Sunday, October 23, 2016

Digest for comp.lang.c++@googlegroups.com - 22 updates in 4 topics

Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>: Oct 24 08:08AM +1300

On 10/21/16 04:36 PM, Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> may be written to two disks but only read from one, the other being used
> for backup. In fact, that is the most common use for RAID storage -
> backup in case one disk fails.
 
That is a very uncommon (and pretty pointless) configuration.
 
> Of course, you can have more disks in a RAID array, but the operation of
> most are similar.
 
It's good to see you agree with David.
 
> You *can* set up a RAID device to read from multiple disks, but that is
> unusual (although not unheard of).
 
Pretty much every RAID configuration reads from all the dives. Any form
of parity RAID *has* to read from all the drives.
 
--
Ian
Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>: Oct 24 08:12AM +1300

On 10/22/16 01:00 AM, David Brown wrote:
 
> For interesting RAID setups, have you ever looked at Linux's RAID-10
> support?
 
Old hat! For interesting RAID setups, look at ZFS which is now included
with Ubuntu if you can't use it on its home turf.
 
:)
 
--
Ian
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>: Oct 23 09:43PM +0200

On 23/10/16 21:08, Ian Collins wrote:
>> for backup. In fact, that is the most common use for RAID storage -
>> backup in case one disk fails.
 
> That is a very uncommon (and pretty pointless) configuration.
 
It is uncommon, but it is not pointless. For example, it would be
perfectly reasonable to take two 500 GB SSD's and put then as a RAID0
pair, then mirror that with a read-mostly 1 TB hard disk. Your write
speed is going to be limited by the hard disk, but your read speed is
going to be very high - for read-mostly loads, that's fine. You may
even use a write intent bitmap to allow the hard disk to get a bit
behind on the writes and catch up later on, all the while giving you
high speed, redundancy, and lower costs than full RAID-10 SSD would take.
 
You might also want one half of a mirror (or perhaps a third of a
three-way mirror) offsite via a network - and make it read-mostly for
better performance.
 
 
>> Of course, you can have more disks in a RAID array, but the operation of
>> most are similar.
 
> It's good to see you agree with David.
 
I'm sure it was an accident, and will no doubt be denied.
 
>> unusual (although not unheard of).
 
> Pretty much every RAID configuration reads from all the dives. Any form
> of parity RAID *has* to read from all the drives.
 
Actually, parity RAID does not /have/ to read from all drives - you
don't have to read the parity. For RAID-5 and RAID-6, the parity is
spread amongst all the drives, and you clearly want to read the raw data
from all drives. But for RAID-4 with all the parity on one drive, you
may not want to read it at all unless you are recovering from failure or
scrubbing the array. (Parity blocks are sometimes read to make small
RMW partial stripe writes faster, but it is not necessary.)
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>: Oct 23 09:48PM +0200

On 23/10/16 21:12, Ian Collins wrote:
 
> Old hat! For interesting RAID setups, look at ZFS which is now included
> with Ubuntu if you can't use it on its home turf.
 
> :)
 
I use btrfs mostly, with native raid (striping and mirroring). But I
have sometimes used RAID-10 on two hard disks - performance is certainly
good.
 
I haven't tried ZFS more than very briefly (on a virtual machine, which
is not ideal for benchmarking!) - it feels too alien on Linux. And I am
not a great fan of raw Ubuntu - I feel it hides too much, and not in a
useful way.
Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>: Oct 24 08:50AM +1300

On 10/24/16 08:43 AM, David Brown wrote:
> may not want to read it at all unless you are recovering from failure or
> scrubbing the array. (Parity blocks are sometimes read to make small
> RMW partial stripe writes faster, but it is not necessary.)
 
I must admit that I have been using ZFS for so long now that I've
forgotten which RAID-N is which!
 
--
Ian
Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu>: Oct 23 02:04PM -0700

>> support?
 
> Old hat! For interesting RAID setups, look at ZFS which is now
> included with Ubuntu if you can't use it on its home turf.
 
Is it? I was under the impression that ZFS is not included
in Linux (or Ubuntu?) distributions because of some sort of
licensing incompatibility. I set up ZFS on a brand new
Ubuntu system recently, and I'm pretty sure I had to do an
apt-get to get it. (In other words ZFS is allowed to run on
Ubuntu, it just can't be packaged with a distribution - at
least, that is my impression.)
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no>: Oct 23 11:14PM +0200

On 23/10/16 23:04, Tim Rentsch wrote:
> apt-get to get it. (In other words ZFS is allowed to run on
> Ubuntu, it just can't be packaged with a distribution - at
> least, that is my impression.)
 
