Re: [opensuse] raid use case
Greg Freemyer wrote:
Depends... you can have a background task run and read through the entire disk. If anything comes up as different between the two copies, you'd know -- at least that's what my lsi card does about once a week....
---
I don't know if your also card does this, but mdraid does better than that.
If the scan detects a media error, mdraid recreates the data from via raid1/5/6 redundant raid members and re-writes the bad sector. The drive itself should use the rewrite of a known bad sector to force a sector reallocate, thus the member drive is restored from silently degraded to "perfect" in short order.
---- Practical issue: you can't do RAID5 or RAID6 with 2 disks, which is what I thought the original poster had. Secondly when you remap sectors, it slows down the drive -- so that drive won't be within 'tolerance' for hardware RAID, so you'd need to replace the drive most likely (if you had a hot spare in the machine, it could immediately start a rebuild). Third -- RAID1 is safer than RAID6 for the same # of total disks in all cases w/same # of even spindles (need an even number for RAID1, obviously). If you only have 3 disks total, you could probably do RAID6 and it would be safer, but 1 data + 2 parity...ouch. But the 1st minimum size demonstrates the problem (and it gets worse w/more disks). With min number of spindles that will work for both: 4, RAID6 would have 2 data disks and 2 parity. while raid10 would have 2 data disks and 2 mirrors. If your failure rate is 'x', then the no-fail rate is 1-x per disk. In the raid 6, if any of the other 3 disks fail (in addition to 1st failure), the raid is toast. With a RAID10, there is only 1 disk that can cause the whole array to fail (the mirror of the one that went bad). If you get a 2nd fail on another pair, you can still rebuild. With only 1 disk "exposed" on RAID10, the % chance of the whole RAID failing is the %chance of 1 disk failing. However, w/raid6, there are 3 disks that are critical to rebuild the bad one -- their "no fail case is (1 - x)**3. I.e. say it was a 1% fail, 99% nofail. In RAID10 chances of whole RAID being safe would be 99% (the no fail rate for the 1 partner of the one that failed). In RAID 6, though it's .99**3 -- or .970. In that best case RAID6 has 3x the 'total fail' chances as the RAID10's. If you have 8 total spindles (6 data/2parity for raid6 vs. 4data+4mirror for raid10), then 1 disk goes. For RAID10, the total fail case only happens if the failed-drive's pair go's so it's still 99% chance of not failing. Vs. RAID6, .99**7 == .932) -- or a almost a 7% chance of a total fail vs. RAID10's 1% chance. The next point up is moving from 512-byte sect disks to 4k... It takes less space for a more power ECC on 4k than the one on 512: (from a Hitachi brief:) .... The second benefit is that a larger and more powerful error correction code (ECC) can be utilized, providing better integrity of user data....
Only if you are using media scrubbing routinely can you have confidence that the member drives go from "perfect" to failed without a silently degraded state in the middle.
LSI defaults them to once/week.
When TB size drives first hit the market, a lot of raid5 rebuilds were failing due to the silent bad sector degradation. That's when the community started strongly urging everyone to either use media scrubbing or raid-6. (Raid 6 has 2 redundant drives so it can rebuild a failed member drive even in the presence of media errors on the surviving members).
---- But w/raid6 after 1 drive fails the chances of non-failure have to be multiplied by # drives left. With RAID10, it's a constant. (Combinatorics) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On Saturday, May 30, 2015, Linda Walsh <suse@tlinx.org> wrote:
Greg Freemyer wrote:
Depends... you can have a background task run and read through the entire disk. If anything comes up as different between the two copies, you'd know -- at least that's what my lsi card does about once a week....
---
I don't know if your also card does this, but mdraid does better than that.
If the scan detects a media error, mdraid recreates the data from via raid1/5/6 redundant raid members and re-writes the bad sector. The drive itself should use the rewrite of a known bad sector to force a sector reallocate, thus the member drive is restored from silently degraded to "perfect" in short order.
---- Practical issue: you can't do RAID5 or RAID6 with 2 disks, which is what I thought the original poster had.
Agreed raid5 takes 3 disks and 4 for raid6.
Secondly when you remap sectors, it slows down the drive -- so that drive won't be within 'tolerance' for hardware RAID, so you'd need to replace the drive most likely (if you had a hot spare in the machine, it could immediately start a rebuild).
I'm not aware of how to detect a remap on the fly. Some drives do it on read, so the very act of doing a full disk scan might trigger a remap. I've never heard of a raid array kicking a drive out in favor of the spare based on a single remap'ed sector. Are you aware of raid arrays that use the smart data for remaps to kick out drives? If so, that is very interesting.
Third -- RAID1 is safer than RAID6 for the same # of total disks in all cases w/same # of even spindles (need an even number for RAID1, obviously).
What do you call a 3-disk mirror? I thought it was still raid1 so I don't get the obvious statement. HP hardware arrays used to allow up to 8 disks in a raid1. (Not a raid 10). If you're saying a 4-disk mirror is safer than a 4-disk raid6 I agree.
If you only have 3 disks total, you could probably do RAID6 and it would be safer, but 1 data + 2 parity...ouch.
Agreed, stupid. If you have 3 disks and you want the best reliability just create a 3-disk mirror.
But the 1st minimum size demonstrates the problem (and it gets worse w/more disks). With min number of spindles that will work for both: 4, RAID6 would have 2 data disks and 2 parity. while raid10 would have 2 data disks and 2 mirrors.
Agreed
If your failure rate is 'x', then the no-fail rate is 1-x per disk.
Ok
In the raid 6, if any of the other 3 disks fail (in addition to 1st failure), the raid is toast.
Totally wrong. The entire purpose of raid 6 is to survive a dual disk failure mode.
With a RAID10, there is only 1 disk that can cause the whole array to fail (the mirror of the one that went bad). If you get a 2nd fail on another pair, you can still rebuild. With only 1 disk "exposed" on RAID10, the % chance of the whole RAID failing is the %chance of 1 disk failing.
Raid6 is always safer than raid10 if there is only 2 disks per mirror set.
However, w/raid6, there are 3 disks that are critical to rebuild the bad one -- their "no fail case is (1 - x)**3.
Simply false. I didn't read further as you seem to not know what raid6 is. Greg -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
greg.freemyer@gmail.com wrote:
Are you aware of raid arrays that use the smart data for remaps to kick out drives? If so, that is very interesting.
I don't know their exact algorithms, but one of them is a difference in rotation speed and/or access times. If a sector has been remapped on the same 'cylinder', it might not. However, google's data on drive failures showed that "after the first scan error, they found a drive was 39 times more likely to fail in the next 60 days than normal drives." Which means if you have SW that quietly and automatically rewrites the sector, it can hide the risk of continuing to use that drive. (http://storagemojo.com/2007/02/19/googles-disk-failure-experience/) --- Sorry, was thinking of RAID5, w/6, you'd need a 3 disk failure. But you'd still only need 1 bad SW failure -- the RAID6 won't protect you from human error. The chances of human error are alot higher than HW% failure. Which is why I go with daily incremental backups on top of RAID-10.
I didn't read further as you seem to not know what raid6 is.
But I notice you didn't bother to explain why it was wrong or what might make RAID6 better than going for backups. Guess you thought everyone else on this list was as stupid as me. -l -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On May 31, 2015 12:32:51 AM EDT, Linda Walsh <suse@tlinx.org> wrote:
greg.freemyer@gmail.com wrote:
Are you aware of raid arrays that use the smart data for remaps to kick out drives? If so, that is very interesting.
I don't know their exact algorithms, but one of them is a difference in rotation speed and/or access times. If a sector has been remapped on the same 'cylinder', it might not. However, google's data on drive failures showed that "after the first scan error, they found a drive was 39 times more likely to fail in the next 60 days than normal drives."
Which means if you have SW that quietly and automatically rewrites the sector, it can hide the risk of continuing to use that drive. (http://storagemojo.com/2007/02/19/googles-disk-failure-experience/)
--- Sorry, was thinking of RAID5, w/6, you'd need a 3 disk failure.
But you'd still only need 1 bad SW failure -- the RAID6 won't protect you from human error. The chances of human error are alot higher than HW% failure.
Which is why I go with daily incremental backups on top of RAID-10.
I didn't read further as you seem to not know what raid6 is.
But I notice you didn't bother to explain why it was wrong or what might make RAID6 better than going for backups. Guess you thought everyone else on this list was as stupid as me.
