
On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 02:23:53 -0700
Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com articulated:

 On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 11:53:18AM +0300, Odhiambo Washington wrote:
  On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 10:38 AM, Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com
  wrote:
  
   You'd surely be happier with a better OS on it, though -- right?
  
  Chad, on the Desktop, I'd rather run the ratware from Redmond
  than try FreeBSD! The second choice would be Linusware (not that I
  know much about it, but just because it seems to support certain
  aspects which would otherwise be painful to get to work with
  FreeBSD). Third option is PC-BSD (which is what you mean with
  better OS). All my servers run FreeBSD though. The better OS is
  not so better at the Desktop, hence the choice of ratware:-)
 
 You clearly have a different opinion of what constitutes a good OS
 than I have.  I prefer a desktop/laptop OS that is stable, reasonably
 securable, and productivity enhancing.  I do not find immense and
 unnecessary bloat, a fundamentally broken approach to things like
 privilege separation, and a GUI so pervasively bound to interfere
 that CPU can spike to near 100% just by moving the mouse across the
 screen to meet those needs.
 
 Perhaps the fact that I use my desktop/laptop systems for things like
 writing code and articles rather than playing Guild Wars all day
 colors my perceptions.

Bloat is a purely subjective term. What one user considers bloat
could very well be a requirement for another use. For example, while
you might consider it bloat to have drivers for modern wireless N
protocol cards, many other users have a real need for them.

I have four PC present working in my home. Three are FreeBSD machines
and one a Win7 one. The Windows machine is essential, if for no other
reason than there is software that is just not available on a FreeBSD
platform. Or if it is available, it is of very poor quality. MS Office
is a perfect example. Despite all of the rubbish the FOSS community has
spewed for over 10 years, OpenOffice is nothing more than a poor clone
of Office 97. The newly released libreoffice might be usable someday;
however, it is now only in its infancy. There is no way it can be
compared to a full blown MS Office 10 suite. Until the FOSS can write
applications that are not only compatible with, but as fully functional
as MS Office and similar software, as well as provide drivers in a
timely manner (and I am still waiting for Java to be updated to the
latest version so that it will work with the FreeBSD version of
Firefox, or for acroread9 to actually work and play well with others,
etc), Microsoft will always be a requirement for many end users.

This is in no way a condemnation of FreeBSD, or any other open-source
product. It is just a simple statement of fact. The majority of users,
despite what they may publicly proclaim, want software and hardware
that just works. I had installed an older nVidia GeForce GT 220 card in
an older PC and then discovered that there was no sound being emitted by
the machine. Wasting valuable time, I finally discovered that I had to
modify the sysctl.conf file. Crap like that should just not happen.
Things should just work. If other OS's can accomplish that feat, there
is no reasonable reason that FreeBSD cannot attain that level of
usability either, unless its goal is to remain nothing more than a
hobbyist's toy.

For the record, I have never played Guild Wars, although there are
many fine games available that are not available on the FreeBSD
platform. And no, I am not going to blame the authors of said software
for that since they have an absolute right, well maybe not according to
the EC aka ECUSSR, but in a normal and free business climate to write
and publish software in whatever OS language they desire. 

Just my 2¢.

-- 
Jerry ✌
freebsd.u...@seibercom.net

Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored.
Please do not ignore the Reply-To header.
__
There is never time to do it right, but always time to do it over.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-13 Thread Bruce Cran
On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 07:38:01 -0500
Jerry freebsd.u...@seibercom.net wrote:

 Despite all of the rubbish the FOSS community
 has spewed for over 10 years, OpenOffice is nothing more than a poor
 clone of Office 97. The newly released libreoffice might be usable
 someday; however, it is now only in its infancy. There is no way it
 can be compared to a full blown MS Office 10 suite.

For some, Office is unusable due to the new Ribbon interface and
libreoffice is the usable office suite due to its familiar menus.

-- 
Bruce Cran
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-13 Thread Polytropon
On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 07:38:01 -0500, Jerry freebsd.u...@seibercom.net wrote:
 Bloat is a purely subjective term.

It's not.



 What one user considers bloat
 could very well be a requirement for another use. For example, while
 you might consider it bloat to have drivers for modern wireless N
 protocol cards, many other users have a real need for them.

This would not be bloat in any regards. Bloat refers to
software that raises hardware requirements (or also software
requirements) for NO benefit at all. For example, a program
that re-implements existing functionality, but does it in
a way that the final result becomes much slower, more
vulnerable to attacks or generally more insecure, would
be bloat.

This is a relation between what software provides and what
it requires for that in chance.

A term in relation is overall usage speed which contains
things like system booting time, program loading time, time
needed for interaction and so on. The corresponding equation
would be
 software requirements
speed = ---
   hardware resources

which shows that if you increase both parts, the result will
stay constant. This is the explaination why a 386 with 40 MHz
and GEOS (Geoworks Ensemble) does not feel slower than a
current PC with plentycore processor and tenmelonhundred
Gigahertz and tons of RAM, running Windows and the
MICROS~1 office suite. This assumes that people do the
same things with both example systems, as they usually
do (here: generic example of word processing).

You can easily see that working (!) hardware support would
not be bloat. In opposite, it would be very WELCOME to have
support for wireless N protocol cards on ANY operating
system. But there are reasons why it is NOT the case.

This means that bloat is not specific to an OS. There are
systems that traditionally emphasize the development of
bloatware for their own marketing reasons, but you can also
find bloated software on efficient and secure systems.



 I have four PC present working in my home. Three are FreeBSD machines
 and one a Win7 one. The Windows machine is essential, if for no other
 reason than there is software that is just not available on a FreeBSD
 platform. Or if it is available, it is of very poor quality. MS Office
 is a perfect example. Despite all of the rubbish the FOSS community has
 spewed for over 10 years, OpenOffice is nothing more than a poor clone
 of Office 97. The newly released libreoffice might be usable someday;
 however, it is now only in its infancy. There is no way it can be
 compared to a full blown MS Office 10 suite.

Which ordinary people treat like a worse typewriter. :-)

I can see that there may be fields where office suites have
their right to exist. I've been working in a multi-OS place
where Linux, BSD, Mac boxes as well as some Windows have
been working quite cooperatively. The MICROS~1 office programs
always caused problems, and as the systems were all given a
OpenOffice installation, things magically worked.

This, keep in mind, is just a very individual observation
that does not claim to be applicable everywhere, just as
yours.



 Until the FOSS can write
 applications that are not only compatible with, but as fully functional
 as MS Office and similar software, as well as provide drivers in a
 timely manner

Just ask for the many different file format specifications for
DOC files. You do know where you need to ask, don't you? :-)

Honestly: If you need to open outdated or defective DOC files,
there is always OpenOffice which achieves what the MICROS~1
program can't.