I think that is the case. The license for ZFS code is an open source
license, but it is incompatible with the GPLv2 of the Linux kernel.
You, as a user, are allowed to mix them - but the distributor cannot mix
them for you.
 
It is not entirely unlike Acrobat Reader, Virtual Box USB extensions,
Nvidia drivers, and various other pieces of software that are freely
available but not free to distribute. A Linux distro can make it easy
to get them with an apt-get, but can't provide them ready integrated.
Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>: Oct 24 10:19AM +1300

On 10/24/16 10:14 AM, David Brown wrote:
>> Ubuntu, it just can't be packaged with a distribution - at
>> least, that is my impression.)
 
> I think that is the case.
 
It is, I should have said available rather than included.
 
--
Ian
Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com>: Oct 24 12:50AM +0200

On Sun, 23 Oct 2016 14:04:32 -0700
> apt-get to get it. (In other words ZFS is allowed to run on
> Ubuntu, it just can't be packaged with a distribution - at
> least, that is my impression.)
 
If you apt-get it in binary form from standard repository then it is
included...
 
--
press any key to continue or any other to quit
Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com>: Oct 24 12:51AM +0200

On Sun, 23 Oct 2016 23:14:45 +0200
> license, but it is incompatible with the GPLv2 of the Linux kernel.
> You, as a user, are allowed to mix them - but the distributor cannot
> mix them for you.
 
Only legal option is to do it via DKMS. Pain if you ask me, but I think
that Ubuntu distributes it already compiled...
 
 
 
 
--
press any key to continue or any other to quit
"Öö Tiib" <ootiib@hot.ee>: Oct 22 06:17PM -0700

On Sunday, 23 October 2016 00:31:06 UTC+3, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> > But nobody can help him. He just doesn't listen.
 
> The same could be said for you, Jacob, and many others. The
> only difference is if you're right and I'm wrong nothing will happen.
 
Where did Jacob claim that nothing will happen? Most people know
that we do not know what will happen. Something will always happen but
we do not know what it is. Are they wrong?
 
> But if I'm right and you're wrong (which I am), you will burn in the
> flames of Hell forever.
 
People who claim they do not know the future are not wrong. However you
also are not wrong. You are lying. You also don't know what will happen
but you lie that you know. Did Jesus teach you to lie? No, He didn't.
Something or someone else taught you that.
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 22 07:52PM -0700

Öö Tiib wrote:
> > The same could be said for you, Jacob, and many others. The
> > only difference is if you're right and I'm wrong nothing will happen.
 
> Where did Jacob claim that nothing will happen?
 
Jacob has said previously he is an atheist.
 
> Most people know that we do not know what will happen.
> Something will always happen but we do not know what it is.
> Are they wrong?
 
They are correct in saying /they/ do not know what it is, but only
because they won't come to God and learn what He has taught us.
They remain in willful ignorance because they reject God.
 
> don't know what will happen but you lie that you know. Did
> Jesus teach you to lie? No, He didn't. Something or someone
> else taught you that.
 
I cannot know on my own what is coming, so God has told us so we
will know. He has revealed what is coming for all people, including
believers and non-believers. I repeat His teachings only so that
you too can know, and be saved from the non-believers' end.
 
----
For believers:
 
http://biblehub.com/kjv/john/5-24.htm
24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word,
and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life,
and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from
death unto life.
 
-----
For non-believers:
 
http://biblehub.com/kjv/revelation/20.htm
 
The Final Judgment
 
11 And I saw a great white throne, and him that sat on it,
from whose face the earth and the heaven fled away; and
there was found no place for them.
12 And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God;
and the books were opened: and another book was opened,
which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out
of those things which were written in the books, according
to their works.
13 And the sea gave up the dead which were in it; and death
and hell delivered up the dead which were in them: and they
were judged every man according to their works.
14 And death and hell were cast into the lake of fire. This is the
second death.
15 And whosoever was not found written in the book of life
was cast into the lake of fire.
 
God cares about enough to guide us. His answers are before
us, readily known. But because of sin, readily dismissed as nonsense
by many.
 
Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin
Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid>: Oct 23 07:30AM

> But if I'm right and you're wrong (which I am), you will burn in the
> flames of Hell forever.
 
> It's worth serious consideration, sir.
 
What if it's you who is worshiping the wrong god, and it's you who
ends up in hell forever?
 
Also, quite a loving god you have there. That's what we call a psychopath.
What kind of loving father tells his children "either you love me, or
I will lock you up in a torture cellar I built myself, and torture you
there forever"? That's not a loving father. That's a psychopath. That
kind of father wouldn't deserve love and worship, but extreme contempt
and disgust.
 