-l
Linda, I simply think it is obvious raid6 is inherently safer than raid10. == gory details == For the the situation without background data scrubbing: let's say there is a "x" chance that a drive has undetected bad sectors. Note: (I scanned about 20 disks out of laptops about 3 weeks ago. One of them had a bad sector. 1 in 20 drives having an untapped bad sector sounds about right to me based on personal experience. My job calls for doing a sector by sector read of my clients drives, so I'm often the person that finds undetected media errors.) So if one member of a mirror dies, then there is x chance that the remaining member has at least one bad sector. At least as of a few years ago, mdraid would abort a mirror re-build as soon as it hit that bad sector. I think for most of us we would agree that in the course of 10 years the odds of at least one drive failure in a mirror pair is effectively 100%, so the odds of a full raid failure are at least x, where I claim x is about 1 in 20. (yes there are ways force data loss for that bad sector and trigger a remap. After that the rebuild should complete, but you still have at least one sector of known data loss.) With a 4 drive raid 6, you need the exact same sector on 2 of the 3 remaining drives to be bad. Even if all 3 of the surviving member drives have a single bad sector, the odds of it being the exact same sector are in the billion to one odds range. In the data scrubbing case: For this I will assume the drives are "perfect" and have no hidden bad sectors. Assume the odds of the second drive of a mirror pair failing before a rebuild can complete are y. Thus the odds of a mirror pair totally failing is simply y (maybe one in 100,000). For the raid 6 you need 2 additional drives to fail prior to the rebuild completing. Thus the odds are on the order of y^2. (Maybe one in 10,000,000,000) Thus the odds of a raid6 failure are on the order of 1 in a billion, but the odds of a mirror failing are on the order of one in 100,000. Getting y more precisely will change the exact odds, but regardless raid6 is safer than a mirror pair simply because it can survive a member drive failure during the rebuild time. Greg -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On May 31, 2015 2:46:39 AM EDT, greg.freemyer@gmail.com wrote:
On May 31, 2015 12:32:51 AM EDT, Linda Walsh <suse@tlinx.org> wrote:
greg.freemyer@gmail.com wrote:
Are you aware of raid arrays that use the smart data for remaps to kick out drives? If so, that is very interesting.
I don't know their exact algorithms, but one of them is a difference in rotation speed and/or access times. If a sector has been remapped on the same 'cylinder', it might not. However, google's data on drive failures showed that "after the first scan error, they found a drive was 39 times more likely to fail in the next 60 days than normal drives."
Which means if you have SW that quietly and automatically rewrites the sector, it can hide the risk of continuing to use that drive. (http://storagemojo.com/2007/02/19/googles-disk-failure-experience/)
--- Sorry, was thinking of RAID5, w/6, you'd need a 3 disk failure.
But you'd still only need 1 bad SW failure -- the RAID6 won't protect you from human error. The chances of human error are alot higher than HW% failure.
Which is why I go with daily incremental backups on top of RAID-10.
I didn't read further as you seem to not know what raid6 is.
But I notice you didn't bother to explain why it was wrong or what might make RAID6 better than going for backups. Guess you thought everyone else on this list was as stupid as me.
-l
Linda, I simply think it is obvious raid6 is inherently safer than raid10.
== gory details ==
For the the situation without background data scrubbing:
let's say there is a "x" chance that a drive has undetected bad sectors.
Note: (I scanned about 20 disks out of laptops about 3 weeks ago. One of them had a bad sector. 1 in 20 drives having an untapped bad sector sounds about right to me based on personal experience. My job calls for doing a sector by sector read of my clients drives, so I'm often the person that finds undetected media errors.)
So if one member of a mirror dies, then there is x chance that the remaining member has at least one bad sector. At least as of a few years ago, mdraid would abort a mirror re-build as soon as it hit that bad sector.
I think for most of us we would agree that in the course of 10 years the odds of at least one drive failure in a mirror pair is effectively 100%, so the odds of a full raid failure are at least x, where I claim x is about 1 in 20.
(yes there are ways force data loss for that bad sector and trigger a remap. After that the rebuild should complete, but you still have at least one sector of known data loss.)
With a 4 drive raid 6, you need the exact same sector on 2 of the 3 remaining drives to be bad. Even if all 3 of the surviving member drives have a single bad sector, the odds of it being the exact same sector are in the billion to one odds range.
In the data scrubbing case:
For this I will assume the drives are "perfect" and have no hidden bad sectors.
Assume the odds of the second drive of a mirror pair failing before a rebuild can complete are y.
Thus the odds of a mirror pair totally failing is simply y (maybe one in 100,000).
For the raid 6 you need 2 additional drives to fail prior to the rebuild completing. Thus the odds are on the order of y^2. (Maybe one in 10,000,000,000)
Thus the odds of a raid6 failure are on the order of 1 in a billion, but the odds of a mirror failing are on the order of one in 100,000.
Getting y more precisely will change the exact odds, but regardless raid6 is safer than a mirror pair simply because it can survive a member drive failure during the rebuild time.
Greg
After writing that I forgot to say the obvious: Raid != backup. For my business files I use spideroak as my backup solution. It uses the kernels inotify feature to watch for file changes and then sends new and updated files off-site for backup. It maintains historical point in time copies of the files so I can say: please restore this word doc to where it was last month before I screwed up and saved a totally different document on top of it. I have the 100gb option and that is working fine for me at present. Greg -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2015-05-31 14:12, greg.freemyer@... wrote:
On May 31, 2015 2:46:39 AM EDT, greg.freemyer@... wrote:
Getting y more precisely will change the exact odds, but regardless raid6 is safer than a mirror pair simply because it can survive a member drive failure during the rebuild time.
That's very interesting.
For my business files I use spideroak as my backup solution. It uses the kernels inotify feature to watch for file changes and then sends new and updated files off-site for backup. It maintains historical point in time copies of the files so I can say: please restore this word doc to where it was last month before I screwed up and saved a totally different document on top of it.
Ah... interesting. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
Le 31/05/2015 14:12, greg.freemyer@gmail.com a écrit :
For my business files I use spideroak as my backup solution. It uses the kernels inotify feature to watch for file changes and then sends new and updated files off-site for backup. It maintains historical point in time copies of the files so I can say: please restore this word doc to where it was last month before I screwed up and saved a totally different document on top of it.
I have the 100gb option and that is working fine for me at present.
Greg
owncloud do a similar thing (I don't know how it manage differential copies, if only he does it) but all this do not works for me. My files are photo or video, I can upload my photos to my web site full size (I have 2Tb online), but video are around 25Gb for each work (final, 100Mb source), apart fiber nothing else than local can afford it. so hard drive and Blu-Ray for the most important, and sources are only kept around 3 years at least 3 archives copy (around 12 Tb total :-)) jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2015-05-31 16:59, jdd wrote:
but all this do not works for me. My files are photo or video, I can upload my photos to my web site full size (I have 2Tb online), but video are around 25Gb for each work (final, 100Mb source), apart fiber nothing else than local can afford it.
Not even fiber. I have it since recently, and the upload rate is still 10 times lower than the download rate. No technical reason for it, they just do. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
Le 31/05/2015 17:18, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
are around 25Gb for each work (final, 100Mb source)
typo, 100Gb, of course
I have it since recently, and the upload rate is still 10 times lower than the download rate. No technical reason for it, they just do.
France is very lucky (not as much as japan, though), fiber is 1Gb/100Mb, as good as most local network, but not every body have it, and I don't :-) jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 31/05/15 16:36, jdd wrote:
Le 31/05/2015 17:18, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
are around 25Gb for each work (final, 100Mb source)
typo, 100Gb, of course
I have it since recently, and the upload rate is still 10 times lower than the download rate. No technical reason for it, they just do.
France is very lucky (not as much as japan, though), fiber is 1Gb/100Mb, as good as most local network, but not every body have it, and I don't :-)
jdd
Hmm. Here in UK, using BTInfinity, I get 38Gb/9Gb. Of course these are nominal maxima, and in practice the speeds I get are much lower as there are other choke points in the route. Bob - -- Bob Williams System: Linux 3.16.7-7-desktop Distro: openSUSE 13.2 (x86_64) with KDE Development Platform: 4.14.3 Uptime: 06:00am up 7:55, 3 users, load average: 0.16, 0.05, 0.06 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iEYEARECAAYFAlVrLnEACgkQ0Sr7eZJrmU4d1wCcCMB3Zg3y34rmesdhjwIIWO5L 5K0Anj7gyV/948c7kyZ4AaUIx250Py8/ =8kWu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-05-31 17:53, Bob Williams wrote:
On 31/05/15 16:36, jdd wrote:
Le 31/05/2015 17:18, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
Hmm. Here in UK, using BTInfinity, I get 38Gb/9Gb.
Unless you have fiber to the computer, you can not use more than 1 Gb. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlVrL64ACgkQja8UbcUWM1w/6AEAl+9MChSJ7FJVGlpkzYFpKO8k Vt5pBcVUP5uAZ3nRmAsA/2gLicxYEL0Xe4xhSojAm2ZwbLK6/y4TTadhPX9lyDT/ =fABV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 31/05/15 16:58, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2015-05-31 17:53, Bob Williams wrote:
On 31/05/15 16:36, jdd wrote:
Le 31/05/2015 17:18, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
Hmm. Here in UK, using BTInfinity, I get 38Gb/9Gb.
Unless you have fiber to the computer, you can not use more than 1 Gb.
Oops! Deluding myself again. That should be 38Mb/sec down, 9Mb/sec up. Bob - -- Bob Williams System: Linux 3.16.7-7-desktop Distro: openSUSE 13.2 (x86_64) with KDE Development Platform: 4.14.3 Uptime: 06:00am up 7:55, 3 users, load average: 0.16, 0.05, 0.06 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iEYEARECAAYFAlVrOJkACgkQ0Sr7eZJrmU7JIQCeIhLWQ5XNMcyI8PF4azjWQ0UZ qcsAoIKNP2wpKErOQbFYR8nXte9J9tt6 =UCMQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Le 31/05/2015 18:36, Bob Williams a écrit :
Oops! Deluding myself again. That should be 38Mb/sec down, 9Mb/sec up.
just a matter of price :-) 9Mb up is not that bad (10x what I have) jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Le 31/05/2015 17:58, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 2015-05-31 17:53, Bob Williams wrote:
On 31/05/15 16:36, jdd wrote:
Le 31/05/2015 17:18, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
Hmm. Here in UK, using BTInfinity, I get 38Gb/9Gb.
but at what price?