 (and I am still waiting for Java to be updated to the
 latest version so that it will work with the FreeBSD version of
 Firefox, or for acroread9 to actually work and play well with others,
 etc), Microsoft will always be a requirement for many end users.

Many things you named work also on the Mac OS X platform
which is also essential to many end users. Also note that
Java and Acroread are just requirements for OTHER things,
as they are tools to support other fields of use. THOSE
fields are the ones creating the initial requirements
(e. g. changing file formats, language specifications,
arbitrary interface changes, and so on).



 This is in no way a condemnation of FreeBSD, or any other open-source
 product. It is just a simple statement of fact.

Which is to be seen in relation to reality.



 The majority of users,
 despite what they may publicly proclaim, want software and hardware
 that just works.

That's true. But MANUFACTURERS do not want such hardware, as
this is NOT the way to increase geowth. Just imagine you could
sell a just works PC that just works three years. Good
idea? No. Better sell a halfway works PC every year along
with a support bundle. If it doesn't break by itself, do it
in software: Feature X requires software Y, but software Y
requires hardware Z.

The NEEDS of the majority of users is NOT in the scope of
the manufacturers, or the 

Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-13 Thread Polytropon
On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 13:10:51 +, Bruce Cran br...@cran.org.uk wrote:
 For some, Office is unusable due to the new Ribbon interface and
 libreoffice is the usable office suite due to its familiar menus.

Users who have already used PCs are familiar with the menu
technique of functionality presentation. Scanning them is
a lot faster than trying to find things in an always-changing
context-sensitive Ribbon interface where things tend to
rearrange whatever your focus is currently on. On the
other hand, the Ribbon would be good for new users who do
not have to re-learn things and who are not good at thinking
in categories, or good at thinking at all. :-)

No, seriously: Provided certain parameters (big screen, no
established knowledge, no need for consistency, average
visual perception and discrimination abilities), the
Ribbon can benefit work. Just because *I* do not feel
familiar with it, it doesn't mean that others have to
judge the same way.

Oh, and you don't really need it when you already know
the keyboard shortcuts, which is ESSENTIAL for serious
work (because it's faster). :-)



-- 
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-13 Thread Jerry
On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 13:10:51 +
Bruce Cran br...@cran.org.uk articulated:

 On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 07:38:01 -0500
 Jerry freebsd.u...@seibercom.net wrote:
 
  Despite all of the rubbish the FOSS community
  has spewed for over 10 years, OpenOffice is nothing more than a poor
  clone of Office 97. The newly released libreoffice might be usable
  someday; however, it is now only in its infancy. There is no way it
  can be compared to a full blown MS Office 10 suite.
 
 For some, Office is unusable due to the new Ribbon interface and
 libreoffice is the usable office suite due to its familiar menus.

New, as in four years old? That is one of the worst straw man arguments
I have heard in a while. In any case, In 2008 OpenOffice.org started
the project Renaissance to improve the user interface of OpenOffice. So
far the prototypes of the project are frequently seen as similar to the
ribbon interface.

Obviously, the use and customization of any software is a personal
experience. However, if the use of the ribbon is beyond your
abilities, and I am assuming that you are aware that the ribbon can
be hidden, modified and that there are many add-ons available that
can be used to manage it, then so be it. I would rather work with an
application with a minor annoyance, and I do not find the ribbon to be
one, then to use a less robust application. Again, it is up to the end
user to ascertain their requirements and find the tool that is best
fitted to that job.

In any case, I am quite confident that your condemnation of the
ribbon is totally based on your reading of Slashdot and other similar
documents and not from any personal experience.

-- 
Jerry ✌
freebsd.u...@seibercom.net

Disclaimer: off-list followups get on-list replies or get ignored.
Please do not ignore the Reply-To header.
__
Knights are hardly worth it.
I mean, all that shell and so little meat...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-13 Thread Polytropon
On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 08:58:05 -0500, Jerry freebsd.u...@seibercom.net wrote:
 On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 13:10:51 +
 Bruce Cran br...@cran.org.uk articulated:
 
  On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 07:38:01 -0500
  Jerry freebsd.u...@seibercom.net wrote:
  
   Despite all of the rubbish the FOSS community
   has spewed for over 10 years, OpenOffice is nothing more than a poor
   clone of Office 97. The newly released libreoffice might be usable
   someday; however, it is now only in its infancy. There is no way it
   can be compared to a full blown MS Office 10 suite.
  
  For some, Office is unusable due to the new Ribbon interface and
  libreoffice is the usable office suite due to its familiar menus.
 
 New, as in four years old? That is one of the worst straw man arguments
 I have heard in a while.

You're refering to when the UI has been issued as being new.
I'm refering to how users recept it TODAY. In many business
settings, you won't see any of the new stuff MICROS~1 has
to offer. This Windows XP is still VERY present, and a
common office application is the predecessor with the traditional
menues. Many user complain about the Ribbon and refuse to use
it, as they had a hard time learning menues (and the changes
within them from program version to program version). And
now something new... that's too complicated. That's why
I was using new as this kind of nonfamiliar interface is
considered new TO THEM.



 In any case, In 2008 OpenOffice.org started
 the project Renaissance to improve the user interface of OpenOffice. So
 far the prototypes of the project are frequently seen as similar to the
 ribbon interface.

Providing the TRY of the same is often inferior to providing
better. But users do not want better, they want the same
as they prefer consistency in usage, implying that nothing new
has to be learned.



 Obviously, the use and customization of any software is a personal
 experience. However, if the use of the ribbon is beyond your
 abilities, [...]

Preferences. Abilities have nothing to do with it, except
we are talking about niche users (who are out of scope anyway),
such as blind users who could read menu text through a Braille
readout, but can't identify images (without any text) by that
means, which implies that a pictural interface which is
contextually changing is absolutely unusable for them.



 [...] and I am assuming that you are aware that the ribbon can
 be hidden, modified and that there are many add-ons available that
 can be used to manage it, then so be it.

I'm not using any MICROS~1 stuff at all, so my experience can
be seen as limited.



 I would rather work with an
 application with a minor annoyance, and I do not find the ribbon to be
 one, then to use a less robust application.

I don't think robustness is important for end users in the
home sector, as bleeding edge is preferred. Robustness is
very important for corporate users.



 Again, it is up to the end
 user to ascertain their requirements and find the tool that is best
 fitted to that job.

No. End users do not try or find anything, or make judged
considerations. They use whatever comes preinstalled, or they
use what they know from their work place (traditionally by
obtaining a pirated copy of whatever it is).



 In any case, I am quite confident that your condemnation of the
 ribbon is totally based on your reading of Slashdot and other similar
 documents and not from any personal experience.

