|
Created a web site over the weekend. Word has it that Google can take anywhere from "4 days" to 6 months to index your site, or never.
Bing, in fact, "found" me in a couple of days. #1 out of 73M+. They say it sometimes helps to search for your own site. Don't know but Google isn't taking notice yet (maybe they want $ first).
It was only in wine that he laid down no limit for himself, but he did not allow himself to be confused by it.
― Confucian Analects: Rules of Confucius about his food
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe posting a minute-long video of your site* on Youtube would make Google index it faster.
*Along with a link to your site in the Description.
|
|
|
|
|
Just ask any of the SEO experts that come to CP
and try to post their spam here
but be quick before we get them. 
M.D.V. 
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
Have you instagram'd it? Tweeted? Paid some nefarious dudes to bot-promo it? Dropped flyers onto villages bereft of human contact? Sung dark and unsettling songs around human sacrifices at a full moon?
In my next life I'm going to become an SEO expert so I can charge a small fortune for completely bogus advice while using the caveat "changes can take up to 6 months to be reflected in your results", with the awesome plan B being "Google changed their algorithm. Looks like we'll have to do another round of changes".
(I assume you've registered your URL with Google?)
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
|
Is a no-fly zone a PITA if you are a frog?
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
yup, it's the pits, literally...
Pittsburgh International Airport, Pittsburgh (PITA - ICAO 4 letter code, PIT - IATA 3 letter code)
pestilence [ pes-tl-uh ns ] noun
1. a deadly or virulent epidemic disease. especially bubonic plague.
2. something that is considered harmful, destructive, or evil.
Synonyms: pest, plague, people
|
|
|
|
|
If there are no flies available, what would the frog put in his pita?
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
Is that like, 0.5 PITA byte per week? 
|
|
|
|
|
Restaurants should be no-fly zones.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
The frog rule: Time is fun when you're having flies.
|
|
|
|
|
They would jump at first opportunity.
Monday starts Diarrhea awareness week, runs until Friday!
JaxCoder.com
|
|
|
|
|
I toad you not to post this but you shot me down... 
If you can't laugh at yourself - ask me and I will do it for you.
|
|
|
|
|
Not trying to poke the friends here.
But it's amusing to see how few heads get heated up and scream "Peta byte per week?" Heck you cannot work on such huge projects. When you clearly do not know what the project is about.
When I am not sure about the project, how can you be so sure that the project or the data handled cannot be of that size?
My boss was joking about this attitude with the Data scientists whom he was interviewing for the team.
On their CVs, they highlight in bold. The current analytics engine run over "x PBs" of data.
And among the Data Scientists & the Data Engineers, It's a scale of expertise. And among the Data-Engineers , they doubt each other if the other is really working on data of that scale.
This reminded me of people in 2000s. that brag about thread-pools and out-of-proc distributed architectures. 
The previous post I made - I had clearly mentioned, the guy whom we interacted with might have said an outrageous figure just to test our "capacity to think" about the architecture.
And he did send us couple of research papers that talked about solving the Peta-byte challenge.
We never know what's the exact sources of these data. Except for the high-resolution videos.
He said "Virtually unlimited storage" on a geographically distributed deployment. Nobody knew what this is about. I posted a question asking if the requirements are insanely high, what's the recommended approach.
Two possibilities I see.
1. You are not interested to answer the question.
2. You are interested (That's why you reply) but you are quite skeptical about the Peta-Byte figure.
A gentlemanish reply I should say[^]
Great manners are learned from the few good. Thanks OriginalGriff.
|
|
|
|
|
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
pestilence [ pes-tl-uh ns ] noun
1. a deadly or virulent epidemic disease. especially bubonic plague.
2. something that is considered harmful, destructive, or evil.
Synonyms: pest, plague, people
|
|
|
|
|
well if its an interview the interviewer can always go technical and ask if all the data was.....
Caveat Emptor.
"Progress doesn't come from early risers – progress is made by lazy men looking for easier ways to do things." Lazarus Long
|
|
|
|
|
I've worked for a few big-data companies, so the numbers didn't particularly worry me -- except that it looked like you might have wanted that much storage on the servers themselves.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
About a week ago, a representative from the Norwegian Mapping Authority said in an interview that storing their data in some cloud service was not a viable solution: Last year, they had increased their saved data volume by two petabytes. He did not indicate the current total size.
