Breaking things is fine provided it's in a test environment as part of the learning experience ^_^

Unscheduled training occurring in my computer lab with 30+ computers. Requires a plugin to work (Couldn't have known no one told me anything). Can't install the plugin while they are doing the training. Can't do the training until the plugin in installed. No preparation. Extremely frustrated and I feel bad for the people in the training because they're going to be here longer and it's already the entire day.

Not a great start to the week.

I have had no issues

@RoopanKumar said:

@iroal @wirestyle22

did that still it get connecting automatically

@iroal and I will most likely be giving you the same advice (from what I've seen so far). I am still monitoring your issue though so one of us will be replying I'm sure.

Street Fighter V -- In the lab super hard

I will be

@Dashrender said:

OK - manage QOS for VOIP traffic on a flat network (no VLANs)

Of course you can't manage the internet side of things, just the local.

What about WAN optimization/acceleration stuff?

Best practices for detecting viruses through LAN traffic would be interesting. I guess that would be too specific (to wireshark) though considering we are mostly interested in open source and that's the best in town afaik

@scottalanmiller said:

@wirestyle22 said:

Can you clarify as to what you mean? What reason do they attribute to a higher uptime than a ProLiant if they are both configured correctly? Honest question.

So the HPE Proliant line is a micro-computer line based on the PC architecture. They are, just for clarify, the industry reference standard for commodity servers (generally considered the best in the business going back to the Compaq Proliant era in the mid-1990s.) They are very good, but they are "commodity". They are basically no different (more or less) than any PC you could build yourself with parts you order online (this is not totally true, there is a tonne of HPE unique engineering, they are tested like crazy, they have custom firmware and boards, they buy parts better than are on the open market, they add some proprietary stuff like the ILO, etc.) but more or less, these are PCs. The DL380 is the best selling server in the world, from any vendor, in any category.

The HPE Integrity line is a mini-computer line. They are not PCs. Most of them (not all) are built on the IA64 EPIC architecture and have RAS [Reliability, availability and serviceability] features that the PC architecture does not support. For example, hot swappable memory and CPUs are standard. Things like redundant controllers are common. The overall build and design is less about cost savings and more about never failing (or being fixed without going down.) It's a truly different class of device. They are also bigger devices, you don't put one in just to run your website. But you can fit more workloads on them, making it make more sense to invest in a single device that almost never fails.

Interesting. Thank you for the information.

@scottalanmiller said:

@wirestyle22 said:

Even the fact that this is possible is amazing to me

Ever see an HP Integrity withstand an artillery round? There is a video of an HP Integrity doing that (easily ten years old) and another one of an HP 3PAR SAN taking one (more recent, actually the video was made by @HPEStorageGuy who is here in the community.) The HP 3PAR is basically HP's "mini computer" class of storage (same class as the HP Integrity is in servers).

In both cases, they fired an artillery round into the chassis of a running HP system (bolted to a surface of course as the thing would have gone flying) and in both cases the system stayed up and running, didn't lose a ping.

That's wild. HP is doin' it right now.

@scottalanmiller said:

@Dashrender said:

Just to keep this going, @dafyre please tell us what the old failing system looked like. Was it 10 server each with internal disks? What was failing?

And it doesn't mean that the old system was "bad", it could have just been normal.

Two HP Proliant DL380 servers in a cluster (if the clustering is good) is way more reliable than a single Proliant DL380.

But are two of them as reliable as a single HP Integrity SuperDome? Not likely. Those things never go down. Never. It's unheard of.

Now which is more cost effective? Buying 100 Proliants instead of one SuperDome, of course. Which is more powerful? One SuperDome.

Can you clarify as to what you mean? What reason do they attribute to a higher uptime than a ProLiant if they are both configured correctly? Honest question.