I have never read anything on Slashdot, sorry. Should I? :-)

My personal experience is limited in helping users who come
from a menu background and feel that the constant re-learning
a contextually changing interface that is based upon pictural
elements instead of WORDS is limiting their productivity. This
was the chance for me to try to use the Ribbon interface, and
I didn't feel it is THAT BAD. There are, however, applications
where this kind of interface, if consistently used, would be
a benefit for the user.

I suggest you have a look at this:

http://toastytech.com/guis/win72.html

It's part of the Windows 7 article of the GUI Gallery and
contains a very nice summary of user perception of the Ribbon,
NOT in relation to MICROS~1's office programs in this case.


-- 
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-13 Thread Bruce Cran
On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 08:58:05 -0500
Jerry freebsd.u...@seibercom.net wrote:

 New, as in four years old? That is one of the worst straw man
 arguments I have heard in a while. In any case, In 2008
 OpenOffice.org started the project Renaissance to improve the user
 interface of OpenOffice. So far the prototypes of the project are
 frequently seen as similar to the ribbon interface.
 
 Obviously, the use and customization of any software is a personal
 experience. However, if the use of the ribbon is beyond your
 abilities, and I am assuming that you are aware that the ribbon can
 be hidden, modified and that there are many add-ons available that
 can be used to manage it, then so be it. I would rather work with an
 application with a minor annoyance, and I do not find the ribbon to
 be one, then to use a less robust application. Again, it is up to the
 end user to ascertain their requirements and find the tool that is
 best fitted to that job.
 
 In any case, I am quite confident that your condemnation of the
 ribbon is totally based on your reading of Slashdot and other
 similar documents and not from any personal experience.

Obviously I'm not talking about myself having problems with it since
I've used all sorts of different UIs over the years and can learn new
interfaces quickly. You seem to be forgetting that most people don't
upgrade very frequently: I wouldn't be surprised if lots were still
running Office 2000.  I worked in an RD environment and even there
people were steadfastly ignoring Vista and even 64-bit Windows even 3
years after it was released - I had to keep running 32-bit XP.

The problem is that less technically-literate people have problems with
_certain_ operations which were simple in the past - printing for
example now takes several clicks during which the screen changes each
time. For people who get confused when icons move on the screen the
context-sensitive nature of it can be rather difficult to learn.

With large screens and people who don't have the baggage of expecting
things to work a certain way I do think Ribbon is better: for example I
recently started using Access 2010 and found it rather easy to find how
to do things like exporting to SQL Server 2008, which would previously
have been buried. Also, the way traditional sub-menus work in Windows
is really awful for people who don't have accurate mouse skills - move
the mouse outside the menu and it disappears. The Ribbon solves this
problem.

-- 
Bruce Cran
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-13 Thread Chad Perrin
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 07:38:01AM -0500, Jerry wrote:
 
 Bloat is a purely subjective term. What one user considers bloat
 could very well be a requirement for another use. For example, while
 you might consider it bloat to have drivers for modern wireless N
 protocol cards, many other users have a real need for them.

If one OS has about a gigabyte installed size and another more like
fifteen to twenty, and both are suitable to accomplishing everyday tasks
for a given user, the latter is bloated.  It doesn't matter if your
favorite 5% of the latter system is different from mine, and we consider
different parts of the system bloat, it's still bloated to both of us.
This is why good design concepts like modularity are . . . good design
concepts.

Well, it's *one* reason, among many.

Shame Microsoft never caught on to that concept.


 
 I have four PC present working in my home. Three are FreeBSD machines
 and one a Win7 one. The Windows machine is essential, if for no other
 reason than there is software that is just not available on a FreeBSD
 platform. Or if it is available, it is of very poor quality.

You use what you need.  I get that.  I never disputed it.  On the other
hand, needing something because of a particular couple of requirements
does not mean it's well designed.



 MS Office is a perfect example. Despite all of the rubbish the FOSS
 community has spewed for over 10 years, OpenOffice is nothing more than
 a poor clone of Office 97. The newly released libreoffice might be
 usable someday; however, it is now only in its infancy. There is no way
 it can be compared to a full blown MS Office 10 suite.

OpenOffice.org and LibreOffice offer functionality MS Office does not,
just as MS Office offers functionality they do not.  Different people
have different needs, and those office suites serve slightly different
needs.  On the other hand, OpenOffice.org and LibreOffice encompass more
MS Office functionality than MS Office does of OpenOffice.org and
LibreOffice functionality.  Since it became a household term (at least in
the open source community), for instance, OpenOffice.org has supported a
wider range of MS Office documents than MS Office, thanks to the fact
that despite its much-ballyhooed adherence to backwards compatibility,
MS Office has tended to (intentionally?) break file format compatibility
between release versions.

Of course, office suites are collectively steaming garbage anyway.



 Until the FOSS can write applications that are not only compatible
 with, but as fully functional as MS Office and similar software, as
 well as provide drivers in a timely manner (and I am still waiting for
 Java to be updated to the latest version so that it will work with the
 FreeBSD version of Firefox, or for acroread9 to actually work and play
 well with others, etc), Microsoft will always be a requirement for many
 end users.

When your criteria for success are identical to someone else's
software, you're just creating a rigged game, where the someone else
is the only possible winner -- because its efforts are in your eyes the
standard of excellence no matter what its efforts produce, and everyone
else just has to play catch-up.  It has nothing to do with actual
quality, usefulness, or productivity.

It's funny you are complaining about open source developers not doing a
good job by pointing out that closed source developers aren't doing their
jobs, by the way.  You are aware that both components of the complete
Java system and Adobe's PDF reader are both closed source software --
right?


 
 This is in no way a condemnation of FreeBSD, or any other open-source
 product.

. . . aside from the part where you blame open source developers for all
the ills of the world above.  Okay, so I exaggerate -- but you seem to be
trolling rather than making a salient point.



 It is just a simple statement of fact. The majority of users, despite
 what they may publicly proclaim, want software and hardware that just
 works. I had installed an older nVidia GeForce GT 220 card in an older
 PC and then discovered that there was no sound being emitted by the
 machine. Wasting valuable time, I finally discovered that I had to
 modify the sysctl.conf file. Crap like that should just not happen.

I agree that there should be ways to handle such things without forcing
minimally competent computer users to search documentation for
information about how to use sysctl to make sound work.  Sane defaults
and reasonable levels of autoconfiguration, at least as *options*, are
good things.

On the other hand, I wish I had the option of searching documentation and
using a simple tool like sysctl to make graphics work on an MS Windows
system a few years back.  Instead, I ended up having to just use a
different 3D graphics adapter because the one I had refused to work
properly on a given motherboard with MS Windows.  I later discovered the
same hardware setup worked fine with Debian.