Lots of people - even computer professionals - are rather careless with large units: Copying a megabyte file is almost instantaneous nowadays. A gigabyte file takes a little while, not that much time. The next size, only one higher...  If copying a gigabyte takes 85 seconds, copying a terabyte takes a full day and night, 24 hours. A petabyte copied at the same speed would take three years. A thousand days. A coworker of mine, program developer for many years, and an eager photographer and home movie maker, bought an 8 TB disk for his home PC, copying all his video and photo stuff that over the years had been accumulating in his multi-disk NAS. But it woudn't copy... Only when he sat down to make an estimate of how long it "ought to" take (in his case: about two days) did he realize that it was copying fine.
At work, we can have (almost) all the disk space we want ... as long as we do not require backup of it. The cost of a raw disk is a drop in the ocean compared to the cost of backup. Ten years ago, we backed up our build servers, all desktop PCs, as well as a number of central servers. Today, the number of SW developers is a magnitude higher, and the disks are at least a magnitude bigger. So today, anything that can be restored from the VCS, can be rebuild or can be reinstalled from the central software repos, are no longer backed up. What can be considered duplicates, or recoverable information, we cannot afford to back up. The volumes are too immense. But of course: That requires that we have very reliable backup plans for the primary copies, and have working plans and procedures for recovering data when some secondary copy is lost.
|
|
|
|
|
Next time the NSA should ask their question somewhere else.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
One of our clients is looking for an on-prem solution for their image-intensive application. This would ideally suit the cloud better but they are adamant about on-prem route. So let them pay.
What's the server config you would recommend for a high intensive graphical workload + insanely big storage. Maybe 0.5 petabytes a week. This involves a high degree of media processing.
--I see this 0.5 PB per week became the focus on the discussion. ROFL.
This could be a fact, I'm not sure in how many locations, how many geographies, in what resolution, etc they would like to capture data. It's up to them. He said the word "Virtually unlimited" and gave an example of 0.5 petabytes a week. So maybe he just pushed the limits to see what hardware architecture we might come up with.
So the whole point of this message is to know if the requirements are extreme, and the client still want to go on-prem, what could be a better suggestion - it could be on the architecture or it could be about an alternate, hybrid solution.
What kinda hardware architecture comes to your mind for this requirement.
Key parameters below, + Please add whatever you feel is key to the on-premises servers, clusters.
- CPU has to be extreme
- virtually unlimited disk space
- Heavy-duty GPU
I still feel like pushing them into the cloud.
modified 11-Mar-20 10:16am.
|
|
|
|
|
Nand32 wrote: This involves a high degree of media processing.
And you prefer a cloud solution for that?
It may be better to just load up the workstations with memory and lots of cores, and only transfer on save. I can't think of any servers that are particularly optimised for graphical processing, anyway -- they're intended to mainly serve data; doing work on a server is somewhat frowned upon (by me, for one). The typical server graphics card is only really used for KVMs or basic monitors.
The level of storage you require is probably better kept separate from the servers (plural; you'll want two, load balanced, for that 99.999% SLA feeling), but various HP Proliant models can take up to eight discs -- and if you want the "cloud experience", you can install Nunatix.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: And you prefer a cloud solution for that?
Yep. Like this High Performance Computing | Microsoft Azure[^]
Mark_Wallace wrote: I can't think of any servers that are particularly optimised for graphical processing, anyway -- they're intended to mainly serve data;
Something like this.
NVIDIA GPU Optimized Servers - Thinkmate[^]
The hardware architecture should combine a cluster of nodes that specializes in different departments. I'm no expert in this actually. Looking to hear from you guys. thanks
|
|
|
|
|
Nand32 wrote: Yep. Like this High Performance Computing | Microsoft Azure[^]
Hmm.
With something like that, I'd still want a local, heavy-duty server to channel clients into it, so it looks to me like an additional expense.Nand32 wrote: Something like this.
NVIDIA GPU Optimized Servers - Thinkmate[^]
Live and learn.
I'd want to do a lot of testing on how it handles load, how it assigns resources to connected clients, and how it handles clients that are asking too much, before considering going live with it. See if they'll lend you one that you fancy, for a PoC.
The first thing I'd want to know is if you've got 20 clients working on a server, and one of them does something that would freeze, lock-up, or crash a workstation, if the work were being done there, what happens to the other 49 clients?
That's easy (and fun!) to test.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
I think I would recommend the boss to go for server consultants like ThinkMate.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