Unless you have fiber to the computer, you can not use more than 1 Gb.
but you can have fiber card on the computer. 100Mb cards are cheap, giga one expensive (and the io may be the culprit) but a real 100Mb is enough. I have it between my online server and the net and it shines :-) jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-05-31 18:47, jdd wrote:
Unless you have fiber to the computer, you can not use more than 1 Gb.
but you can have fiber card on the computer. 100Mb cards are cheap, giga one expensive (and the io may be the culprit)
I don't know. My desktop board, which has some years, came with 2 gigabit interfaces. I have not ever seen fibre on computers, though.
but a real 100Mb is enough. I have it between my online server and the net and it shines :-)
Yes, it is. Here, fiber ISPs (Telefonica and Ono) are embarked in a commercial war: who is faster? Both are now switching clients to 300 Mbps. But what for? Most (home) setups can not make use of it, because most use wifi, and those that don't have 100mbps ethernet... More than 100 Mbps only makes sense if several computers are wired, not on wifi. And anyway, my 100 mbps connection today only makes 70. And what I found is that many sites are slow! They don't feed me as many bytes as I can take. Even some updates in YaST go slow (typically packman). - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlVrP0QACgkQja8UbcUWM1y1egD/Y9pjrznqoeiOg0otqRJJkCoC ffCfMQyrb4m9Cfr26/IA/jp1Dl/G10mlQwFRtkjaqEBICVWKvbqVwi7KyvTidSJ/ =Bjl3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On Sun, 2015-05-31 at 19:05 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2015-05-31 18:47, jdd wrote:but you can have fiber card on the > computer. 100Mb cards are
cheap, giga one expensive (and the io may be the culprit) I don't know. My desktop board, which has some years, came with 2 gigabit interfaces. I have not ever seen fibre on computers, though.
It is very common on corporate servers.
And anyway, my 100 mbps connection today only makes 70. And what I found is that many sites are slow! They don't feed me as many bytes as I can take. Even some updates in YaST go slow (typically packman).
Rate limiting is normal, any/all major sites and services are going to rate-limit you. You buy more bandwidth for more aggregate throughput of concurrent transactions, you do not buy more bandwidth for 'faster downloads' - that won't work. -- Adam Tauno Williams <mailto:awilliam@whitemice.org> GPG D95ED383 Systems Administrator, Python Developer, LPI / NCLA -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-05-31 23:51, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
On Sun, 2015-05-31 at 19:05 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
I have not ever seen fibre on computers, though.
It is very common on corporate servers.
I guessed so :-)
And anyway, my 100 mbps connection today only makes 70. And what I found is that many sites are slow! They don't feed me as many bytes as I can take. Even some updates in YaST go slow (typically packman).
Rate limiting is normal, any/all major sites and services are going to rate-limit you. You buy more bandwidth for more aggregate throughput of concurrent transactions, you do not buy more bandwidth for 'faster downloads' - that won't work.
That's not what they talk about on their commercials, on the contrary, that you'll get more speed, that web browsing will fly. On the fine print they say that speed will depend on the sites I visit, though. Normally yast downloads updates quite fast; it is packman which goes slower, at least some times. The difference is the absence of mirrorbrain, I suppose. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlVrisUACgkQja8UbcUWM1zxVAD8C7qkcSCWaS8XMSS+oj5g7RX+ gTrPejxqg2Sf0JfuS+oA/iuubHGi3ZQ6nkij0F98JbMuYF+E/nWlnSVr05wbqF+C =OCCN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 05/31/2015 06:27 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
going to rate-limit you. You buy more bandwidth for more aggregate throughput of concurrent transactions, you do not buy more bandwidth for 'faster downloads' - that won't work. That's not what they talk about on their commercials, on the contrary,
Rate limiting is normal, any/all major sites and services are that you'll get more speed, that web browsing will fly. On the fine print they say that speed will depend on the sites I visit, though.
I suspect you're talking about different things. You're talking about what you get from your ISP and Adam is talking about what the servers you connect to will allow. Quite different things. Don't forget, if it's a popular site, then there may be several other connections at the same time as yours. You'll have to share the server's bandwidth with those others. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-06-01 03:14, James Knott wrote:
On 05/31/2015 06:27 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Rate limiting is normal, any/all major sites and services are
going to rate-limit you. You buy more bandwidth for more aggregate throughput of concurrent transactions, you do not buy more bandwidth for 'faster downloads' - that won't work. That's not what they talk about on their commercials, on the contrary, that you'll get more speed, that web browsing will fly. On the fine print they say that speed will depend on the sites I visit, though.
I suspect you're talking about different things. You're talking about what you get from your ISP and Adam is talking about what the servers you connect to will allow. Quite different things. Don't forget, if it's a popular site, then there may be several other connections at the same time as yours. You'll have to share the server's bandwidth with those others.
Absolutely, I know that. But it is a new experience for me. You see, till recently I had a 1 mbit ADSL, and I was the slow link in the overall system. Now I have a 100 mbit fibre, and I'm the fast one on the game. I'm not used to be waiting because the web out there is not fast enough for me ;-P - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlVruCsACgkQja8UbcUWM1xkIQD+Mx4kmmawhMi5Pfc97uXSIPwM mnZHGU/4Gi3M4Eu20e4A/ArhK6IShM6oaoD9256OI+3WMsMPC3nnbhiPzh6LjVR5 =BfGz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 05/31/2015 09:40 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
But it is a new experience for me. You see, till recently I had a 1 mbit ADSL, and I was the slow link in the overall system. Now I have a 100 mbit fibre, and I'm the fast one on the game. I'm not used to be waiting because the web out there is not fast enough for me ;-P
As I mentioned, I have 60 Mb and often find myself waiting. I also have an Intel Core i7 CPU (4 core & hyper-threading) and 16 GB of memory, so the problem is not on my end. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-06-01 03:50, James Knott wrote:
On 05/31/2015 09:40 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
But it is a new experience for me. You see, till recently I had a 1 mbit ADSL, and I was the slow link in the overall system. Now I have a 100 mbit fibre, and I'm the fast one on the game. I'm not used to be waiting because the web out there is not fast enough for me ;-P
As I mentioned, I have 60 Mb and often find myself waiting. I also have an Intel Core i7 CPU (4 core & hyper-threading) and 16 GB of memory, so the problem is not on my end.
To me, it is funny. As I said, the main ISPs here are on a commercial war about who is faster. One goes to 100 Mbps, the other does the same within weeks. The one goes to 300, the other too. And both saying how fast our browsing will be, LOL. Then they install our computers with wifi, that doesn't do more than 50. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlVru6sACgkQja8UbcUWM1zEWAD+PfH1SsNTVTgYS5lGVI/PviSM eZQvyF/Ghd4TAlTN5wgA/2lVvTUu6MsfGcZZssm8fafEXVcpvH9iK3kT6VW2UBVb =bpUr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Le 01/06/2015 03:55, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
As I said, the main ISPs here are on a commercial war about who is faster. One goes to 100 Mbps, the other does the same within weeks. The one goes to 300, the other too. And both saying how fast our browsing will be, LOL.
don't forget most people do not use they link only to surf, but also for HD TV. If you have three HD TV at home, you will appreciate to ba able to look at three different programms at the ame time, or stream HD films jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2015-06-01 08:11, jdd wrote:
Le 01/06/2015 03:55, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
As I said, the main ISPs here are on a commercial war about who is faster. One goes to 100 Mbps, the other does the same within weeks. The one goes to 300, the other too. And both saying how fast our browsing will be, LOL.
don't forget most people do not use they link only to surf, but also for HD TV. If you have three HD TV at home, you will appreciate to ba able to look at three different programms at the ame time, or stream HD films
Yes, mine is like that, but one TV only. At least for the moment ;-) But I have measured the speed on the desktop machine and it doesn't seem affected by the TV being on or not. The traffic goes via the router, but I can not see evidence of it in ntop. I can not even find out the IP of the TV. So I do not know what bandwitdth the TV needs. Now that I remember, there is a choice of about 10 Mbps plus TV. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
Le 01/06/2015 12:47, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
I can not see evidence of it in ntop. I can not even find out the IP of the TV.
no IP, direct streaming to the box (AFAIK)
So I do not know what bandwitdth the TV needs.
around 5Mb/s in France (HD) jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2015-06-01 12:56, jdd wrote:
Le 01/06/2015 12:47, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
I can not see evidence of it in ntop. I can not even find out the IP of the TV.
no IP, direct streaming to the box (AFAIK)
But in my case it is connected in one of the standard sockets of the router. If it is not tcp/ip, what is it? Raw ethernet?
So I do not know what bandwitdth the TV needs.
around 5Mb/s in France (HD)
That's a trifle. It does not justify going from 100 Mb to 300. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
Le 01/06/2015 13:13, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
That's a trifle. It does not justify going from 100 Mb to 300.
certainly not but my adsl is only 12... jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2015-06-01 13:58, jdd wrote:
Le 01/06/2015 13:13, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
That's a trifle. It does not justify going from 100 Mb to 300.
certainly not
but my adsl is only 12...
Mine was only 1, that's why I switched. If I had 12, I would have stayed. Copper pair has some advantages: cabling in the house is simpler, for starters. Traditional phone is powered by the copper wires, whereas my phone now is on fiber and absolutely requires AC power (no battery backup, either). If my house mains goes down (which has already happened) I have no way to phone anybody for help. Either I put an UPS, or use the mobile phone, and both solutions will only work for some (limited) hours. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
On 06/01/2015 08:06 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Copper pair has some advantages: cabling in the house is simpler, for starters. Traditional phone is powered by the copper wires, whereas my phone now is on fiber and absolutely requires AC power (no battery backup, either).
