|
Salvatore Terress wrote: posted by a person signing as "software engineer of company X ".
Posted by a person who is getting paid by the company X.
It could be that they are an employee or that they are just claiming to be an employee.
Larger companies generally will not put up with that.
Smaller companies might or might depending on if it is an employee and what kind of employee.
Salvatore Terress wrote: I assume "they" do not care.
I doubt that. But could be the case that they are not paying enough to have enough people to deal with that sort of thing.
|
|
|
|
|
Salvatore Terress wrote: " How much is one plus one ?"
Ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer. Sounds like a personal problem. Unless you really don't know, in which case I shudder for our future.
|
|
|
|
|
see above and have a swell
day
|
|
|
|
|
Again, from experience - companies generally do not monitor "their" forums.
But they get bent out of shape with public negative comments.
Hence nothing new here - it is still customer's fault because the customer has
to write the review , but by choice.
I call this "abuse of technology" - when I got rotten stuff from my local grocer
I did not have to write review then...
|
|
|
|
|
I am not going to comment on either side of this exchange.
What I can suggest is to put your posts through ChatGPT and give it context. ChatGPT will do a great job in rewording anything that you write. For example:
Quote: You are a professional programmer. Adjust the following post with a professional friendly neutral tone:
(paste your post here)
The benefit is that you can write the nastiest post to get whatever it is to get it off your chest and ChatGPT will write what is needed. This is the more modern method of writing the one you want to send, then delete it, then write the one that needs to be sent. Chat GPT just makes the process quicker. It is quite amusing to see the changes made...
FWIW, I like to use:
Quote: You are Ryan Reynolds in the role of Deadpool. Rewrite the following adding a quip or two:
Graeme
"I fear not the man who has practiced ten thousand kicks one time, but I fear the man that has practiced one kick ten thousand times!" - Bruce Lee
modified 27-Apr-24 7:49am.
|
|
|
|
|
Firstly, your example sucks..you can do better. If you ask such trivial questions on a professional forum, of course you are going to get flamed.
Secondly, I have reviewed your activity here and noticed that out of 10 questions asked, you marked none as answered/solved, even the ones you answered yourself.  Furthermore, I saw none of the 'attitude' you describe and have to assume that you are complaining/ranting here about your experience at another site/forum.
Thirdly, the occasional rant is OK, but too many and you sound like a whiner, especially if it involves acting butt hurt. Additionally, you need to tone down the sarcasm. Well directed sarcasm/wit is appreciated but not when it's directed at the community. Example:
Salvatore Terress wrote: Have a swell day
This may be well intentioned, but it comes across as 'f*%k you'.
Lastly, the intent of this reply is not to attack you, but hopefully to elicit some personal introspection. If you have problems/attitudes with so many people, maybe you need to work on your people skills. It might just be a communication/translation thing. Good luck. 
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
"Hope is contagious"
|
|
|
|
|
I assume that your comment is on my original post. I am not sure, the indentation is MY problem.
Kindly allow me to say this
I do not post , questions or comments, to get raked over the coal for my style.
Read my lips - I do not give a rip if YOU do not like my style.
I will make an exception if I offed you....and I will apology...
As far as letting AI to beautify (?) what YOU write
if it is still a free country , wherever you reside ,
knock yourself out
BUT LEAVE ME OUT
Have a blessed day
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: As far as letting AI to beautify (?) what YOU write
I guess that this was directed at me. So let me rephrase what I wrote with a very famous saying:
Quote: You catch more flies with honey than vinegar
And if you're not familiar with this saying, then you need to read this:
Flies represents anything you want to achieve. Honey (sweet) represents anything pleasant that you do to get what you want. Vinegar (sour) represents anything unpleasant that you do to get what you want. It tells you to use nice methods rather than unkind methods in dealing with other people.
This is a saying that means: you will be more successful in life being sweeter, or nice rather than being, mean to people, not nice and doing hurtful, dishonest things in life.