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 23 03:17AM -0700

Juha Nieminen wrote:
 
> > It's worth serious consideration, sir.
 
> What if it's you who is worshiping the wrong god, and it's you
> who ends up in hell forever?
 
I have investigated Jesus Christ. I have tested Him and tried Him
and proved Him out. He is solid, and completely foundational. He
is God, and because of Him we have hope.
 
> psychopath. What kind of loving father tells his children "either
> you love me, or I will lock you up in a torture cellar I built myself,
> and torture you there forever"?
 
You have it backwards. Sin blinds you to that reality, and twists your
thinking so you see it that way. Your thinking is actually evidence of
how much we need Him.
 
Sin destroys everything it touches. It does nothing else. Consider
the /one/ sin by Adam and Eve, and all the death, all the hate, all
the wars, all the killing, all the disease. This is the place we live in
right now. And if you examine your life closely, and compare your
daily actions to the call of God in the Bible (toward holiness), you
will conclude that nearly everything you believe and do today is full-
on sin. You are damaged goods because of sin. We all are. We're
all broken and do nothing but evil when our acts, thoughts, and
deeds are set alongside a holy, holy, holy God.
 
If a member of our society today did nothing but evil, hurting
people everywhere he went, he would eventually land in prison
with a life sentence without the possibility of parole. It's not
because we hate the person, but because all they are capable of
doing is harming others. If they had been able to be reformed, or
converted in some way so they stopped doing evil, they might
have not wound up in prison for life.
 
Sin is a disease. Once sin was committed by Adam and Eve, they
spiritually died. The original nature they possessed had been
altered by the transgression, such that because they disobeyed God
willfully, and because the punishment of sin is death because sin
is so harmful and destructive, they died that very day, even though
in their flesh they lived many more years.
 
Sin is so destructive, God had to build a special kind of super prison
to contain it, the place called Hell. There, the evil that is sin is kept
in check so that the worker of sin can no longer do harm to the
truly innocent in the rest of His Creation.
 
It's as the prisoner in prison for life. If that prisoner gets along
with people, obeys the rules, even helps out, he may get decent treatment, a few freedoms, some liberties, but it
will all still be within the confines of the prison system. But if he's
wicked, cruel to the other inmates, he'll be in lockdown, solitary
confinement, isolation, so that no one even sees him as food and
water are slipped through closed systems such that there is no
possible connection between him and the guards, let alone the
outside world.
 
God has established a system to contain sin appropriately.
 
Sin is so evil, so destructive, so heinous, so without any redeemable
quality, that not only must the prisoner be placed into prison,
into solitary confinement, secured with unbreakable chains, kept
in total isolation from the "outside world," but there must be an
ongoing occupier of the sinner's mind, being, and substance, to
prevent them from exerting influence on any other thing in God's
Creation.
 
We are powerful beings, Juha. More powerful than angels. God's
"security measures" take that into fullest consideration when
the extent to which isolation and mental occupation is required.
 
Remember ... one sin, and how much death? Every animal. Every
person. Every child with cancer. Every mother struck down in her
prime. All the result of one sin.
 
God would've been justified in ending His Creation with Adam
and Eve. To isolate them in prison (Hell), and be done with it.
But He would never have created you. Or me. Or the other billions
that were created. All of them would've been lost too.
 
We are eternal beings, beautiful and powerful. Sin has robbed us
of spiritual life and spiritual vision, so we don't see it. But God
has not abandoned us. He's watching each of us. He's putting
things before our paths on life to see how we respond. He's testing
us, not to discover what we'll do because He already knows, but
to provide a witness, the proof to us, to others, to the books being
written whereby we'll be judged.
 
He knows who will be saved, and who won't be. And the precious
nature of those who are forgiven of sin, the redeemed, are why
He didn't end mankind with Adam and Eve. Even from their
corrupt-with-sin seed are literally billions and billions saved, so
many they cannot be counted the Bible says.
 
God tries the reins of each person's heart. And those whom He
wills, and those who seek the truth, He draws to His Son for
forgiveness. Jesus still pays the full price of our sin in Hell, but
it is His gift to us to set us free from sin, and the eternal death
from sin.
 
> That's not a loving father. That's a psychopath. That kind of father
> wouldn't deserve love and worship, but extreme contempt
> and disgust.
 
He would be a psychopath if sin were not so pervasive and
destructive. But perhaps now you can see it in an eternal light,
recognizing what one sin by Adam and Eve caused, and how
much havoc one sin-loving being could wreak over eternity.
 
God is wholly justified in sending people and demons to Hell
because sin is that destructive.
 
