@JaredBusch said:
Thankfully, my wife buys almost exclusively on sales and such.
Same here. Usually at ridiculous discounts that make the final price about what you could get at WM or Target.
@JaredBusch said:
Thankfully, my wife buys almost exclusively on sales and such.
Same here. Usually at ridiculous discounts that make the final price about what you could get at WM or Target.
The wife is the husband's problem. If she wears the pants, it will be your problem. At any rate, if you make her unhappy, you will suffer one way or another. If you make sure there are clear boundaries that all parties understand and agree to, this can be resolved. If it stays as is and you just "do whatever you want", it's going to end badly.
To be clear, UEB is for VMware and Hyper-V. UVB is for Xen. You can back up any VM like a physical by adding the agent. If you want to back up VM's through the hypervisor, you have to stick to the above correlation.
Agent-based: all physicals use the agent and take flat-file backups. Agent-based is also recommended for taking granular application level backups (SQL, SP, Exchange).
Agentless: with VM's (on proper platforms, corresponding to the list above for UEB) can be protected via the hypervisor. (On a physical appliance, Xen Server can only be agent-based.) Agentless is an image snapshot backup. With VMware, DB's can use AppAware and take stable-state snapshots, as well.
Caveats: On a VM, you may choose to go agent or agentless (only agent for Xen, unless it's on UVB). You probably want the convenient machine restores associated with snaps for your VM's, therefore, agentless is advantageous. However, there are some cases that you might prefer to go with the agent on a VM. If you have a VM file server in excess of 1TB, the creation/mounting of restore images for single file restores (from snaps) can get cumbersome, so it's recommended to use the agent and take file-level backups that can simply be browsed and restored within the web UI. If you have VM's employing SQL/Exch/SP DB's, it's recommended that you install the agent for their backups. You can still take snaps for the VM (which do not include the DB's). Sometimes, if you insist on having your cake and eating it, too, you may choose to go both routes for the same VM. In the case of a large file server, this might be appetizing to you. You get easy file restores, and you take an occasional snapshot backup so you can restore the VM quickly, too. The downside is that you are creating 2 separate backups for the same data, so eating twice the storage space for backups.
Questions? lol
@coliver said:
Haha. The huge banner at the bottom was a good clue.
Excellent! That proves that the banner is effective.
All of what I just posted doesn't even address that you are, in essence, stealing your internet connection. Even with permission from your landlord, you are a separate household/dwelling, and you are stealing from the ISP. That's like having a company car with a gas card and letting your buddy use it all the time and charge his gas to the card. You may have an agreement, but in the end, you are both agreeing to steal from your employer.
@scottalanmiller said:
Sounds like it must be type 2.
Yes, it is option 2. Excerpt from the release article:
"Unitrends Free provides hypervisor-level protection for up to 1 terabyte (TB) of data."
@dafyre said:
@art_of_shred said:
I miss the days when all you had to do was reset the time on the microwave and VCR.
You mean you actually did (and know how) to do that?
Yes, we are the generation that had to because our parents couldn't figure it out.
Very seldom have I found the customer to be right, but that doesn't typically sway their decision-making outcomes.
@coliver said:
@MattSpeller said:
@coliver I hire sparky's because I know what 120v across the chest feels like.
This thread is giving me the hebejeebies, I'm exiting stage left.
Yep... I generally do too unless I can make sure the breaker is off at the panel. We had all the breakers to the upstairs off when doing this and thought we were good.... turns out that wasn't the case. Lesson learned.
I do 90% of my electrical work with the power on. How the heck am I supposed to see what I'm doing if the light's off?!? Besides, 110V just tickles a little. I accidentally channeled 208V one time. I'd like to avoid repeating that one.
Networking seems to have a much higher value than attending sessions, and a great time to really develop relationships with vendors.
@JaredBusch said:
@scottalanmiller said:
Here is the question, why does this matter?
Systems are down, yes. It is a failure, yes. Azure is not down, no. Azure is down to you, yes. It is a Microsoft outage, yes.
It matters to be precise. You of all people should understand that.