There's no use pretending MS Windows 

Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-13 Thread Modulok
So... how about those solid state drives... yup.

-Modulok-

On 2/13/11, Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com wrote:
 On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 07:38:01AM -0500, Jerry wrote:

 Bloat is a purely subjective term. What one user considers bloat
 could very well be a requirement for another use. For example, while
 you might consider it bloat to have drivers for modern wireless N
 protocol cards, many other users have a real need for them.

 If one OS has about a gigabyte installed size and another more like
 fifteen to twenty, and both are suitable to accomplishing everyday tasks
 for a given user, the latter is bloated.  It doesn't matter if your
 favorite 5% of the latter system is different from mine, and we consider
 different parts of the system bloat, it's still bloated to both of us.
 This is why good design concepts like modularity are . . . good design
 concepts.

 Well, it's *one* reason, among many.

 Shame Microsoft never caught on to that concept.



 I have four PC present working in my home. Three are FreeBSD machines
 and one a Win7 one. The Windows machine is essential, if for no other
 reason than there is software that is just not available on a FreeBSD
 platform. Or if it is available, it is of very poor quality.

 You use what you need.  I get that.  I never disputed it.  On the other
 hand, needing something because of a particular couple of requirements
 does not mean it's well designed.



 MS Office is a perfect example. Despite all of the rubbish the FOSS
 community has spewed for over 10 years, OpenOffice is nothing more than
 a poor clone of Office 97. The newly released libreoffice might be
 usable someday; however, it is now only in its infancy. There is no way
 it can be compared to a full blown MS Office 10 suite.

 OpenOffice.org and LibreOffice offer functionality MS Office does not,
 just as MS Office offers functionality they do not.  Different people
 have different needs, and those office suites serve slightly different
 needs.  On the other hand, OpenOffice.org and LibreOffice encompass more
 MS Office functionality than MS Office does of OpenOffice.org and
 LibreOffice functionality.  Since it became a household term (at least in
 the open source community), for instance, OpenOffice.org has supported a
 wider range of MS Office documents than MS Office, thanks to the fact
 that despite its much-ballyhooed adherence to backwards compatibility,
 MS Office has tended to (intentionally?) break file format compatibility
 between release versions.

 Of course, office suites are collectively steaming garbage anyway.



 Until the FOSS can write applications that are not only compatible
 with, but as fully functional as MS Office and similar software, as
 well as provide drivers in a timely manner (and I am still waiting for
 Java to be updated to the latest version so that it will work with the
 FreeBSD version of Firefox, or for acroread9 to actually work and play
 well with others, etc), Microsoft will always be a requirement for many
 end users.

 When your criteria for success are identical to someone else's
 software, you're just creating a rigged game, where the someone else
 is the only possible winner -- because its efforts are in your eyes the
 standard of excellence no matter what its efforts produce, and everyone
 else just has to play catch-up.  It has nothing to do with actual
 quality, usefulness, or productivity.

 It's funny you are complaining about open source developers not doing a
 good job by pointing out that closed source developers aren't doing their
 jobs, by the way.  You are aware that both components of the complete
 Java system and Adobe's PDF reader are both closed source software --
 right?



 This is in no way a condemnation of FreeBSD, or any other open-source
 product.

 . . . aside from the part where you blame open source developers for all
 the ills of the world above.  Okay, so I exaggerate -- but you seem to be
 trolling rather than making a salient point.



 It is just a simple statement of fact. The majority of users, despite
 what they may publicly proclaim, want software and hardware that just
 works. I had installed an older nVidia GeForce GT 220 card in an older
 PC and then discovered that there was no sound being emitted by the
 machine. Wasting valuable time, I finally discovered that I had to
 modify the sysctl.conf file. Crap like that should just not happen.

 I agree that there should be ways to handle such things without forcing
 minimally competent computer users to search documentation for
 information about how to use sysctl to make sound work.  Sane defaults
 and reasonable levels of autoconfiguration, at least as *options*, are
 good things.

 On the other hand, I wish I had the option of searching documentation and
 using a simple tool like sysctl to make graphics work on an MS Windows
 system a few years back.  Instead, I ended up having to just use a
 different 3D graphics adapter because the one I had refused to work
 

Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-13 Thread Chad Perrin
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 08:58:05AM -0500, Jerry wrote:
 On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 13:10:51 +
 Bruce Cran br...@cran.org.uk articulated:
 
  On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 07:38:01 -0500
  Jerry freebsd.u...@seibercom.net wrote:
  
   Despite all of the rubbish the FOSS community
   has spewed for over 10 years, OpenOffice is nothing more than a poor
   clone of Office 97. The newly released libreoffice might be usable
   someday; however, it is now only in its infancy. There is no way it
   can be compared to a full blown MS Office 10 suite.
  
  For some, Office is unusable due to the new Ribbon interface and
  libreoffice is the usable office suite due to its familiar menus.
 
 New, as in four years old? That is one of the worst straw man arguments
 I have heard in a while. In any case, In 2008 OpenOffice.org started
 the project Renaissance to improve the user interface of OpenOffice. So
 far the prototypes of the project are frequently seen as similar to the
 ribbon interface.

I do not think you understand the term straw man as used in reference
to a logical fallacy.  A straw man fallacy involves using a distraction
in place of a valid argument, supplanting someone else's argument with
this distraction, attributing it to that other person for the sake of
attacking it rather than the argument that other person actually made.
How, exactly, does the comment about the ribbon fit that definition at
all?


 
 Obviously, the use and customization of any software is a personal
 experience. However, if the use of the ribbon is beyond your
 abilities, and I am assuming that you are aware that the ribbon can
 be hidden, modified and that there are many add-ons available that
 can be used to manage it, then so be it. I would rather work with an
 application with a minor annoyance, and I do not find the ribbon to be
 one, then to use a less robust application. Again, it is up to the end
 user to ascertain their requirements and find the tool that is best
 fitted to that job.

Beyond your abilities is a better example of a straw man fallacy, since
I don't think anyone here said Use of the ribbon is beyond my
abilities, or anything even remotely equivalent to that.


 
 In any case, I am quite confident that your condemnation of the
 ribbon is totally based on your reading of Slashdot and other similar
 documents and not from any personal experience.

Interfaces that change without a consistent use model being presented to
the user -- as is the case with all but the most basic, unsophisticated
users who are presented with the ribbon -- have long been recognized as a
failure of usability design, and for good reason.  This is why the words
consisten navigation are so important in Web design circles.