My phone is VoIP over the cable TV network. The terminal has a built in battery for when power fails. However, there's nothing stopping you from buying a UPS. I assume your carrier has provided power backup for their equipment. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2015-06-01 14:11, James Knott wrote:
On 06/01/2015 08:06 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Copper pair has some advantages: cabling in the house is simpler, for starters. Traditional phone is powered by the copper wires, whereas my phone now is on fiber and absolutely requires AC power (no battery backup, either).
My phone is VoIP over the cable TV network. The terminal has a built in battery for when power fails.
Not here.
However, there's nothing stopping you from buying a UPS.
On my expense. They are big, heavy things, and I need to place one behind the TV, which is already a mare nest of cables. A battery in the "ONT" (I don't know the English name) by the manufacturer (Lucent-Alcatel, IIRC) would be trivial to do. I do have an UPS upstairs that I will migrate downstairs, no (unsolvable) problem there. The computer has a newer, bigger, one.
I assume your carrier has provided power backup for their equipment.
Most certainly not. This link is in Spanish: <http://fibraoptica.blog.tartanga.net/2014/07/04/analisis-de-los-equipos-utilizados-en-una-instalacion-ftth-de-movistar/> -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
On 06/01/2015 08:41 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On my expense. They are big, heavy things, and I need to place one behind the TV, which is already a mare nest of cables.
I recently bought a UPS and placed it near my TV, to keep my PVR alive during brief power hits. Without it, the PVR will reboot and lose a few minutes of whatever it was recording. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-06-01 16:06, James Knott wrote:
On 06/01/2015 08:41 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On my expense. They are big, heavy things, and I need to place one behind the TV, which is already a mare nest of cables.
I recently bought a UPS and placed it near my TV, to keep my PVR alive during brief power hits. Without it, the PVR will reboot and lose a few minutes of whatever it was recording.
Precisely. Same as I have - but my PVR is upstairs. The UPS protected the router, the PVR, and the wireless phone. Now I have to move it downstairs, and move the phone base as well. And think what to do with the PVR. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlVsduUACgkQja8UbcUWM1zNrgD5ASYiLFtj5/+BlAs64bXij/N1 F2t9LCG1bQ3PjPicolAA/1rPQWLzv53l1ShXoNulAsfO6wR/aoewh3ngvbX9HUU/ =6iuK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-06-01 17:14, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2015-06-01 16:06, James Knott wrote:
I recently bought a UPS and placed it near my TV, to keep my PVR alive during brief power hits. Without it, the PVR will reboot and lose a few minutes of whatever it was recording.
Precisely. Same as I have - but my PVR is upstairs. The UPS protected the router, the PVR, and the wireless phone.
Forgot to mention. One of the features of the new fiber tv I got, is that I can record almost everything, as many simultaneous programs as I want - but it is not done locally, but at the ISP, and stored for six months. I can power off all the equipment, the recording is not affected at all - obviously. In fact, what I think they do, is record everything on all channels, continuously. When a client clicks "record", what it does is simply save a pointer or index to it. So I say: I could go back and watch a program that finished an hour ago, or a day. But no. No? Well, yes... if you subscribe that "extra" service. This thing is full of extra subscriptions. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlVsez8ACgkQja8UbcUWM1zlpAEAhKphpAjJlw/H7Lm/AGFiJzRN ncoc3OLi0uga85t1MIcA/1D2tW42CnfVh0n7hLcTfc1L7QvPyk9iioDfkeOeHQ/I =wS2O -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 2015-06-01 17:14, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2015-06-01 16:06, James Knott wrote:
I recently bought a UPS and placed it near my TV, to keep my PVR alive during brief power hits. Without it, the PVR will reboot and lose a few minutes of whatever it was recording.
Precisely. Same as I have - but my PVR is upstairs. The UPS protected the router, the PVR, and the wireless phone.
Forgot to mention.
One of the features of the new fiber tv I got, is that I can record almost everything, as many simultaneous programs as I want - but it is not done locally, but at the ISP, and stored for six months. I can power off all the equipment, the recording is not affected at all - obviously.
Yes, Swisscom has begun offering this service too recently. Of course, some of us have been recording TV on harddisk since 2001. The first one was a mere 18Gb, which didn't take long to fill, but it was fairly easily upgraded to 120Gb (I think it was).
In fact, what I think they do, is record everything on all channels, continuously. When a client clicks "record", what it does is simply save a pointer or index to it.
Yes, most likely. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (20.6°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - virtual servers, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-06-01 17:50, Per Jessen wrote:
Carlos E. R. wrote:
Yes, Swisscom has begun offering this service too recently. Of course, some of us have been recording TV on harddisk since 2001. The first one was a mere 18Gb, which didn't take long to fill, but it was fairly easily upgraded to 120Gb (I think it was).
Yes, I started doing that when the TV "on air" switched to digital broadcasting. Before that I used tapes, to save from the satellite service (which now I don't have). Recording from the digital TV on HD is easy and has several advantages; like being totally under my control, copying the files to the computer, converting to avi, editing out sections... And I miss one feature: pause a program, go back, etc. On fiber tv I can only do that on a finished recording, not on the live program. And of course, I can not save anything to my computer. It stops that kind of p2p ;-) - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlVsg3QACgkQja8UbcUWM1z8zwD9GXv/02NFh8d5zU+vZh5Czxcf QVsitC8G17BcY7+bZQgA/iXpcIIgf47SL6ilkRFexgSAntRs06LQRWeqwEUVXrgB =Dae7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 06/01/2015 11:14 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
alive during brief power hits. Without it, the PVR will reboot and lose a few minutes of whatever it was recording. Precisely. Same as I have - but my PVR is upstairs. The UPS protected
I recently bought a UPS and placed it near my TV, to keep my PVR the router, the PVR, and the wireless phone.
Now I have to move it downstairs, and move the phone base as well. And think what to do with the PVR.
What's wrong with another UPS? They're cheap. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-06-01 20:46, James Knott wrote:
On 06/01/2015 11:14 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Now I have to move it downstairs, and move the phone base as well. And think what to do with the PVR.
What's wrong with another UPS? They're cheap.
Well, I have three already... :-) One is continuously connected. Now I would need two. Or leave the pvr out. I was going to say that they are not that cheap, but I had a look and they are cheaper that what I remembered: <http://www.pccomponentes.com/sais.html> The (local) range is 40€ to 366€ - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlVswZ8ACgkQja8UbcUWM1xtywD/dW8eXtpoCNZdYwhDCHNEKbhO UFUOMmVdL3+ighNyts0BAIZBlGmtJx/lHkn8jG/Ckpfy3Peyja4P0aOrfOrW/rSj =E8tI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On Mon 01 Jun 2015 08:11:52 AM CDT, jdd wrote:
Le 01/06/2015 03:55, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
As I said, the main ISPs here are on a commercial war about who is faster. One goes to 100 Mbps, the other does the same within weeks. The one goes to 300, the other too. And both saying how fast our browsing will be, LOL.
don't forget most people do not use they link only to surf, but also for HD TV. If you have three HD TV at home, you will appreciate to ba able to look at three different programms at the ame time, or stream HD films
jdd
Hi I have 6Mb/s cable connection here, with four (or more) laptops, a desktop/kvm machine, two android devices, a kindle and an iphone. I can stream netflix to four devices (normally just one) as well as surf the internet etc and don't notice any real degradation from an end user perspective. -- Cheers Malcolm °¿° LFCS, SUSE Knowledge Partner (Linux Counter #276890) SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 12 GNOME 3.10.1 Kernel 3.12.39-47-default up 3 days 14:38, 4 users, load average: 0.46, 0.30, 0.26 CPU AMD A4-5150M APU @ 3.3GHz | GPU Richland Radeon HD 8350G -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 01/06/15 03:55, Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 2015-06-01 03:50, James Knott wrote:
On 05/31/2015 09:40 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
But it is a new experience for me. You see, till recently I had a 1 mbit ADSL, and I was the slow link in the overall system. Now I have a 100 mbit fibre, and I'm the fast one on the game. I'm not used to be waiting because the web out there is not fast enough for me ;-P As I mentioned, I have 60 Mb and often find myself waiting. I also have an Intel Core i7 CPU (4 core & hyper-threading) and 16 GB of memory, so the problem is not on my end. To me, it is funny.
As I said, the main ISPs here are on a commercial war about who is faster. One goes to 100 Mbps, the other does the same within weeks. The one goes to 300, the other too. And both saying how fast our browsing will be, LOL.
Then they install our computers with wifi, that doesn't do more than 50.
