You will often hear or see the term RDBMS or Relational Database Management System. This term refers to a subset of DBMS, not an alternative, and is specific to those DBMS that handle relational database formats. The term SQL is often incorrectly applied to these, but SQL is a language and relational databases are a mathematical model. While the two have a relationship (no pun intended) they are different things completely and are not directly tied together. Today, what is and is not an RDBMS is increasingly unclear as nearly all DBMS have some relational element and even the most traditional RDBMS stalwarts have begun to add non-relational engines or options.

@MattSpeller said in Always Teach to the Future:

@PenguinWrangler said in Always Teach to the Future:

For tech people I think college is a waste of time.

Depends on the kind of tech. There's stuff you should definitely learn in a classroom before you have any business being on a job site. I generally agree that fundamentally how higher education is taught could be improved greatly.

Doesn't mean college, though. Those are normally safety things. And classrooms teach very little. If it's risky, they should be certified. It's the testing that matters, not the classroom.

In some cases, understanding when you are or are not may only be important for understanding your own scope and responsibility. Knowing that you are not responsible for data loss when someone in management above you refuses recommended backups is important for sleeping at night or telling a future employer about a previous role.

Knowing that you do (or do not) actually run IT could be potentially important for explaining in a court case who is responsible for decisions leading to breaches, data losses or violations. Titles do not matter in court, roles do.

But in a more day to day, practical sense, explaining to management "above you" at your job that they have decided to take over as the head of IT and that that impacts how you and they need to think about your job. Maybe this can make your job better, maybe this can help management understand business failings. But if we can't put these things into words, we cannot begin to address them.

This really follows along well with this discussion: https://mangolassi.it/topic/11852/why-it-builds-a-house-of-cards

It's far easier to avoid the "house of cards" motivation problems with an MSP than with internal staff.

@DustinB3403 said in Why IT Builds a House of Cards:

Just to necro this thread, how would someone in IT actually get the business to see and understand these risks? I've tried this, explained in full detail the chances taken and I get a "thank you for telling us, but let's stay the course" sorts of responses.

Thanks for the necro. Get greeted with a comment I didn't recall making, just to look at the date 2 1/2 years ago. lol.

Then, on a second note, this article legitimately applies to me today.

@Dashrender said in What is the Difference Between a Hypervisor and an Operating System:

@scottalanmiller said in What is the Difference Between a Hypervisor and an Operating System:

@DustinB3403 said in What is the Difference Between a Hypervisor and an Operating System:

@black3dynamite said in What is the Difference Between a Hypervisor and an Operating System:

What would you call Xbox One system, a hypervisor or OS?
http://wccftech.com/xbox-one-architecture-explained-runs-windows-8-virtually-indistinguishable/

If the article is accurate it would have to be a hypervisor. With a dom0 running an anorexic windows 8.

Sounds like they use the term RTOS as a code for hypervisor. They say it is an RTOS but then point out that it is not an OS (in that it doesn't run apps) and that it is a hypervisor (in that it hosts Windows 8.) So either their name is wrong, or their description is.

Ok, I didnt read the article, I commented based on things i heard from Paul Thurrott.

So I'll admit my understanding might have been wrong.

As a side note, Xbox one has been upgraded to Windows 10 now....

It's weird that the article claims it's a partition not a VM....

Partition and VM are not competing concepts. Lots of VMs are partitions. One thing (VM vs physical) is about how it runs. Partition vs. something else is just where it is stored. Nothing in saying it is a partition suggests that it is not a VM.

Now we only have the article to go on, but the article seems pretty clear that it is a VM. But what it really is, no idea.

@John-Nicholson said in Adding a New Hyperconverged Cluster to Your Existing Network:

Of course, there is always the option to keep the old infrastructure indefinitely. This can be an excellent choice if the old infrastructure is purpose designed for a specific workload, such as perhaps VDI, and the HC cluster is designed for more general purpose needs (or vice versa, of course.) Using each tuned for specific use cases is absolutely viable, but does require knowledge of and support of two different clusters each of a unique type which creates IT overhead, but remains a very realistic option.

I'd argue dropping the skill sets to maintain legacy clusters is one of the main appeals to HCI. (I Personally want to FORGET about HBA Queue depth management, and FC Zoning). The problem of running old gear indefinably is the hardware support costs, environmental costs, and lack of support for new hypervisor versions and other things eventually catch up with you before you realize it.

Yes, it's technical debt for sure and in most cases, you want to head towards phasing it out. But whatever skill set you had for it, you will still have at the time that you begin replacing it and can slowly reduce the dependency and the skills related to it together.

They work very differently too. MySQL's features vary significantly based on which engine is in use. They perform differently, have different relational abilities, store differently on disk (MyISAM is one file per table, InnoDB is one file for everything) and use different tools.

This whole topic is now starting to sound like "A house is a house for me" lol.

Literally just got off of the phone with someone who had a FreeNAS bug cause a system to become useless, just like the one case that happened today. But instead of it being the JPE encouraging a mistake, the same problem happened through a GUI bug. One of the big risks that the JPE introduces is that the GUI is all "extra" points of failure and has nowhere near the testing of the standard OS tools. So a little big can cause a lot of damage, as it did. The entire SAN had to be replaced due to a small bug in the FreeNAS interface.

So the service is nothing but the GUI, as expected. 🙂 Thanks for verifying. Nice to know for sure I'm not crazy from time to time.

Funny enough I just had this talk with our President about a 3D printer...

It's been my old school thinking, but I guess I need to give up the 256 node subnets.

@scottalanmiller said:

@ajstringham I think CB is right. If you are a Chevy you are a car, but not all cars are Chevys.

If you are passionate you likely will work hard. But you may work hard and not be passionate. Lots of people hate what they do but feel compelled to work hard.

I took it the opposite way. I though the meant you can be passionate and not work hard. I would say that is not true. But what you said is true.