-- 
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]


pgppRQt7YQpaN.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-13 Thread Maxim Khitrov
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 11:47 AM, Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com wrote:
 On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 08:58:05AM -0500, Jerry wrote:
 On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 13:10:51 +
 Bruce Cran br...@cran.org.uk articulated:

  On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 07:38:01 -0500
  Jerry freebsd.u...@seibercom.net wrote:
 
   Despite all of the rubbish the FOSS community
   has spewed for over 10 years, OpenOffice is nothing more than a poor
   clone of Office 97. The newly released libreoffice might be usable
   someday; however, it is now only in its infancy. There is no way it
   can be compared to a full blown MS Office 10 suite.
 
  For some, Office is unusable due to the new Ribbon interface and
  libreoffice is the usable office suite due to its familiar menus.

 New, as in four years old? That is one of the worst straw man arguments
 I have heard in a while. In any case, In 2008 OpenOffice.org started
 the project Renaissance to improve the user interface of OpenOffice. So
 far the prototypes of the project are frequently seen as similar to the
 ribbon interface.

 I do not think you understand the term straw man as used in reference
 to a logical fallacy.  A straw man fallacy involves using a distraction
 in place of a valid argument, supplanting someone else's argument with
 this distraction, attributing it to that other person for the sake of
 attacking it rather than the argument that other person actually made.
 How, exactly, does the comment about the ribbon fit that definition at
 all?



 Obviously, the use and customization of any software is a personal
 experience. However, if the use of the ribbon is beyond your
 abilities, and I am assuming that you are aware that the ribbon can
 be hidden, modified and that there are many add-ons available that
 can be used to manage it, then so be it. I would rather work with an
 application with a minor annoyance, and I do not find the ribbon to be
 one, then to use a less robust application. Again, it is up to the end
 user to ascertain their requirements and find the tool that is best
 fitted to that job.

 Beyond your abilities is a better example of a straw man fallacy, since
 I don't think anyone here said Use of the ribbon is beyond my
 abilities, or anything even remotely equivalent to that.



 In any case, I am quite confident that your condemnation of the
 ribbon is totally based on your reading of Slashdot and other similar
 documents and not from any personal experience.

 Interfaces that change without a consistent use model being presented to
 the user -- as is the case with all but the most basic, unsophisticated
 users who are presented with the ribbon -- have long been recognized as a
 failure of usability design, and for good reason.  This is why the words
 consisten navigation are so important in Web design circles.

 --
 Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]

Can you guys please take Microsoft bashing elsewhere? This thread is
about FreeBSD and SSDs - a topic I'd like to hear more about from
people with first-hand experience in running such setup.

- Max
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-13 Thread Bruce Cran
On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 09:42:54 -0700
Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com wrote:

 There's no use pretending MS Windows never has issues with the
 efficacy of its autoconfiguration.  Most of us have used that OS
 quite a lot, and know that problems arise -- and that, unlike with
 open source OSes, it's actually fairly common to have no recourse at
 all when something does not work.

A good example is the need to edit the registry to improve network
performance - http://support.microsoft.com/kb/321098 . Another is that
in order to disable auto-run you need to know to type gpedit.msc in
the Run window to load the Group Policy Editor and navigate to the
settings.

-- 
Bruce Cran
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-13 Thread Frank Shute
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 12:05:51PM -0500, Maxim Khitrov wrote:

 
 Can you guys please take Microsoft bashing elsewhere? This thread is
 about FreeBSD and SSDs - a topic I'd like to hear more about from
 people with first-hand experience in running such setup.
 
 - Max

Agreed. I posted my short experience of using an SSD as a workstation
drive and I'd be interested in hearing the experience of any other
users. Problems? Praise? Let's hear it.

Have people bothered to mount /tmp as a memory drive or are they as me
just using their SSDs without any messing about?


Regards,

-- 

 Frank

 Contact info: http://www.shute.org.uk/misc/contact.html




pgpsCkOwKiE7d.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-13 Thread Adam Vande More
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Frank Shute fr...@shute.org.uk wrote:

 On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 12:05:51PM -0500, Maxim Khitrov wrote:
 
 
  Can you guys please take Microsoft bashing elsewhere? This thread is
  about FreeBSD and SSDs - a topic I'd like to hear more about from
  people with first-hand experience in running such setup.
 
  - Max

 Agreed. I posted my short experience of using an SSD as a workstation
 drive and I'd be interested in hearing the experience of any other
 users. Problems? Praise? Let's hear it.


I have two personal SSD's, one an older PATA model in my laptop and an X-25
serving as a ZIL.  I have had a great experience with them, but I know the
Intel doesn't properly obey cache flush requests even with updated firmware
so I guess that would be my biggest problem with them.


-- 
Adam Vande More
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-13 Thread Svein Skogen (Listmail account)
On 13.02.2011 19:50, Adam Vande More wrote:
 On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Frank Shute fr...@shute.org.uk wrote:
 
 On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 12:05:51PM -0500, Maxim Khitrov wrote:


 Can you guys please take Microsoft bashing elsewhere? This thread is
 about FreeBSD and SSDs - a topic I'd like to hear more about from
 people with first-hand experience in running such setup.

 - Max

 Agreed. I posted my short experience of using an SSD as a workstation
 drive and I'd be interested in hearing the experience of any other
 users. Problems? Praise? Let's hear it.

 
 I have two personal SSD's, one an older PATA model in my laptop and an X-25
 serving as a ZIL.  I have had a great experience with them, but I know the
 Intel doesn't properly obey cache flush requests even with updated firmware
 so I guess that would be my biggest problem with them.

I'm running two X25-m G2s myself. One in my laptop, the other in my
workstation (as systems and software drives, I used spinning metal for
raw storage in both). Nothing but praise from me.

//Svein

-- 
+---+---
  /\   |Svein Skogen   | sv...@d80.iso100.no
  \ /   |Solberg Østli 9| PGP Key:  0xE5E76831
   X|2020 Skedsmokorset | sv...@jernhuset.no
  / \   |Norway | PGP Key:  0xCE96CE13
|   | sv...@stillbilde.net
 ascii  |   | PGP Key:  0x58CD33B6
 ribbon |System Admin   | svein-listm...@stillbilde.net
Campaign|stillbilde.net | PGP Key:  0x22D494A4
+---+---
|msn messenger: | Mobile Phone: +47 907 03 575
|sv...@jernhuset.no | RIPE handle:SS16503-RIPE
+---+---
A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?

 Picture Gallery:
  https://gallery.stillbilde.net/v/svein/




signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-13 Thread Chip Camden
Quoth Chad Perrin on Sunday, 13 February 2011:
 
 OpenOffice.org and LibreOffice offer functionality MS Office does not,
 just as MS Office offers functionality they do not.  Different people
 have different needs, and those office suites serve slightly different
 needs.  On the other hand, OpenOffice.org and LibreOffice encompass more
 MS Office functionality than MS Office does of OpenOffice.org and
 LibreOffice functionality.  Since it became a household term (at least in
 the open source community), for instance, OpenOffice.org has supported a
 wider range of MS Office documents than MS Office, thanks to the fact
 that despite its much-ballyhooed adherence to backwards compatibility,
 MS Office has tended to (intentionally?) break file format compatibility
 between release versions.
 