Hi The main advantage of fiber for us is not the speed, but that it can support 80 users, even with a chapuza like we have. You can't do that with anything else. It doesn't seem to matter what you use to connect. A 'phone can be just as quick as an intel laptop. We'd guess that the vocabulary includes bandwidth. For just 1 users, we don't think you're going to see much advantage. Vodafone adsl gives you whatever the service can send it to you. We think the limit is how fast the server is sending stuff, not the hardware you use. HTH -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Le 01/06/2015 09:24, buhorojo a écrit :
The main advantage of fiber for us is not the speed, but that it can
the most visible advantage is up speed, that allows you to have a local server serving the net easily, when with 1Mb adsl it's really difficult jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 01/06/15 09:30, jdd wrote:
Le 01/06/2015 09:24, buhorojo a écrit :
The main advantage of fiber for us is not the speed, but that it can
the most visible advantage is up speed, that allows you to have a local server serving the net easily, when with 1Mb adsl it's really difficult
jdd
Hi Please could you explain that in a little more detail? We don't have a local server. We see it in being able to work in a google docs domain. That isn't possible with adsl. Is that an example of what you are saying? Thanks. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Le 01/06/2015 09:54, buhorojo a écrit :
Please could you explain that in a little more detail? We don't have a local server. We see it in being able to work in a google docs domain. That isn't possible with adsl. Is that an example of what you are saying? Thanks.
for example, I have an online server here to serve my own videos http://dodin.info/piwigo/index.php?/category/2672 i don't want to use youtube for privacy reason (most of the video are private). I could have it at home if I had fiber link, not possible with adsl jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On Mon, 2015-06-01 at 09:54 +0200, buhorojo wrote:
On 01/06/15 09:30, jdd wrote:
The main advantage of fiber for us is not the speed, but that it can
Le 01/06/2015 09:24, buhorojo a écrit : the most visible advantage is up speed, that allows you to have a local server serving the net easily, when with 1Mb adsl it's really difficult
The ***ONLY*** technical advantage of Fiber is ***DISTANCE***. Unlike just about every other media the signal does not degrade measurably for a great distance - so higher performance lines are possible over greater distance. A 1Gbp/s FDX ethernet connection is imperceptibly different than a 1Gbp /s fiber connection provided the distance is short and the level of EMF is low. [and there is 10Gbp/s copper now]
Please could you explain that in a little more detail? We don't have a local server. We see it in being able to work in a google docs domain. That isn't possible with adsl. Is that an example of what you are saying? Thanks.
That is not a limitation of ADSL, that is a limitation of *your* ADSL. Very good performance can be provided by ADSL .... at short distances using quality cabling and SLAMs. -- Adam Tauno Williams <mailto:awilliam@whitemice.org> GPG D95ED383 Systems Administrator, Python Developer, LPI / NCLA -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Le 01/06/2015 14:50, Adam Tauno Williams a écrit :
The ***ONLY*** technical advantage of Fiber is ***DISTANCE***. Unlike
yes basic fiber is given for 120 *km* :-))
Very good performance can be provided by ADSL .... at short distances
yes, but distance from you to the ISP building, you don't master :-( jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-06-01 14:50, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
That is not a limitation of ADSL, that is a limitation of *your* ADSL. Very good performance can be provided by ADSL .... at short distances using quality cabling and SLAMs.
Improving ADSL that much needs, probably, replacing cables, as many have 50 or more years (like mine). And that's something they are not prepared to do. Apparently rewiring with fiber is more economical. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlVseIsACgkQja8UbcUWM1wR3gD/bJowxvzFma1Ai6+DnO+/wltW LtGgGnD24E7O2JxxxBsA/1Zrr3JaQVd7UTAa2+5bmKEcipJgiPC0vLHsvhrLGSxc =Hdh0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 01/06/15 03:55, Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 2015-06-01 03:50, James Knott wrote:
On 05/31/2015 09:40 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
But it is a new experience for me. You see, till recently I had a 1 mbit ADSL, and I was the slow link in the overall system. Now I have a 100 mbit fibre, and I'm the fast one on the game. I'm not used to be waiting because the web out there is not fast enough for me ;-P As I mentioned, I have 60 Mb and often find myself waiting. I also have an Intel Core i7 CPU (4 core & hyper-threading) and 16 GB of memory, so the problem is not on my end. To me, it is funny.
As I said, the main ISPs here are on a commercial war about who is faster. One goes to 100 Mbps, the other does the same within weeks. The one goes to 300, the other too. And both saying how fast our browsing will be, LOL.
Then they install our computers with wifi, that doesn't do more than 50.
The fastest we saw on wifi was this: http://tiendaonline.orange.es/internet-4g but that was a demonstration. Unless you have a lot of users that maybe a good choice. It would be interesting to know if anyone has hands on. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2015-06-01 10:05, buhorojo wrote:
On 01/06/15 03:55, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Then they install our computers with wifi, that doesn't do more than 50.
The fastest we saw on wifi was this: http://tiendaonline.orange.es/internet-4g but that was a demonstration. Unless you have a lot of users that maybe a good choice. It would be interesting to know if anyone has hands on.
The page is down for maintenance. But 4G is not WiFi, but cellular (mobile). WiFi speed (bandwidth) adjusts with the number of other transmitters (AP) in the vicinity. Typical is 54 GB, but can be much more if there is nobody nearby. The 5GHz band is supposed to support 1 Gbit, but apparently my hardware doesn't support it. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
On 06/01/2015 07:02 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
WiFi speed (bandwidth) adjusts with the number of other transmitters (AP) in the vicinity. Typical is 54 GB, but can be much more if there is nobody nearby. The 5GHz band is supposed to support 1 Gbit, but apparently my hardware doesn't support it.
That depends on the WiFi version. 802.11g on 2.4 GHz or 802.11a on 5 supports up to 54 Mb/s, though that's peak rate, actual is lower. 802.11n on either band will do up to 450 Mb, IIRC and 802.11ac supports over a gigabit. If you're stuck with a & g, you've got an old model. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2015-06-01 10:05, buhorojo wrote:
On 01/06/15 03:55, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Then they install our computers with wifi, that doesn't do more than 50.
The fastest we saw on wifi was this: http://tiendaonline.orange.es/internet-4g but that was a demonstration. Unless you have a lot of users that maybe a good choice. It would be interesting to know if anyone has hands on. The page is down for maintenance.
But 4G is not WiFi, but cellular (mobile). Oh, OK. It still does Internet so not sure what is the difference. Also it isn't available everywhere in Spain but unless you're running a lot of devices and you have 4g in your zone we'd recommend to have a look at it. It's a lot cheaper than fibra. Most phones don't work, but the box
On 01/06/15 13:02, Carlos E. R. wrote: they give you converts it so both your computer and phone will work. Most Orange stores will demo it. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 06/01/2015 11:45 AM, buhorojo wrote:
But 4G is not WiFi, but cellular (mobile). Oh, OK. It still does Internet so not sure what is the difference.
The difference is 4G is a licensed and charged for service provided by carriers. WiFi is an unlicensed service used by individuals and may be provided by businesses for free. WiFi is only on the 2.4 and 5 GHz bands. 4G can use any of several bands, which vary with country and carrier. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-06-01 17:45, buhorojo wrote:
On 01/06/15 13:02, Carlos E. R. wrote:
But 4G is not WiFi, but cellular (mobile). Oh, OK. It still does Internet so not sure what is the difference. Also it isn't available everywhere in Spain but unless you're running a lot of devices and you have 4g in your zone we'd recommend to have a look at it. It's a lot cheaper than fibra. Most phones don't work, but the box they give you converts it so both your computer and phone will work. Most Orange stores will demo it.
Besides what James says, 4G here has a download limit per month. And I download a lot, even when having a 1Mbps ADSL. Another reason that blocks me from switching ISP, is that as you can see I use the mail service of the ISP. If I go to another provider, I would have to tell many people to change address. And resubscribe many services. Doable, but a pain. The sales people talk of "phone migration", but they forget that things like email migration are impossible. We had precedents. Time ago there was "tiscali.es". It disappeared. They had instructions for mail migration... bullshit. What they did was move the contents of your folder to another domain. Not redirect email sent to the old address to the new address. So no, I'm not prepared at all to switch providers. And fiber is nice, any way... it has problems, yes, but also advantages :-) - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlVsw7MACgkQja8UbcUWM1w6jAEAhG3khAziBxdrzgE9QKCmA2zz xD61HJj3vf4D4ZmXsmgA/3/ayYM/7Yx6ZR9G7aNj0GutGmgfkCi8n1b6TimSdhJV =fgg4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 01/06/15 22:42, Carlos E. R. wrote:
And fiber is nice, any way... it has problems, yes, but also advantages :-)
For us it's the only way. Sorry, we thought you were looking for something faster than adsl but I think you've already gone to fiber? If not, and you do find a way to redirect your mail, the orange 4g en casa is not limited, you don't need a fone line and it's only €30 per month. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-06-01 23:06, buhorojo wrote:
On 01/06/15 22:42, Carlos E. R. wrote:
And fiber is nice, any way... it has problems, yes, but also advantages :-)
For us it's the only way. Sorry, we thought you were looking for something faster than adsl but I think you've already gone to fiber?
Yes, I went for fiber, it was installed about a month ago.
If not, and you do find a way to redirect your mail, the orange 4g en casa is not limited, you don't need a fone line and it's only €30 per month.
Not limited? Interesting. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlVsyfUACgkQja8UbcUWM1zGqgD/SJPPOn5ZMg0k0aPkqFrzWkP9 XH8Pl0LOsFp3wk6JrLAA/21GD4R9hC0Pjddt7FSUJt70B5hmUAIwMeN0wwVNJ/v8 =Fqtq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 01/06/15 23:09, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Not limited? Interesting.
It's only limited if you connect via your phone on one of their undecipherable small print contracts which always charge you a lot more than what it says in the publicity. If you take their 4g-to-wifi box, it's not. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2015-06-02 09:56, buhorojo wrote:
On 01/06/15 23:09, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Not limited? Interesting.
