- Best way to use enum with classes - 6 Updates
- C++ needs some help - 5 Updates
- New static code analyser for Linux - C/C++ - 2 Updates
| Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>: Oct 18 07:31AM +1300 On 10/18/16 02:30 AM, Jerry Stuckle wrote: >>> You don't read very well, do you? >> Prove it with a quote (I know you won't, but what the hell). > You wouldn't be able to read it anyway. Good, so you can't provide a quote. >> networks, they aren't as esoteric ans you appear to believe. > Sure. That is the NIC speed. Not your link speed. It says nothing > about your LAN/WAN connection. Oh dear, maybe a little more help is required? From the dladm man page: dladm show-phys [-m | -H | -P] [[-p] -o field[,...]] [phys-link] Show the physical device and attributes of all physical links, or of the named physical link. Without -P, only physical links that are available on the running system are displayed. ... -o field, --output=field A case-insensitive, comma-separated list of output fields to display. ... SPEED The current speed of the link, in megabits per second. # dladm show-phys ixgbe0 LINK MEDIA STATE SPEED DUPLEX DEVICE ixgbe0 Ethernet up 10000 full ixgbe0 -- Ian |
| Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>: Oct 18 07:38AM +1300 On 10/18/16 02:37 AM, Jerry Stuckle wrote: > There is no way any workstation (or single server, for that matter) > could come close to using anywhere near 10G. Even 1G is a push for > anything other than short bursts. You really do live in the 90s, don't you? -- Ian |
| Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net>: Oct 17 05:32PM -0400 On 10/17/2016 10:21 AM, David Brown wrote: >> Actually, he did. > Have you an exact quotation or reference? If not, I'll assume you are > making things up as usual. Go back and look for yourself. But I know you want me to waste time because you are too lazy to look for it. >> stoopid to the max. > No, a 10G LAN connection in his office is perfectly reasonable if he is > working with 10G equipment. Having a 10G NIC is not the same as having a 10G connection. > Maybe you know of a better way to check 10G interfaces without using 10G > network cards. Or perhaps you are just complaining about him having > this in his office? Maybe you know of a system which can support 10G in other than very short bursts? > Disk throughput is more of an issue, although you can get PCI express > SSD's that can sustain a few GB/s and therefore saturate a 10 Gb > ethernet link. Obviously you are not familiar with them - as you just showed. And just because an SSD can theoretically sustain a few GB/s doesn't mean anything. Real speed is much less than that, and by the time you throw processing time in there, you're talking much less than 1GB/s sustained. > And there are companies that make and sell 40 Gb and 100 Gb Ethernet > cards (dual port). Assuming the customers are not all complete morons, > these folks must have measured that they are already saturating 10 Gb links. Sure - but these are for data centers, which have entirely different needs than someone's office - and can utilize those cards. >> I can converse with hardware engineers so well. > Jerry, your Usenet posts suggest that you are incapable of having a > sensible conversation with /anyone/. Oh, I have sensible conversations with a lot of people. But I don't put up with trolls and idiots. > some time in the past - I have no evidence to the contrary. Maybe you > /were/ working with network hardware some 40 years ago. The trouble is, > you still seem to be thinking in terms of 40 year old hardware. Not at all. I still work on it today. I'm not doing the designs any more - but I work with engineers who do - and we do it on the same level. BTW - I do still do some design in my spare time - it's still a hobby of mine. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle jstucklex@attglobal.net ================== |
| Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net>: Oct 17 05:34PM -0400 On 10/17/2016 10:57 AM, Scott Lurndal wrote: >> stoopid to the max. > While it may be uncommon, it is not unusual - particularly at my > CPOE, where we develop 10/25/40/100Gbit networking gear. There's a difference when you're developing such gear. But that still doesn't mean you have a 10G link - other than for testing. > in many "single servers", and has no problem sourcing or sinking data > at line-rate. Two-socket ThunderX servers are also available, which > will drive four 40Gb ethernet links. How many of those are in people's offices? Or used to anywhere near their capacity? -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle jstucklex@attglobal.net ================== |
| Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net>: Oct 17 05:35PM -0400 On 10/17/2016 2:38 PM, Ian Collins wrote: >> could come close to using anywhere near 10G. Even 1G is a push for >> anything other than short bursts. > You really do live in the 90s, don't you? Nope. I live in the current year. But I also don't live in a fantasy world, like you seem to. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle jstucklex@attglobal.net ================== |
| Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net>: Oct 17 05:39PM -0400 On 10/17/2016 2:31 PM, Ian Collins wrote: >>> Prove it with a quote (I know you won't, but what the hell). >> You wouldn't be able to read it anyway. > Good, so you can't provide a quote. No, I'm not going to waste my time looking for something you're too lazy to find yourself (hint: it's in this thread) and couldn't understand, anyway. > # dladm show-phys ixgbe0 > LINK MEDIA STATE SPEED DUPLEX DEVICE > ixgbe0 Ethernet up 10000 full ixgbe0 Sure. But it shows the physical device and link - not what's beyond your computer and definitely not what actually can be accomplished. You won't get anywhere near 10GB throughput, even to another computer on your LAN. But then you've already backpedaled and admitted you don't have anywhere near a 10GB internet link. And you can't use anywhere near the 10GB link you claim to have. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle jstucklex@attglobal.net ================== |
| woodbrian77@gmail.com: Oct 17 08:56AM -0700 On Monday, October 17, 2016 at 7:55:26 AM UTC-5, Öö Tiib wrote: > unbelievably ridiculous, like their "creepy clown panic". > Even their presidential candidates are behaving like two rabid > dogs. On the one hand I'm glad that 44% of Americans think both Hillary and Trump are "terrible" candidates. On the other hand I can't figure out why it isn't 70%. We have more than two candidates. I'll probably vote for the Constitution Party candidate again. Brian Ebenezer Enterprises http://webEbenezer.net |
| scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal): Oct 17 04:30PM >On the one hand I'm glad that 44% of Americans think both >Hillary and Trump are "terrible" candidates. On the other >hand I can't figure out why it isn't 70%. Because the other 56% are smart enough to realize that thirty years of republican attacks on the clintons may be politically motivated rather than representative of any significant shortcomings. On the other hand, Donald "Hitler" Trump just needs to open his mouth to prove his unfitness for public office. |
| woodbrian77@gmail.com: Oct 17 10:25AM -0700 On Monday, October 17, 2016 at 11:30:51 AM UTC-5, Scott Lurndal wrote: > thirty years of republican attacks on the clintons may > be politically motivated rather than representative of > any significant shortcomings. Heare are some reasons to consider the Constitution Party. "If you believe those tiny people living in their mother's wombs are "persons" and therefore deserving of life, choose me. If not, any of the other candidates will do." "If you want the United States to return to being a free and independent nation able to chart its own course in the world, choose me. If not, any of the others will do." "If you want limited government and personal liberty, choose me. But if not, any of the others will do." I think science agrees that life begins at conception. Brian Ebenezer Enterprises - In G-d we trust. http://webEbenezer.net |
| scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal): Oct 17 06:33PM >=E2=80=9CIf you want the United States to return to being a free and=20 >independent nation able to chart its own course in the world,=20 >choose me. The United States _is_ a free and independent nation and it does chart its own course in the world. It doesn't exist in a vacuum, however. >=E2=80=9CIf you want limited government and personal liberty, choose me.=20 If you want limited government and personal liberty, feel free to move to Somolia. |
| Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net>: Oct 17 05:23PM -0400 On 10/17/2016 3:24 AM, David Brown wrote: > discussion group, and an international forum. I don't use it to > complain about local politics in my little corner of the world - please > don't complain about politics in /your/ little corner of the world. In this case, I agree with you, David. I have to put up with enough of this crap every day. And being in the Washington, DC area, it's even worse than the rest of the country. I don't want to have to deal with it in a technical newsgroup. Rick's crap is bad enough. -- ================== Remove the "x" from my email address Jerry Stuckle jstucklex@attglobal.net ================== |
| legalize+jeeves@mail.xmission.com (Richard): Oct 17 04:33PM [Please do not mail me a copy of your followup] devnexen@gmail.com spake the secret code >http://devnexen.blogspot.ie/2016/10/static-code-analysis.html It's not new. PVS Studio has been around since 2010. The product looks nice, but I've never found time to evaluate it myself. -- "The Direct3D Graphics Pipeline" free book <http://tinyurl.com/d3d-pipeline> The Terminals Wiki <http://terminals-wiki.org> The Computer Graphics Museum <http://computergraphicsmuseum.org> Legalize Adulthood! (my blog) <http://legalizeadulthood.wordpress.com> |
| David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>: Oct 17 09:54PM +0200 On 17/10/16 18:33, Richard wrote: >> http://devnexen.blogspot.ie/2016/10/static-code-analysis.html > It's not new. PVS Studio has been around since 2010. The product > looks nice, but I've never found time to evaluate it myself. What's new is that there appears to be a Linux version. However, that is only for the site-license version, and there is no information or demo for it. It would appear that the Linux version is currently very much an experimental version - it may even require MSVS for Linux to use it fully. Prices are on enquiry - nothing is shown on their website. So it might be a nice and useful product, but it is very hard to tell if it would be useful or cost-effective for any given usage. And it seems to be very strongly biased towards MSVC usage (that's just a comment, not a criticism). |
| You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to comp.lang.c+++unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. |
No comments:
Post a Comment