Hey, I just found out that libreoffice can open all those old .WRI files
that MS Office no longer recognizes!  Thanks for the tip!

-- 
Sterling (Chip) Camden | sterl...@camdensoftware.com | 2048D/3A978E4F
http://chipsquips.com  | http://camdensoftware.com   | http://chipstips.com


pgp3Y3QPOJNHS.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-13 Thread Chip Camden
Quoth Bruce Cran on Sunday, 13 February 2011:
 On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 09:42:54 -0700
 Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com wrote:
 
  There's no use pretending MS Windows never has issues with the
  efficacy of its autoconfiguration.  Most of us have used that OS
  quite a lot, and know that problems arise -- and that, unlike with
  open source OSes, it's actually fairly common to have no recourse at
  all when something does not work.
 
 A good example is the need to edit the registry to improve network
 performance - http://support.microsoft.com/kb/321098 . Another is that
 in order to disable auto-run you need to know to type gpedit.msc in
 the Run window to load the Group Policy Editor and navigate to the
 settings.
 
 -- 
 Bruce Cran

You've touched on the basic philosophical difference between the
Microsoft and Unix approaches.  The former seeks to make usual activities
easy and obvious, at the expense of making unusual activities downright
difficult or impossible.  Unfortunately, one person's unusual is
another's everyday.  The latter (Unix), OTOH, seeks greater consistency
of interface, at the expense of a significant user learning experience
just to get started.  Personally, I prefer the latter, because that
learning builds on itself and generates enormous power to overcome
further obstacles and create new things.  But for users who do not wish
to learn anything and who want to use their computer the same way they use
their DVD player or their electric toothbrush, the Microsoft Way fits the
bill.

-- 
Sterling (Chip) Camden | sterl...@camdensoftware.com | 2048D/3A978E4F
http://chipsquips.com  | http://camdensoftware.com   | http://chipstips.com


pgptPp92J4rk0.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-13 Thread Chad Perrin
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 12:05:51PM -0500, Maxim Khitrov wrote:
 
 Can you guys please take Microsoft bashing elsewhere? This thread is
 about FreeBSD and SSDs - a topic I'd like to hear more about from
 people with first-hand experience in running such setup.

Perhaps responding to the FreeBSD bashing got a little out of hand.  I
apologize for sinking to nearly the same level of off-topic OS
deprecation.

-- 
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]


pgpwXFS5HoHrp.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-13 Thread Chad Perrin
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 11:29:15AM -0800, Chip Camden wrote:
 
 But for users who do not wish to learn anything and who want to use
 their computer the same way they use their DVD player or their electric
 toothbrush, the Microsoft Way fits the bill.

I think you're being too kind to the obviousness of the modern media
player device's interface.  The electric toothbrush is pretty obvious,
though, if one is accustomed to toothbrushes in general.

-- 
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]


pgpYbuP5dX9bp.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-13 Thread Chad Perrin
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 11:10:26AM -0800, Chip Camden wrote:
 
 Hey, I just found out that libreoffice can open all those old .WRI files
 that MS Office no longer recognizes!  Thanks for the tip!

My pleasure.

I bet it doesn't have the old Windows Write memory leak, either -- which,
by the way, persisted in Wordpad at least as late as XP.  I haven't
checked whether that same memory leak still exists in Vista or Win7;
maybe I should.

-- 
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]


pgpwaxx7be93Y.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-13 Thread perryh
Chip Camden sterl...@camdensoftware.com wrote:

 But for users who do not wish to learn anything ...
 the Microsoft Way fits the bill.
^

Of course.  It's his company.  But does it fit anyone else?




;-)
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-12 Thread Dave
On 11 Feb 2011 at 13:33, Adam Vande More wrote:

 On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com
 wrote:
 
  Ignoring the TRIM issue for a moment . . .
 
  You're probably best off saving SSD storage for cases where you have
  lots of reads and little to no write activity, unless you enjoy
  buying new SSDs a lot.  Actually, let's not ignore TRIM; the
  work-around for lack of TRIM support on some drives is a garbage
  collection routine that exacerbates the problem of having to
  replace your SSDs more often if you do a lot of writes.
 
  I guess I would only use SSDs on servers in the same cases where I
  would let myself be talked into using MySQL -- cases where you just
  treat it pretty much like a read-only data store, and do not have to
  (safely) add or change data stored there most of the time.
 
 
 Modern SSD's can do a *lot* of writes, wear-leveling and other
 tecniques allow SSD's to be implemented for nearly any workload. 
 There's a great deal of literature and facts on this topic if someone
 was motivated enough to research it.  Some legends are better off
 fading away.
 
 http://www.storagesearch.com/ssdmyths-endurance.html
 
 Same thing is sort of true with TRIM, on most modern drives lack of OS
 TRIM support isn't the performance hit it used to be although still
 desirable.
 -- 
 Adam Vande More
 

Define a *lot*.   If you look up the spec's on the common (currently) 
available SSD systems, it's only in the 10's of 1000's writes.  Pittiful 
compared to magnetic media.

The way they work too, if you write one sector you actualy re-write a 
much larger block of memory.  Wear leveling, not that common with SSD 
Hard Drives, but very common with USB (Flash) memory sticks, only goes so 
far.

SSD's have a place, but not for things like swapfiles or working data 
that changes a lot..

Regards.

Dave B.

___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-12 Thread Adam Vande More
On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 6:14 AM, Dave d...@g8kbv.demon.co.uk wrote:

 Define a *lot*.   If you look up the spec's on the common (currently)
 available SSD systems, it's only in the 10's of 1000's writes.  Pittiful
 compared to magnetic media.


Chances are on many setups, by the time you've written enough data to
significantly wear out the drive your magnetic media would died of
mechanical failure long before.  Purchase what you need MLC/SLC.


 The way they work too, if you write one sector you actualy re-write a
 much larger block of memory.


Depends on full setup, the write amplification effect on the X-25's is about
1.1x.  Recent SSD's all are much more efficient compared to when these were
large, legitimate concerns.


 Wear leveling, not that common with SSD
 Hard Drives, but very common with USB (Flash) memory sticks,


Completely wrong even the first gen modern SSD's had wear leveling built in.


 SSD's have a place, but not for things like swapfiles or working data
 that changes a lot..


I guess ZIL's wouldn't be a good use for such devices either.  Perhaps you
can inform FS designers that they are doing it wrong.

