[geeks] Big Blue Smoke

[alex j avriette]

>> cant see it. i _know_ it hasnt got 208 cpu's... i _know_ it hasnt got
>> 416 disks... i _know_ it hasnt got 416 nic's....
>
> Those are silly comparisons. The question is how much data can
> it move. Once you get into their price range, mainframes are always
> better for moving large amounts of data.

*****AAAAAGGHHH******A**SDalksdjalisd jqWO8FDHWEVFONAS;DV.

ok. ive had a really long ass day. my database blew up, and i had to 
recover it from backup, and i lost 24 hours of data. i started work at 
7am, got home at 10pm, and i can see now that im pissed off and i should 
probably watch what i say.

however.

explain to me how the ()@#$@# a webpage, or even 40,000 or even 
40,000,000 webpages is a lot of data? its just not a lot of data. i can 
fit 600,000 xml metadata files inside a gig. heavily indexed with other 
tables and duplicated, i can store it in a postgres database in under 10 
gigs.

> Considering that net services tends to be a spikey load, running more
> servers on one shared machine will make better use of resources.

where i come from we call that a single point of failure.

alex.