@scottalanmiller said:

@Dashrender said:

of course I know the answer is yes, we've seen this in video where a laptop is watching a video that's streaming from one VM and that VM is moved/failed over to another server and the video either never stops... or has a small kinda pause, but no actual failure.

There can be zero pause, but the cost gets higher and higher to do that stuff. And there are other penalties. Like IBM, HP and Oracle all makes systems that will allow you to rip CPUs out of them while they are running. No blips. But they introduce some latency for all operations to make this possible.

Even the fact that this is possible is amazing to me

@scottalanmiller said:

@Dashrender said:

I guess the term independent in RAID is what drives @scottalanmiller point the most. Redundant Array of Independent Drives = so at a drive only level, Independent, the drives are Redundant, and they are in an Array..

Wow - I've never looked at it this way before.

I think the "it must mean the data" perception probably comes from the fact that many people state that RAID is about improving reliability. But it isn't. That's a big reason that people choose it, but RAID is about increasing speed, capacity and/or reliability by using cheap Winchester drives rather than using some other drive type. It's one of the three.

So when we look at it that way, RAID 0 has both redundancy (meaning more than one disk) AND redundancy (meaning something can fail and something else takes over) in two of three instances.

If we need a cache with increased speed over a single drive and we have a five disk RAID 0, then one fails, we just go down to a four disk RAID 0. Not as fast as before, but still faster than a single drive.

That is definitely an interesting way to look at it.

@dafyre said:

@scottalanmiller said:

If redundancy provides that reliability, no problem. If magic fairy dust does, that's fine too.

Where can I find 3 boxes of Magic fairy dust? My supplies are starting to run low, lol.

That's kinda been my whole point though. If redundancy doesn't provide a better perception of reliability, then why bother with it?

If I knew that redundancy wasn't going to help improve the perception of reliability, I'd much rather work on a single server that I knew was going to fail and restore it from backup when the failure happens.

I've been on both sides of that road.

Reality > Perception

I say this working at a place where uneducated perception is leaps and bounds the most annoying part of my job. I could write a book on it.

@scottalanmiller said:

@wirestyle22 said:

Semantics?

Semantics are one of the most important things in IT. This isn't a theoretical experiment in language, this is a real problem that plagues SMB IT every day. Go on Spiceworks and the average conversation around storage is someone being hoodwinked by this very bit of semantics. They request the wrong thing, they get what they ask for and they end up paying a lot and getting something negative.

I understand everything that you guys have said here but you both agree. That is the confusing part of it for me.

Redundancy doesn't mean reliability.
Reliability doesn't mean Redundancy.

I would rather have my users complain up and down, calling me the worst SysAdmin ever yet have a better system overall. I think complication with no real reward is a huge problem in IT from what I have read and experienced.

Take my opinion with a grain of salt though. I have never made incredible claims about my knowledge. I can only speak of my experiences.

Semantics?

@Minion-Queen said:

@wirestyle22 said:

I'll be going to this Mangocon, my first ever. I see the proposed sessions. Do we have an idea of when we will solidify that portion of the event?

I hope to have that done by the end of this week. We have a list of sessions we would like to have but yet to have speakers for all of them!

Can't wait to meet everyone

@RoopanKumar said:

printer automatically getting added in windows 8 machine from server

configured a windows 2008 R2 machine as print server role added

issue is when we remove the printer it is automatically get added to the desktop machine (win8)

I assume you actually did install this printer intentionally at some point?

Turn off Print Spooler Service
run: %windir%\System32\spool\PRINTERS
Delete everything in that folder
Turn on Print Spooler Service
F5 to refresh printers and devices

I'll be going to this Mangocon, my first ever. I see the proposed sessions. Do we have an idea of when we will solidify that portion of the event?

@Dashrender said:

@tonyshowoff Exactly !

The NSA was asked to provide numbers on the number of attacks/issues/ whatever you want to call them than they have thwarted, and they couldn't even come up with a lie of a number - instead they simply said - that's national security information and we can't tell you.