-- 
Adam Vande More
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-12 Thread Odhiambo Washington
On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Adam Vande More amvandem...@gmail.comwrote:

 On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 6:14 AM, Dave d...@g8kbv.demon.co.uk wrote:

  Define a *lot*.   If you look up the spec's on the common (currently)
  available SSD systems, it's only in the 10's of 1000's writes.  Pittiful
  compared to magnetic media.
 

 Chances are on many setups, by the time you've written enough data to
 significantly wear out the drive your magnetic media would died of
 mechanical failure long before.  Purchase what you need MLC/SLC.


  The way they work too, if you write one sector you actualy re-write a
  much larger block of memory.


 Depends on full setup, the write amplification effect on the X-25's is
 about
 1.1x.  Recent SSD's all are much more efficient compared to when these were
 large, legitimate concerns.


  Wear leveling, not that common with SSD
  Hard Drives, but very common with USB (Flash) memory sticks,
 

 Completely wrong even the first gen modern SSD's had wear leveling built
 in.


  SSD's have a place, but not for things like swapfiles or working data
  that changes a lot..
 

 I guess ZIL's wouldn't be a good use for such devices either.  Perhaps you
 can inform FS designers that they are doing it wrong.


While my tech mind cannot comprehend all these arguments, there are laptops
which come with SSD as primary drives and are running Windows or even
Apple's OS X.
I fail to understand why manufacturers would let people install SSDs on
machines when their life is so much in question.

Can someone please enlighten me on the dangers faced by those who opt to get
their laptops installed with SSDs?

I personally have one, with a Toshiba 128GB SSD (THNS128GG4BAAA-NonFDE). I
am running Windows 7 on it.

Should I stop and buy a SATA disk?:)


-- 
Best regards,
Odhiambo WASHINGTON,
Nairobi,KE
+254733744121/+254722743223
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Damn!!
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-12 Thread Frank Shute
On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 07:12:08PM +0300, Odhiambo Washington wrote:

 On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Adam Vande More amvandem...@gmail.comwrote:
 
  On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 6:14 AM, Dave d...@g8kbv.demon.co.uk wrote:
 
   Define a *lot*.   If you look up the spec's on the common (currently)
   available SSD systems, it's only in the 10's of 1000's writes.  Pittiful
   compared to magnetic media.
  
 
  Chances are on many setups, by the time you've written enough data to
  significantly wear out the drive your magnetic media would died of
  mechanical failure long before.  Purchase what you need MLC/SLC.
 
 
   The way they work too, if you write one sector you actualy re-write a
   much larger block of memory.
 
 
  Depends on full setup, the write amplification effect on the X-25's is
  about
  1.1x.  Recent SSD's all are much more efficient compared to when these were
  large, legitimate concerns.
 
 
   Wear leveling, not that common with SSD
   Hard Drives, but very common with USB (Flash) memory sticks,
  
 
  Completely wrong even the first gen modern SSD's had wear leveling built
  in.
 
 
   SSD's have a place, but not for things like swapfiles or working data
   that changes a lot..
  
 
  I guess ZIL's wouldn't be a good use for such devices either.  Perhaps you
  can inform FS designers that they are doing it wrong.
 
 
 While my tech mind cannot comprehend all these arguments, there are laptops
 which come with SSD as primary drives and are running Windows or even
 Apple's OS X.
 I fail to understand why manufacturers would let people install SSDs on
 machines when their life is so much in question.
 
 Can someone please enlighten me on the dangers faced by those who opt to get
 their laptops installed with SSDs?
 
 I personally have one, with a Toshiba 128GB SSD (THNS128GG4BAAA-NonFDE). I
 am running Windows 7 on it.
 
 Should I stop and buy a SATA disk?:)
 

No you shouldn't but you should run FreeBSD on it ;)

There's a lot of FUD talked about SSDs.

All I know is that I've been using one in my workstation for coming up
to a year with no problems so far.

Take it from a mechanical engineer that SSDs are much more robust than
HDDs, which is one reason they (HDDs) are going the way of the dodo.

I recommend that people should use SSDs for their workstations. Makes
a big difference in performance and makes the computer much more
pleasant to work on.


Regards,

-- 

 Frank

 Contact info: http://www.shute.org.uk/misc/contact.html




pgpYgl6MyCNsr.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-12 Thread Odhiambo Washington
On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 7:54 PM, Frank Shute fr...@shute.org.uk wrote:

 On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 07:12:08PM +0300, Odhiambo Washington wrote:
 
  On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Adam Vande More amvandem...@gmail.com
 wrote:
 
   On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 6:14 AM, Dave d...@g8kbv.demon.co.uk wrote:
  
Define a *lot*.   If you look up the spec's on the common
 (currently)
available SSD systems, it's only in the 10's of 1000's writes.
  Pittiful
compared to magnetic media.
   
  
   Chances are on many setups, by the time you've written enough data to
   significantly wear out the drive your magnetic media would died of
   mechanical failure long before.  Purchase what you need MLC/SLC.
  
  
The way they work too, if you write one sector you actualy re-write
 a
much larger block of memory.
  
  
   Depends on full setup, the write amplification effect on the X-25's is
   about
   1.1x.  Recent SSD's all are much more efficient compared to when these
 were
   large, legitimate concerns.
  
  
Wear leveling, not that common with SSD
Hard Drives, but very common with USB (Flash) memory sticks,
   
  
   Completely wrong even the first gen modern SSD's had wear leveling
 built
   in.
  
  
SSD's have a place, but not for things like swapfiles or working data
that changes a lot..
   
  
   I guess ZIL's wouldn't be a good use for such devices either.  Perhaps
 you
   can inform FS designers that they are doing it wrong.
  
  
  While my tech mind cannot comprehend all these arguments, there are
 laptops
  which come with SSD as primary drives and are running Windows or even
  Apple's OS X.
  I fail to understand why manufacturers would let people install SSDs on
  machines when their life is so much in question.
 
  Can someone please enlighten me on the dangers faced by those who opt to
 get
  their laptops installed with SSDs?
 
  I personally have one, with a Toshiba 128GB SSD (THNS128GG4BAAA-NonFDE).
 I
  am running Windows 7 on it.
 
  Should I stop and buy a SATA disk?:)
 

 No you shouldn't but you should run FreeBSD on it ;)


With all the debate about FreeBSD this, FreeBSD that as regards SSDs, I am
not sure if I should so this:-)
I'll continue to run my FreeBSD servers on SATA-N..



 There's a lot of FUD talked about SSDs.

 All I know is that I've been using one in my workstation for coming up to a
 year with no problems so far.

 Take it from a mechanical engineer that SSDs are much more robust than
 HDDs, which is one reason they (HDDs) are going the way of the dodo.

 I recommend that people should use SSDs for their workstations. Makes a big
 difference in performance and makes the computer much more pleasant to work
 on.