It's only limited if you connect via your phone on one of their undecipherable small print contracts which always charge you a lot more than what it says in the publicity. If you take their 4g-to-wifi box, it's not.
Ah! That's curious. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
On 05/31/2015 09:55 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Then they install our computers with wifi, that doesn't do more than 50.
Isn't there an Ethernet connection available? Can't you use your own WiFi? My cable modem came with a built in router & WiFi. But I put it in bridge mode and use a Linux box as my router/firewall. I have a separate WiFi access point that runs 802.11n. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2015-06-01 13:42, James Knott wrote:
On 05/31/2015 09:55 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Then they install our computers with wifi, that doesn't do more than 50.
Isn't there an Ethernet connection available? Can't you use your own WiFi? My cable modem came with a built in router & WiFi. But I put it in bridge mode and use a Linux box as my router/firewall. I have a separate WiFi access point that runs 802.11n.
Yes, it comes with 4 "holes", one used by the TV. The issue is that the three new little boxes and cables are (mandatorily?) placed as close to the TV in the sitting room as possible. My computer room is on another room, far away, upstairs. With ADSL, as I had ages ago cabled the house to have phone on several rooms (before wireless home phones were popular), the ADSL router and AP were placed in the "computer room". Everything neat and working. The ISP technicians did not place a cable from tv to computer on the other room. The solution they offer is you buy a wifi card for the desktop machine. I told the ISP that was impossible, as some of my devices are not computers at all, they do not accept cards. The talk person was baffled, I don't remember if she suggested a wifi to wifi to ethernet setup (which is slow) or I did. However, a friend told me that the technicians have an obligation to install the cable where the clients need it, but to me they denied the possibility. I'm on my own for that. I have just set, temporarily (ie, for years) a cable hanging from the ceiling going upstairs. Eventually, I'll drill a hole in the concrete floor and pass the cable... you know, houses here are made from concrete, no wood. Drilling that hole is no trivial matter. Plus that ceiling is 3 meters up, and I'm scared of heights ;-) -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2015-06-01 13:42, James Knott wrote:
On 05/31/2015 09:55 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Then they install our computers with wifi, that doesn't do more than 50.
Isn't there an Ethernet connection available? Can't you use your own WiFi? My cable modem came with a built in router & WiFi. But I put it in bridge mode and use a Linux box as my router/firewall. I have a separate WiFi access point that runs 802.11n.
Yes, it comes with 4 "holes", one used by the TV. The issue is that the three new little boxes and cables are (mandatorily?) placed as close to the TV in the sitting room as possible.
Three new boxes? If your TV is connected via ethernet (assuming the 4 "holes" are RJ45 sockets), max distance is 100m.
My computer room is on another room, far away, upstairs. With ADSL, as I had ages ago cabled the house to have phone on several rooms (before wireless home phones were popular), the ADSL router and AP were placed in the "computer room". Everything neat and working.
Things happen at different times in different places, but for me, ADSL came good few years after DECT phones became popular.
The ISP technicians did not place a cable from tv to computer on the other room. The solution they offer is you buy a wifi card for the desktop machine. I told the ISP that was impossible, as some of my devices are not computers at all, they do not accept cards.
Do they have a USB port? Try googling "DWA-121 Wireless N 150 Pico USB Adapter". I've just bought a couple of those.
However, a friend told me that the technicians have an obligation to install the cable where the clients need it, but to me they denied the possibility. I'm on my own for that.
Why don't you tie a cat5 cable on the end of our ADSL cable and pull it through? -- Per Jessen, Zürich (23.2°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - your free DNS host, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2015-06-01 14:36, Per Jessen wrote:
Carlos E. R. wrote:
Yes, it comes with 4 "holes", one used by the TV. The issue is that the three new little boxes and cables are (mandatorily?) placed as close to the TV in the sitting room as possible.
Three new boxes? If your TV is connected via ethernet (assuming the 4 "holes" are RJ45 sockets), max distance is 100m.
No, I mean that the ISP places 3 new boxes: one is called "ONT", which is a device that converts from fiber to ethernet, then a router, then a TV decoder. Yes, certainly they could place the boxes anywhere in the house, and run cables. But they don't. The big thing for them is the TV, and then sell you extras: movies, serials subscriptions, sports subscriptions, etc.
My computer room is on another room, far away, upstairs. With ADSL, as I had ages ago cabled the house to have phone on several rooms (before wireless home phones were popular), the ADSL router and AP were placed in the "computer room". Everything neat and working.
Things happen at different times in different places, but for me, ADSL came good few years after DECT phones became popular.
I got one many years ago, but it was relatively expensive and the Ni-Cd battery died soon. Replaced it, died again (memory effect). Being a two levels old house, having a phone plug downstairs and upstairs was very important, so I run the cables many years ago. Or rather, my father did, with my help. The cross.ceiling hole existed previously, it was used for the house bell.
The ISP technicians did not place a cable from tv to computer on the other room. The solution they offer is you buy a wifi card for the desktop machine. I told the ISP that was impossible, as some of my devices are not computers at all, they do not accept cards.
Do they have a USB port? Try googling "DWA-121 Wireless N 150 Pico USB Adapter". I've just bought a couple of those.
Nay. One is an HP printer, another is an old multimedia box for the tv, another is an old laptop with no wifi... Anyway, I prefer cable. Faster transmission.
However, a friend told me that the technicians have an obligation to install the cable where the clients need it, but to me they denied the possibility. I'm on my own for that.
Why don't you tie a cat5 cable on the end of our ADSL cable and pull it through?
I'll try that, of course, but I suspect the hole is not wide enough. And I will need somebody else help, one person can't do this. Everything is doable. It just is complicated and needs work. Or expense. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
Carlos E. R. wrote:
The ISP technicians did not place a cable from tv to computer on the other room. The solution they offer is you buy a wifi card for the desktop machine. I told the ISP that was impossible, as some of my devices are not computers at all, they do not accept cards.
Do they have a USB port? Try googling "DWA-121 Wireless N 150 Pico USB Adapter". I've just bought a couple of those.
Nay. One is an HP printer, another is an old multimedia box for the tv, another is an old laptop with no wifi... Anyway, I prefer cable. Faster transmission.
Yeah me too, but sometimes cable is just too cumbersome. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (23.9°C) http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - dedicated server rental in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Op maandag 1 juni 2015 14:23:14 schreef Carlos E. R.:
Yes, it comes with 4 "holes", one used by the TV. The issue is that the three new little boxes and cables are (mandatorily?) placed as close to the TV in the sitting room as possible.
I have the same type of set-up. I understood that the link to the ISP carries two VLANs, one for the TV signal and one for the Internet connection. The TV VLAN is bridged directly to the TV outlet on the modem. I can see the TV box, connected to that outlet, is using DHCP to get a 10.x.y.z address in the TV network. The Internet connection is connected to the NAT server in the modem. -- fr.gr. member openSUSE Freek de Kruijf -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-06-01 14:54, Freek de Kruijf wrote:
Op maandag 1 juni 2015 14:23:14 schreef Carlos E. R.:
I have the same type of set-up. I understood that the link to the ISP carries two VLANs, one for the TV signal and one for the Internet connection. The TV VLAN is bridged directly to the TV outlet on the modem. I can see the TV box, connected to that outlet, is using DHCP to get a 10.x.y.z address in the TV network. The Internet connection is connected to the NAT server in the modem.
Ah... makes sense. Yes... rings a bell here. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlVsfaoACgkQja8UbcUWM1zlBgD/e6TiS0V3qmb4BrVQKj/QRK2j kkdv37lKLRRSUfxEyNcA/R/jbUri4clHl9geG0eRCJbnjrlKDSDisLkKzIYASgnp =dfiE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 06/01/2015 03:23 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
drill a hole in the concrete floor and pass the cable
- names like DeWalt, Bosch, Makita, Sparky, Ryobi and Erbauer make Percussion [hammer] Drills - with a Concrete-Diamond-Tip Drill-Bit . . . it should drill thru like cheese :: as to Heights :: maybe it's possible to drill from above, with feet on the deck ........... regards -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-06-01 14:56, ellanios82 wrote:
- with a Concrete-Diamond-Tip Drill-Bit . . . it should drill thru like cheese
Yes, but not being an expert, I could drill through a beam and damage it. And anyway, I don't have a bit that long. And if I buy one, my machine is not good enough for a long bit. No, if I decide to drill that hole, I have to hire a professional. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlVsfx8ACgkQja8UbcUWM1wVdwEAoIdzWX+JbQzjOhevaYFQPjEe 77ra/jrzvyF4EXOuQIsA/3OOiC4+BSfjw4p1yfxaU+IAEaV/buHolUskdEpV77Sd =gcGT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Le 01/06/2015 17:49, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
No, if I decide to drill that hole, I have to hire a professional.
probably much more expensive than buying the hardware, and not more secure :-) jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 06/01/2015 07:46 PM, jdd wrote:
have to hire a professional.
probably much more expensive than buying the hardware, and not more secure :-)
- a percussion electric drill is a useful tool to have at home :: long-shanked diamond-tip concrete-drill-bit is not a mighty expense ........... regards -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
jdd wrote:
Le 01/06/2015 17:49, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
No, if I decide to drill that hole, I have to hire a professional.
probably much more expensive than buying the hardware, and not more secure :-)
Yes, a hammer drill is hardly a big expense - in my long life I have even managed to acquire two. The oldest is going on 25+ years. The drill-bits are often pricier, especially for long drills suitable for concrete. I've never had to buy any diamond-tipped bits though - maybe the Greek earthquake-proof concrete is a bit tougher :-) -- Per Jessen, Zürich (20.8°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - free dynamic DNS, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 06/01/2015 08:15 PM, Per Jessen wrote:
> diamond-tipped bits
- believe the stuff used is called "Crushing Boart" [ not that expensive ]
{ - as wikipedia says : "Bort or boart is a term used in the diamond
industry to refer to shards of non-gem-grade/quality diamonds. In the
manufacturing and heavy industries, "bort" is used to describe dark,
imperfectly formed/crystallized diamonds of varying levels of opacity.