The miracle and love of God is that He was willing to save any
of us, for we have all sinned and are guilty before Him. That
He would still make a way out for us ... what an amazing gift.
 
Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin
"Öö Tiib" <ootiib@hot.ee>: Oct 23 05:22AM -0700

On Sunday, 23 October 2016 05:52:21 UTC+3, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> > > only difference is if you're right and I'm wrong nothing will happen.
 
> > Where did Jacob claim that nothing will happen?
 
> Jacob has said previously he is an atheist.
 
It does mean that he believes God that does not exist and that Bible
is similar fairy tale like Cinderella. It does not mean that he believes
that nothing will happen.
 
 
> They are correct in saying /they/ do not know what it is, but only
> because they won't come to God and learn what He has taught us.
> They remain in willful ignorance because they reject God.
 
It is because there are no God to go to. None. Nowhere. Ordinary
people, totally mere mortals, rule this world and all Churches
in it and write books about God. People like Hillary Clinton and
Donald Trump.
 
> > else taught you that.
 
> I cannot know on my own what is coming, so God has told us so we
> will know.
 
No, you simply don't know. Are you prophet? Do you talk to God?
Jesus suggested to look at fruits of prophets in your own Book.
Yes, Matthew 7:16. What are your fruits? No, you are not a prophet,
sorry. You have convinced everybody in newsgroups you post to.
 
> He has revealed what is coming for all people, including
> believers and non-believers. I repeat His teachings only so that
> you too can know, and be saved from the non-believers' end.
 
That is fraud called bait and switch. You call to God and then cite
some book written clearly by man citing other man. Where is God?
You don't know. Like all rest of us.
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 23 06:04AM -0700

Öö Tiib wrote:
> [snip]
 
The Bible is the written word of God, and Jesus Christ is God. He
came here to save us from death through sin, and He accomplished
His goals at the cross through His death, burial, and resurrection. All
who put their faith and trust in Him are saved.
 
Your knowledge of the Bible is flawed, Öö Tiib . I urge you to seek the
truth and put away preconceptions because you'll find they're wrong,
and that they are doing you harm.
 
You can learn about God by seeking the truth, asking Him for help in
faith and understanding, and in reading the Bible. He will know if
you are serious in seeking the truth. If you are, He will open up your
understanding so you can come to know it.
 
You are a beautiful creation of God with tremendous value. Your
life was given to you with a plan by God to prosper eternally. You
are deeply loved. It's why He goes through these efforts to reach
you. He wants you to be with Him where He is forever ... in the
eternal paradise of God.
 
Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin
"Öö Tiib" <ootiib@hot.ee>: Oct 23 06:16AM -0700

On Sunday, 23 October 2016 16:04:57 UTC+3, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
> Öö Tiib wrote:
> > [snip]
 
Everybody are already convinced that you are rude person without
any manners so why to bother demonstrating it again?
 
[snip]
 
What are your fruits?
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 23 06:45AM -0700

Öö Tiib wrote:
> What are your fruits?
 
A fair question. Let me ask you: What would the fruits of a
believer in Jesus Christ be? What are some of the things people
could look for to know somebody was truly born again?
 
Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin
"Öö Tiib" <ootiib@hot.ee>: Oct 23 11:14AM -0700

On Sunday, 23 October 2016 16:45:57 UTC+3, Rick C. Hodgin wrote:
 
> A fair question. Let me ask you: What would the fruits of a
> believer in Jesus Christ be? What are some of the things people
> could look for to know somebody was truly born again?
 
I can attempt to answer but I may misunderstand the Christian
scripture, I am atheist after all. My impression is that nothing
ethereal is needed; the fruits (or lack of such) should be clearly
present in this world for everybody to observe. It was likely meant
that people should look at what such preachers have achieved or in
process of achieving, who follows them ... whom have they converted
and what have the followers done. So what are your fruits?
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 23 11:49AM -0700

Öö Tiib wrote:
> what such preachers have achieved or in process of achieving,
> who follows them ... whom have they converted and
> what have the followers done. So what are your fruits?
 
You can google my name and inspect the things I've done and see
if you see any fruit if you want. If not, no harm no foul.
 
Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin
"Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com>: Oct 23 04:54AM -0700

Go to church today. Get yourself back on the right track again.
Say a little prayer asking God to help you. He will.
 
Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin
Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid>: Oct 23 07:19AM

> How did you achieve in your test that the destructor was throwing?
> Implicitly those are 'noexcept(true)' unless the class has any bases
> or members that got 'noexcept(false)' destructors.
 
Ah, so destructors are noexcept by default, without having to
specify it explicitly (while the opposite is true for constructors)?
That explains it.
 
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---
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.
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)