These people in the know always talk about the imminent failure of SSDs
soon:-)


-- 
Best regards,
Odhiambo WASHINGTON,
Nairobi,KE
+254733744121/+254722743223
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Damn!!
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-12 Thread Polytropon
On Sat, 12 Feb 2011 16:54:19 +, Frank Shute fr...@shute.org.uk wrote:
 On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 07:12:08PM +0300, Odhiambo Washington wrote:
  Should I stop and buy a SATA disk?:)
  
 
 No you shouldn't but you should run FreeBSD on it ;)

What else should one run?! ;-)



 All I know is that I've been using one in my workstation for coming up
 to a year with no problems so far.

For noise issues, SSDs surely beat HDDs, but this will
be compensated by all the fans in modern PCs for the
power supply, the processor, the chipset, the housing
fan, the graphics card, the other graphics card... :-)



 Take it from a mechanical engineer that SSDs are much more robust than
 HDDs, which is one reason they (HDDs) are going the way of the dodo.

At least in mobile devices (such as netbooks) they are
welcome. Energy parameters seem to be okay, and the
absence of moving parts is a big plus for this kind of
devices where robustness is considered to be important.



 I recommend that people should use SSDs for their workstations.

No problem if a SSD fails after 2 years in use (just an
arbitrary assumption), because of two reasons: (A) the
computer itself will fail or at least considered outdated
after that time, so it will get replaced, and (B) there
are backups. Yes. There ARE backups.



 Makes
 a big difference in performance and makes the computer much more
 pleasant to work on.

Definitely, but consider my comment at the beginning. :-)



-- 
Polytropon
Magdeburg, Germany
Happy FreeBSD user since 4.0
Andra moi ennepe, Mousa, ...
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-12 Thread Chad Perrin
On Sat, Feb 12, 2011 at 07:12:08PM +0300, Odhiambo Washington wrote:
 
 I fail to understand why manufacturers would let people install SSDs on
 machines when their life is so much in question.

I fail to see why a manufacturer would *not* want your hardware to wear
out faster, since that would mean you would have to buy replacement
hardware sooner.


 
 Can someone please enlighten me on the dangers faced by those who opt to get
 their laptops installed with SSDs?

In many cases, particularly where there is quite a lot of RAM installed
in the system and where people use a netbook the way it was intended to
be used when designed (typically involving a lot of Web browsing and not
much else), SSDs might be the best option -- especially given the rapid
obsolescence of low-performance, ultra-portable units.  If you expect
your hardware to last a long time, overrun physical RAM into swap space
a lot, and (as you might with FreeBSD) compile code an awful lot, the
heavier storage-write load might make more of a difference in the
expected lifetime of the hardware.

With FreeBSD, installing everything from binary packages can help
mitigate the possible problems of shortening the life of your SSDs.

Of course, if you care about having lots of storage, it's worth keeping
in mind the fact that SSDs still cost a lot more per gigabyte of storage
than rotating magnetic media (HDDs).


 
 I personally have one, with a Toshiba 128GB SSD (THNS128GG4BAAA-NonFDE). I
 am running Windows 7 on it.
 
 Should I stop and buy a SATA disk?:)

Probably not.  You already have the SSD storage, and its improved
performance for many operations (as well as improved durability under
stress in the short term) can still be of benefit.  Just be sure you know
when the usable lifespan of your SSD approaches, keep good backups (as
you always should anyway), and be happy.

You'd surely be happier with a better OS on it, though -- right?

-- 
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]


pgprvo07hiHkt.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-11 Thread Peter Vereshagin
Nothing to do oh, freebsd-questions stay in bat!
2011/02/11 09:40:37 + Paul Macdonald p...@ifdnrg.com = To FreeBSD 
Mailing List :

PM I'd be interested to here peoples opinions on best uses for SSD, general 
PM purpose applications such as databases , webservers etc will benefit 
PM obviously,

Sun.com before to bankrupt was spamming me about their nice idea on SSD
appliance for their servers.
It took me a some while though to know out accidentally that they apply
solid-state memory devices for... FS journal.
This looks wise and reasonable to me because:
1. SSD is known as less reliable storage.
2. SSD has less track-to-track seek average time.
( than usual HDD )

73! Peter pgp: A0E26627 (4A42 6841 2871 5EA7 52AB  12F8 0CE1 4AAC A0E2 6627)
--
http://vereshagin.org
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-11 Thread Chad Perrin
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 09:40:37AM +, Paul Macdonald wrote:
 
 I'd be interested to here peoples opinions on best uses for SSD, general 
 purpose applications such as databases , webservers etc will benefit 
 obviously,
 
 but i'm also  curious as to disk intensive applications such as mailq's, 
 spamassassin etc?  (I presume here the lack of TRIM may degrade 
 performance rapidly?)

Ignoring the TRIM issue for a moment . . .

You're probably best off saving SSD storage for cases where you have lots
of reads and little to no write activity, unless you enjoy buying new
SSDs a lot.  Actually, let's not ignore TRIM; the work-around for lack of
TRIM support on some drives is a garbage collection routine that
exacerbates the problem of having to replace your SSDs more often if you
do a lot of writes.

I guess I would only use SSDs on servers in the same cases where I would
let myself be talked into using MySQL -- cases where you just treat it
pretty much like a read-only data store, and do not have to (safely) add
or change data stored there most of the time.

-- 
Chad Perrin [ original content licensed OWL: http://owl.apotheon.org ]


pgpG1etBtYC3W.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: FreeBSD and SSD drives

2011-02-11 Thread Adam Vande More
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 12:57 PM, Chad Perrin per...@apotheon.com wrote:

 Ignoring the TRIM issue for a moment . . .

 You're probably best off saving SSD storage for cases where you have lots
 of reads and little to no write activity, unless you enjoy buying new
 SSDs a lot.  Actually, let's not ignore TRIM; the work-around for lack of
 TRIM support on some drives is a garbage collection routine that
 exacerbates the problem of having to replace your SSDs more often if you
 do a lot of writes.

 I guess I would only use SSDs on servers in the same cases where I would
 let myself be talked into using MySQL -- cases where you just treat it
 pretty much like a read-only data store, and do not have to (safely) add
 or change data stored there most of the time.


Modern SSD's can do a *lot* of writes, wear-leveling and other tecniques
allow SSD's to be implemented for nearly any workload.  There's a great deal
of literature and facts on this topic if someone was motivated enough to
research it.  Some legends are better off fading away.

http://www.storagesearch.com/ssdmyths-endurance.html

Same thing is sort of true with TRIM, on most modern drives lack of OS TRIM
support isn't the performance hit it used to be although still desirable.



-- 
Adam Vande More
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org