The lowest grade, "crushing bort", is crushed by steel mortars and used
to make industrial-grade abrasive grits. Small bort crystals are used in
drill bits. The Democratic Republic of the Congo provides 75% of the
world supply of crushing bort" }
............
regards
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Le 01/06/2015 19:35, ellanios82 a écrit : > On 06/01/2015 08:15 PM, Per Jessen wrote: >> diamond-tipped bits > - believe the stuff used is called "Crushing Boart" [ not that > expensive ] anyway, most of the time it's possible to avoid concrete (for example using existent holes or passing through exterior) jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-06-01 18:46, jdd wrote:
Le 01/06/2015 17:49, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
No, if I decide to drill that hole, I have to hire a professional.
probably much more expensive than buying the hardware, and not more secure :-)
Not for me! If I drill a beam and break it, the bill would be tremendous. I'm unsure if the beams are steel or reinforced concrete in this old house. The first type is not doable, the second might break. You have to know where the are, and choose another place for the hole. Anyway, I have soon to do repairs that I can't do myself; so if I finally need to do the hole, I'd just add it to the list. First steps first. Buy a roll of cable! - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlVsxT0ACgkQja8UbcUWM1yPtAD/fbmYTV8YPhhN9FXHhsPtGQo1 /mTm4BOaUoVFbIkl1i8A/2LcsKa91r1/6hx8fsO5p9cnVGPADK/oisrnfUHtAIJ/ =Z67Y -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On Sun, 2015-05-31 at 21:50 -0400, James Knott wrote:
On 05/31/2015 09:40 PM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
But it is a new experience for me. You see, till recently I had a 1 mbit ADSL, and I was the slow link in the overall system. Now I have a 100 mbit fibre, and I'm the fast one on the game. I'm not used to be waiting because the web out there is not fast enough for me ;-P As I mentioned, I have 60 Mb and often find myself waiting. I also have an Intel Core i7 CPU (4 core & hyper-threading) and 16 GB of memory, so the problem is not on my end.
Yep, I have ~120Mbp/s combined from two independent fiber providers routed through a Cisco 7206VXR. Rate limiting on the remote is normal - and as more people get faster connections - probably a smart thing for everyone to do. -- Adam Tauno Williams <mailto:awilliam@whitemice.org> GPG D95ED383 Systems Administrator, Python Developer, LPI / NCLA -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 06/01/2015 08:38 AM, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
Rate limiting on the remote is normal - and as more people get faster connections - probably a smart thing for everyone to do.
Actually, not. If you're the only one connected to a site, why not use all available bandwidth? On the other hand, if there are multiple users, then TCP is inherently "rate limiting" in that it's designed to share the bandwidth. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Carlos E. R. wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 2015-05-31 23:51, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
On Sun, 2015-05-31 at 19:05 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
I have not ever seen fibre on computers, though.
It is very common on corporate servers.
I guessed so :-)
And anyway, my 100 mbps connection today only makes 70. And what I found is that many sites are slow! They don't feed me as many bytes as I can take. Even some updates in YaST go slow (typically packman).
Rate limiting is normal, any/all major sites and services are going to rate-limit you. You buy more bandwidth for more aggregate throughput of concurrent transactions, you do not buy more bandwidth for 'faster downloads' - that won't work.
That's not what they talk about on their commercials, on the contrary, that you'll get more speed, that web browsing will fly.
Right, that's how you sell it to Joe Bloggs. Nothing much wrong with that.
Normally yast downloads updates quite fast; it is packman which goes slower, at least some times. The difference is the absence of mirrorbrain, I suppose.
mirrorbrain doesn't add much without a widespread set of mirrors. I don't know pacmans mirroring setup. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (19.5°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - free dynamic DNS, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2015-06-01 09:48, Per Jessen wrote:
Carlos E. R. wrote:
That's not what they talk about on their commercials, on the contrary, that you'll get more speed, that web browsing will fly.
Right, that's how you sell it to Joe Bloggs. Nothing much wrong with that.
Exactly :-)
Normally yast downloads updates quite fast; it is packman which goes slower, at least some times. The difference is the absence of mirrorbrain, I suppose.
mirrorbrain doesn't add much without a widespread set of mirrors. I don't know pacmans mirroring setup.
Yes, that's it. Mirror brain spreads the load automatically over the mirrors. Packman doesn't use mirror brain, but I don't know if it has some other setup. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
On 05/31/2015 11:53 AM, Bob Williams wrote:
Here in UK, using BTInfinity, I get 38Gb/9Gb
That's seems a bit fast. On cable modem, I get 60/10 Mb, though I have seen it as high as low 80's down. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-05-31 17:36, jdd wrote:
Le 31/05/2015 17:18, Carlos E. R. a écrit :
I have it since recently, and the upload rate is still 10 times lower than the download rate. No technical reason for it, they just do.
France is very lucky (not as much as japan, though), fiber is 1Gb/100Mb, as good as most local network, but not every body have it, and I don't :-)
I have, in theory, 100Mb/10Mb, and next week I should have 300Mb/??, but it is almost pointless. The new router is just behind the TV set in the sitting room, very far from my work room. They don't cable the house, they only test wifi. And wifi is limited to about 54Mbps total. I have a temporary ethernet cable to my workroom, which appears to do gigabit, I'm unsure. On the sitting room, I can connect the laptop to the router via ethernet, but I doubt that my laptop supports gigabit, so the max speed would be 100. The rest of the connection, 300, is wasted. And anyway, the ISP insists on setting the upload at 10 times slower than the download, so that "uploading" backups to the cloud is still even more clunky. Maybe they want people to buy "enterprise" or "professional" connections to have /decent/ upload speeds. - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlVrL1AACgkQja8UbcUWM1wIWAD/fYgwLc+xl5BKKIhrGbKpjaeK Yz3UbcJZAlBV7NPeLIkA/RMQC+fbIk7g3+rTYqbFIrDFDR72ibKTAFe+LXI+le/s =srVY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2015-05-31 16:59, jdd wrote:
but all this do not works for me. My files are photo or video, I can upload my photos to my web site full size (I have 2Tb online), but video are around 25Gb for each work (final, 100Mb source), apart fiber nothing else than local can afford it.
Not even fiber. I have it since recently, and the upload rate is still 10 times lower than the download rate. No technical reason for it, they just do.
Sure. Fibre is only a medium, it says nothing about the services offered. Same for copper for that matter. If you buy an asymmetric service, that's what you get - if you buy a symmetric service, ditto. We have a number of providers available on our fibre - speed offered varies with the provider - 10/10, 20/20, 30/30, 60/60, 100/100 with provider number 1, 1000/100, 200/40, 50/10, 20/4, 10/2, 5/1 with number 2, 1000/1000 with number 3. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (22.9°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - your free DNS host, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 05/31/2015 02:42 PM, Per Jessen wrote:
I have it since recently, and the upload rate is still 10 times lower
than the download rate. No technical reason for it, they just do. Sure. Fibre is only a medium, it says nothing about the services offered. Same for copper for that matter. If you buy an asymmetric service, that's what you get - if you buy a symmetric service, ditto.
Asymmetrical service is due to the limitations of the technology. With ADSL, it was to get adequate download bandwidth over telephone pairs. However, there are symmetric services, such as HDSL, which offer balanced bandwidth. With cable, there's contention that has to be dealt with, as well as upstream bandwidth limitations. However, with fibre, there's no such restriction. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 2015-05-31 21:12, James Knott wrote:
On 05/31/2015 02:42 PM, Per Jessen wrote:
I have it since recently, and the upload rate is still 10 times lower
than the download rate. No technical reason for it, they just do. Sure. Fibre is only a medium, it says nothing about the services offered. Same for copper for that matter. If you buy an asymmetric service, that's what you get - if you buy a symmetric service, ditto.
Asymmetrical service is due to the limitations of the technology. With ADSL, it was to get adequate download bandwidth over telephone pairs. However, there are symmetric services, such as HDSL, which offer balanced bandwidth. With cable, there's contention that has to be dealt with, as well as upstream bandwidth limitations. However, with fibre, there's no such restriction.
Yes, I know that with copper pair there are technical limitations to the upload speed. Both with high speed modems (V90) and with ADSL. But fiber, which is what I have since very recently, doesn't have any technical limitation. The limitation is arbitrary, or commercial. Actually, they didn't offer me any choice. If I insist, I can get a somewhat cheaper service limited to something like 10 mbps, at about the same price as ADSL. By special request, and they will insist that I don't. There was no mention of symmetrical speeds, but they should exist; probably what they call professional or business service. They assume that if I want symmetrical speed is because I want to serve things. And it will maybe come with fixed IP and perhaps a domain. And a hefty price. Just guessing, knowing them ;-) - -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith)) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlVrgsAACgkQja8UbcUWM1w7FAD/VV9yj55PRgZmvt8etk1sJZPc 2wS/klF3uNLGLjFmUF8A/2p1FQq0LHzpZ6HM3842BM069HIFaJPpu5BI/9fJoEAq =keNK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
Carlos E. R. wrote:
Yes, I know that with copper pair there are technical limitations to the upload speed. Both with high speed modems (V90) and with ADSL. But fiber, which is what I have since very recently, doesn't have any technical limitation. The limitation is arbitrary, or commercial.