The proverb has been traced back to G. Torriano's 'Common Place of Italian Proverbs' . It first appeared in the United States in Benjamin Franklin's 'Poor Richard's Almanac' in 1744, and is found in varying forms..." From "Random House Dictionary of Popular Proverbs and Sayings" by Gregory Y. Titelman (Random House, New York, 1996).
We share our feedback and suggestions with you as the following is showing your lack of understanding and your poor attitude:
Quote: if it is still a free country , wherever you reside ,
knock yourself out
BUT LEAVE ME OUT
FYI, ALL CAPS is SHOUTING - a clear sign of poor attitude, the statement just makes it far worse.
But if that is your attitude, then we're all wasting our time. Here is one last famous saying for you to ponder:
Quote: You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink!
ref: YOU CAN LEAD A HORSE TO WATER, BUT YOU CAN'T MAKE HIM DRINK - Cambridge English Dictionary[^]
Graeme
"I fear not the man who has practiced ten thousand kicks one time, but I fear the man that has practiced one kick ten thousand times!" - Bruce Lee
|
|
|
|
|
Experience tells me that just about every one of these responses will be ignored. This member seems to think that the world in general, and any forum in particular, should modify its processes to his wants, and complains bitterly if it doesn't. Some years ago he even raised a question in Bugs 'n' Sugs, complaining that people kept asking him to put his code samples in <pre> tags to make them readable. And he also admits to being thrown off most other technical forums. Quite why he keeps coming back here is a mystery.
|
|
|
|
|
Reflection/Projection is the most common trait for people who have anger issues. This appears no different.
Graeme
"I fear not the man who has practiced ten thousand kicks one time, but I fear the man that has practiced one kick ten thousand times!" - Bruce Lee
modified 28-Apr-24 7:52am.
|
|
|
|
|
After recent fiasco trying to get NEW car key I have decided I want to be
"professional chat " person when I grow up.
That is not a typo - it was posted as such.
PS
My java hangout is hiring - starting at $10.50
Pushing buttons and giving correct change is reqired.
I wonder what is required qualification for
"professional chat " person job.
From my experience , reading (English) is not one of them.
|
|
|
|
|
I get older but refuse to grow up!
If you can't find time to do it right the first time, how are you going to find time to do it again?
PartsBin an Electronics Part Organizer - Release Version 1.4.0 (Many new features) JaxCoder.com
Latest Article: EventAggregator
|
|
|
|
|
I mentioned in a thread a few weeks ago I had acquired a Mediasonic HFR2-SU3S2 PRORAID 4-bay external enclosure, and was dismayed at the performance (2.5MB/s over USB3, 5MB/s over eSATA) with a RAID-5 configuration.
There was mention that RAID-5 has significant overhead over other types of RAID. Someone suggested to try RAID-10. I'm "losing" an additional drive worth of space (compared to RAID-5), but with RAID-10, as I'm writing this, performance is currently holding steady at ~100+ MB/s (vs 5, at best).
It blows my mind that performance would be that much different. There's overhead, and then there's 20x slower throughput. The system is otherwise identical - same drives, same enclosure, same cables, same system it's connected to.
This is with full-disk VeraCrypt encryption. Without encryption, RAID-10 showed spikes of up to 160MB/s (but generally holding steady at 120-130MB/s). I'm okay with that.
If there's something else to blame, I'm not seeing it. But right now, I have little choice but to say RAID-5 is a killer when it comes to write operations. Again, I knew you don't get any of that for free, there's some overhead, but I never expected it to reach that level.
If I've reached the wrong conclusion, then I'm wrong. I just see nothing else to blame right now.
And I'm a much happier camper. This is usable.
|
|
|
|
|
I just found this site: RAID Performance Calculator - WintelGuy.com
I can't comment on its accuracy, but it suggests that a RAID-5 made of 4 drives each doing 170 MB/S (A WD-Blue SATA 4TB drive is rated up to 185 MB/s) and 90% write (assuming you're doing a backup ...) you should be seeing 183 MB/s for RAID-5 and 357 (!) MB/s for RAID 10. Now eSATA should be able to handle up to 600 MB/s, so something is not right. Does the manufacturer have a help site you could consult? Maybe a user/support group out there somewhere. Maybe it's just a sucky RAID implementation, all round. I'd at least check the manufacturers Web site to see if there's a firmware update that might solve things.