What would I tell my clients if this happened on my account? I would tell them there was some kind of MS problem with the account causing the services to go offline. This is the fact. I am not trying to push it off as not an outage. I am stating clearly WHAT it down. It makes all the difference in the world.
This is completely unrelated to the crossed-account billing issue with Azure. That was a MS Azure internal issue, and we were completely at their mercy to get it straightened out: not our issue. This is a MS (not Azure, which is totally separate) account problem. I don't think blame is necessary here, but MS' support attention and abilities are being called into question.
A large customer of ours was trying to backup roughly 5.5TB of local data on a Unitrends appliance rated for 3.2TB, up until a couple weeks ago. We just got them a new, larger unit to give them a total of over 10TB of data protection, but they still did not have a DR plan. Small WAN pipe, remote location, and lack of wanting anything hands-on (carrying drives off-site) determined our limited options. We decided to go with an Iosafe 1515+ NAS for a local backup copy. It's not ironclad, but it's as good as we can do for now, given the limitations we have to deal with. That should arrive before the end of the year, but that will be our first DR project of 2016, getting it installed and operational.
We were having a conversation at the dinner table the other night, about how the implementation of technology is so much different than what the dreamers had imagined. Once upon a time, we looked into the "future" and imagined a day when we would be able to communicate in "cyberspace", parallel to our actual reality, and how we would use this technology for all kinds of productive things. Reality: we carry a piece of tech in our pockets that holds nearly instant access to just about every bit of knowledge ever conceived (like Orlando Jones' character in "The Time Machine"), and what is it used for? I think the overwhelming majority is looking a cat pictures and watching porn. As we look ahead, we yearn for the day when large payloads can be effortlessly transported over great distances, through teleportation, changing the face of reality itself. I imagine the typical use will be something more like sending perfectly-timed bags of flaming dog poop outside random people's front doors, and making getting dressed even less necessary for a trip to Wal Mart. I mean, people are still photocopying their butt and 3-D printers are great for making coffee mugs. What do you see for our bright "world of tomorrow"?
I have been dealing with a customer having occasional failed outbound calls on their Free PBX system. We have looked at details like system resources on the server, general network traffic, and even migrated a bunch of VM's onto a new server to split the load up. One of the primary thoughts is that they may be hitting their SIP trunk's concurrent call limit. The main reason for this thoughts are these: 1. the limit is only 10 calls, and they have something like 50 registered extensions, and 2. users have reported receiving an "all busy" message when a dialed call fails to connect. I did notice that the "normal congestion" setting looks like it will play exactly that message in the case of congestion, whatever that means definitively. Also, it seems to me, logically, that a network traffic bottleneck would simply cause the call to "fail" and not prompt a system-originated message to play in response to the drop.
What are your thoughts? To be clear, we're talking about Asterix and Vitelity (SIP provider).
Firstly, let's not confuse "professional" with "expert". People may blur their usage, but they don't mean the same thing. Professional basically means you get paid to deal with it exclusively. How does that not fit in "IT pro"?
She also changed special to valuable, but spelled it "valuble". lol
Can't you just get a fresh copy of your data from the NSA?
@SamieWalters said in What constitutes an IT Pro?:
@wirestyle22 said in What constitutes an IT Pro?:
@Dashrender said in What constitutes an IT Pro?:
@wirestyle22 said in What constitutes an IT Pro?:
@SamieWalters With brain dumps in the world I don't see certifications as a reliable metric to determine competency.
Actually this fully depends on the cert.
As I understand it, the Linux certs have a hands on portion - here is a broken something -fix it. That makes that certification worth something to me.
I agree if there is a lab portion of it for sure
So I guess the question now goes - is there a hierarchy of IT-related certifications and/or degrees? Are some deemed "better" and more "legit" than others?
Absolutely, but I think it's very subjective and will vary greatly depending who you ask to qualify that hierarchy.
I don't care who said/wrote any bit of that article. I agree with 95% of it whole-heartedly. That is all. And, to be clear, I am speaking of the heart of what's said, not the silly details like the exact "$60,000" value, or the "car phone" remark. Those are only making a point, not the crux of the matter.