Commercial / for marketing reasons. I think the asymmetric connections on fibre are offered because consumers who move from xDSL will feel more comfortable with an asymmetric spec. Silly, I know.
They assume that if I want symmetrical speed is because I want to serve things.
Not an unreasonable assumption. Is there any other reason? -- Per Jessen, Zürich (19.5°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - free dynamic DNS, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2015-06-01 09:43, Per Jessen wrote:
Carlos E. R. wrote:
Yes, I know that with copper pair there are technical limitations to the upload speed. Both with high speed modems (V90) and with ADSL. But fiber, which is what I have since very recently, doesn't have any technical limitation. The limitation is arbitrary, or commercial.
Commercial / for marketing reasons. I think the asymmetric connections on fibre are offered because consumers who move from xDSL will feel more comfortable with an asymmetric spec. Silly, I know.
Yes, silly. :-) But true.
They assume that if I want symmetrical speed is because I want to serve things.
Not an unreasonable assumption. Is there any other reason?
The cloud. Using online services like google docs. Working online in general. Working at home and sending large files to the office. At the start of internet, one of the uses was connecting from any computer to any other computer to get a file you wanted. Friend to friend (not anonymous). Nat and dynamic IPs broke it. ISPs did not want it. They wanted us to connect only to established servers. Of course, people need services that connect a user to another user, and for these they need intermediaries (think skype, f.i.). IPv6 might restore the original idea, /if/ everybody is again given a fixed IP. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2015-06-01 09:43, Per Jessen wrote:
Carlos E. R. wrote:
Yes, I know that with copper pair there are technical limitations to the upload speed. Both with high speed modems (V90) and with ADSL. But fiber, which is what I have since very recently, doesn't have any technical limitation. The limitation is arbitrary, or commercial.
Commercial / for marketing reasons. I think the asymmetric connections on fibre are offered because consumers who move from xDSL will feel more comfortable with an asymmetric spec. Silly, I know.
Yes, silly. :-) But true.
They assume that if I want symmetrical speed is because I want to serve things.
Not an unreasonable assumption. Is there any other reason?
The cloud. Using online services like google docs. Working online in general. Working at home and sending large files to the office.
Ah yes, I forgot about that. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (23.1°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - your free DNS host, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
James Knott wrote:
On 05/31/2015 02:42 PM, Per Jessen wrote:
I have it since recently, and the upload rate is still 10 times lower
than the download rate. No technical reason for it, they just do. Sure. Fibre is only a medium, it says nothing about the services offered. Same for copper for that matter. If you buy an asymmetric service, that's what you get - if you buy a symmetric service, ditto.
Asymmetrical service is due to the limitations of the technology.
Not exclusively as my previous posting clearly shows. Marketing gets in the way too. -- Per Jessen, Zürich (19.3°C) http://www.dns24.ch/ - free dynamic DNS, made in Switzerland. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
greg.freemyer@gmail.com wrote:
Linda, I simply think it is obvious raid6 is inherently safer than raid10.
== gory details ==
For the the situation without background data scrubbing:
let's say there is a "x" chance that a drive has undetected bad sectors.
=== At this point, why are we discussing that? I said my raid card does background scanning automatically, once a week (you can change it to a longer time, or you can have it do continuous scanning as well, as well as have it limit itself to 'X'% of the disk BandWidth). Someone mentioned that the mdraid w/linux has an option for doing the same -- so that doesn't appear to be at issue. What is at issue is whether or not it is safer to use RAID6 instead of RAID10+daily backups.
Note: (I scanned about 20 disks out of laptops about 3 weeks ago. One of them had a bad sector. 1 in 20 drives having an untapped bad sector sounds about right to me based on personal experience. My job calls for doing a sector by sector read of my clients drives, so I'm often the person that finds undetected media errors.)
Nearly all times I've run into bad sectors have been when I've used Desktop drives. Many Desktop drives are Enterprise drives w/remapped sectors. I.e. the vendor's tests indicated some need for sector remapping beyond "some" quality threshold. My own experience w/failures: more than once they were they were desktop drives. About 15 years ago, I didn't realize how much difference there was between desktop and enterprise level drives and made the mistake of ordering a batch for use w/a HW raid card. None of them would work -- because all of them had remapped sectors. A second data point was on an order of 26 drives. They were Enterprise drives, but the vendor didn't list or say that they were also 'pre-owned/remanufactured' drives. The LSI-HW raid card labeled 23 of them 'Bad' -- even though they were all Enterprise. A bit of research turned up that their original manufacture-date was over 3 years old. Even though they drives come w/5-year warranty, the OEM had(has) a registry of remanufactured drives and won't honor drives that have been 'remanufactured'. Of special note: I scanned the drives that were rejected. All came up "error-free", but 23 of them had too many remapped sectors that the HW raid card detects as soon as the drive spins up (i.e. it has to be using #defects -- insufficient time for it to have scanned the drive). In my testing I've found that drives with remappings, take longer to scan than drives w/no mappings -- the worst drives took 15% longer to complete a scan than those that didn't. Background scanning that *rewrites* the sector to the same physical media is _potentially_ hiding an issue that Google's statistical data shows has a significantly higher failure chance in the next month.
So if one member of a mirror dies, then there is x chance that the remaining member has at least one bad sector. At least as of a few years ago, mdraid would abort a mirror re-build as soon as it hit that bad sector.
I think for most of us we would agree that in the course of 10 years the odds of at least one drive failure in a mirror pair is effectively 100%, so the odds of a full raid failure are at least x, where I claim x is about 1 in 20.
---- It is recommended that consumer drives be replaced every 3 years, and enterprise in the 4-5 year time frame. If you are still using a 10 year- old drive, might as well play russian roulette. That's scary!
(yes there are ways force data loss for that bad sector and trigger a remap. After that the rebuild should complete, but you still have at least one sector of known data loss.)
With a 4 drive raid 6, you need the exact same sector on 2 of the 3 remaining drives to be bad.
So with a RAID10 (or RAID1), wouldn't you also need the exact same sector to be bad -- as well as in the backup image which is also on a RAID10? If you issue a format command or dd if=/dev/zero of=RAID6, or if you upgrade to a new OS, your machine may be unbootable. RAID6 won't do you any good. My suggestion was, in reponse to the OP -- who was going to have 1 new drive and how could he best use those two drives. best to use the two drives. with 1 extra drive -- use it for incremental backups.
Even if all 3 of the surviving member drives have a single bad sector, the odds of it being the exact same sector are in the billion to one odds range.
Same would hold for 2 separate RAID10's where the 2nd is used for incremental backups. Then lets talk about performance.
In the data scrubbing case:
For this I will assume the drives are "perfect" and have no hidden bad sectors.
Assume the odds of the second drive of a mirror pair failing before a rebuild can complete are y.
Thus the odds of a mirror pair totally failing is simply y (maybe one in 100,000).
For the raid 6 you need 2 additional drives to fail prior to the rebuild completing. Thus the odds are on the order of y^2. (Maybe one in 10,000,000,000)
Thus the odds of a raid6 failure are on the order of 1 in a billion, but the odds of a mirror failing are on the order of one in 100,000.
---- But the mirror is incrementally backed up on a 2nd RAID10. All of a sudden you are talking having at least 4 copies of the data -- all would have to fail. In my use case, I'd have to have 3 additional drives fail before rebuild is complete. How could that not be safer -- protected against soft-attacks that corrupt the data AND HW failures. I've used RAID6 and the performance just wasn't there. But aside from that benefit, I can restore my system from any day in the past 2 weeks and from more spaced apart images going back 3 months right now (Feb 1 level 0 backups). Another benefit of RAID10, say again for simplicity 4 data spindles, RAID1 only needs to write a 2nd disk. RAID6 needs to *read* the 5 other disks in the RAID6, and then do a write to at least 1 parity disk (maybe both). That has to hurt performance.... Also, FWIW, if I got a new disk, the new (usually larger) disk went to backups.. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org
On 2015-05-31 05:59, greg.freemyer@gmail.com wrote:
On Saturday, May 30, 2015, Linda Walsh <> wrote:
If you only have 3 disks total, you could probably do RAID6 and it would be safer, but 1 data + 2 parity...ouch.
Agreed, stupid. If you have 3 disks and you want the best reliability just create a 3-disk mirror.
Not stupid. Different compromise. 3 disks in raid 5 have more capacity than a 3 disk mirror (raid 1), and still can survive a 1 disk total failure (any one of the 3 disks). Such a triple mirror could survive 2 disk failure, but it has lower capacity. It is just an engineering choice. Raid 6 is safer than raid 5, but requires a minimum of 4 disks. <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_RAID_levels#RAID_6> According to the table there, raid 6 can survive a 2 disk failure. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
participants (12)
-
Adam Tauno Williams -
Bob Williams -
buhorojo -
Carlos E. R. -
ellanios82 -
Freek de Kruijf -
greg.freemyer＠gmail.com -
James Knott -
jdd -
Linda Walsh -
Malcolm -
Per Jessen