"A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer down your pants"
Chuckles the clown
|
|
|
|
|
k5054 wrote: Maybe it's just a sucky RAID implementation, all round
That's what I suspect. I'll have a look at their web site, but I'm always a little nervous about firmware updates.
|
|
|
|
|
What you currently have is only slightly better than a brick, so it doesn't seem like you'd loose all that much 
"A little song, a little dance, a little seltzer down your pants"
Chuckles the clown
|
|
|
|
|
Re-read my first message. It's now performing well within acceptable range (to me) using RAID-10. I'm not going to re-try RAID-5.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm the person who suggested going to RAID-10 for both safety and speed. The fact that RAID-5 was so slow tells me that there is no hardware support on that enclosure for the RAID-5 calculations and it was being done entirely in software.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm guessing it was a poor RAID-5 implementation.
Do note also that I've installed zero software for this, so the parity computation still has to be done by something in the enclosure, and not the CPU of the system it's connected to...
|
|
|
|
|
But that enclosure must have some CPU (and RAM). And hopefully a hardware RAID controller.
If it doesn't have a hardware RAID controller, all the work has to be done by the CPU (of the enclosure), with decent amount of RAM.And for RAID5, A LOT of calculation has to be done for the striping. RAID5 is aimed at use cases where the fault tolerance is of higher importance than performance, though read performance should suffer far less than write performance, as the later has the highest amount of computation and possibly data reordering...
So if your enclosure is CPU+RAM only, with both a slow CPU and little RAM, then it is quite logical that that it will show a subpar performance.
|
|
|
|
|
Agreed. My original post included the full make/model of the enclosure. I haven't come across anything that documents its internals however - not that I've tried very hard. But, it's there if someone's curious...
[Edit]
I just asked ChatGPT to describe how that works. It first suggested the host CPU was being used to calculate parity and such. I then pointed out I installed no software, so what process, exactly, is performing the calculations...to which it said I was right and it was wrong, and proceeded to explain that's done by the RAID controller (its exact words: "the actual parity calculations and RAID management occur within the enclosure itself, independent of any proprietary software on the host system.")
Yeah, I'm not worried about these glorified chatbots taking over just yet. Problem is, the majority of people interacting with them just don't question its responses and just go with them...
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the "RAID controller" of this box is certainly software based, as in software running on the CPU and the RAM integral to that box. And with a $160 price tag, this is certainly NOT a real hardware controller, those cost just by themselves as much.
Looked at their manual, and it doesn't even remotely reveal anything about the internals. Looks fancy though... 
|
|
|
|
|
Ralf Quint wrote: Looks fancy though...
I've got to admit, it's a nice-looking box.
I had bad experiences with RAID over a decade ago, figured it couldn't still be so bad, so I went with this one. I'm okay with the performance (now that I'm using RAID-10) so I'll stick with it. But I wouldn't exactly rush to buy another one, or recommend it to non-technical users.
|
|
|
|
|
dandy72 wrote: If I've reached the wrong conclusion, then I'm wrong. I just see nothing else to blame right now.
While RAID 10 sounds like the way to go, gotta at least give some love to RAID 5. Due to using the parity data on RAID 5 (which is what makes those writes slow) you can still rebuild while claiming more space when compared to RAID 5. Reads are still ok on 5, it's just the write speeds that suck. More times than not, you'll never need 5 for home use, but on those instances where space is more important than speed (for backups rarely accessed, etc.) it's nice to know it's there.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
I agree completely. I mentioned I initially thought RAID-5 provided the better capacity:redundancy ratio so I went for that. If performance wasn't in issue, that'd still be my first choice.
I'm only intending to use the RAID as an extra backup. In other words, I'd regularly replace bits that have changed and write whatever is new. If all went well, in theory, I'd never need to read anything back. The only time it'd be in use is for write operations.
And this backup set includes VMs that I need to keep running most of the time. The performance I was seeing with RAID-5 made that impossible.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
