|
I have been poking around all day - hence the rant - but thanks, any help would be much appreciated.
If I had framed a question early on I might have gotten somewhere but after messing about all day with it any question I could have framed would have dripped with bile
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have tried all that to no avail
|
|
|
|
|
RugbyLeague wrote: "if you have to mess around with config files to get a software system running then look for a different software system".
Please explain; without argumentation the statement feels as if you're dismissing things merely based on complexity.
Only game-consoles need not be configured.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: Only game-consoles need not be configured
That's true of my old NES; but not true on my Xbox and Wii.
|
|
|
|
|
The problem there is that you're not configuring your application; you're configuring IIS.
I always host WCF in my own Window services and avoid that pile of nastiness.
And I write my own configuration files; I don't do it Microsoft's way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Damn, that almost looks like Sauron's eye.
"Ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazg gimbatul, ash nazg thrakatulûk, agh burzum-ishi krimpatul."
"... One Ring to rule them all, One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all and in the darkness bind them
In the Land of Mordor where the Shadows lie."
, J.R. Tolkien
Cheers!
"I had the right to remain silent, but I didn't have the ability!"
Ron White, Comedian
|
|
|
|
|
Wow, I though that when I saw it! 
|
|
|
|
|
It does doesn't it.
Good eye! 
|
|
|
|
|
Awesome, as usual.
Looks like an eyeball, if I stare long enough it may wink?
|
|
|
|
|
The rackspace ad (above, in the CP banner) claims advantages of using SSD storage. Does this make sense for cloud servers 
~RaGE();
I think words like 'destiny' are a way of trying to find order where none exists. - Christian Graus
Do not feed the troll ! - Common proverb
|
|
|
|
|
Rack mounted servers still need to access disk space and the faster the better.
|
|
|
|
|
Still don't get it : What matters is the user access time to the "cloud" server, which is by magnitude greater than the server disk space access time, so where is the benefit (from the user point of view) ?
Note: I might have a complete false image of how accessing remote data is working, so if this seems to be the case, feel free to send me to Google school first
~RaGE();
I think words like 'destiny' are a way of trying to find order where none exists. - Christian Graus
Do not feed the troll ! - Common proverb
|
|
|
|
|
There is still a difference in the access time between fixed hard disks and SSD. So, no matter what the "cloud access" time is, this difference is definitely going to add to the final equation.
|
|
|
|
|
"The Cloud" is not some mystical, magical fairyland where data with little wings flit around waiting to be accessed. It must exist in a physical form, at meatspace coordinates, and be connected to a physical network. Solid state drive technology is a good choice for that physical form. And even if your data is off holidaying on The Cloud, there is still a great deal of local storage that MUST occur, including the operating system, virtual memory, etc. Again, solid state drive technology is a good choice.
|
|
|
|
|
Shameel is right, but it's bad for the server as well: because a hard disk read is an physical process, the thread locks until it is complete, and no other threads can get accesses serviced until the HDD is finished. The use of an SSD means that one read doesn't have to block another (or at least not for so long) so the actual throughput of the server improves. Better server performance when loaded equals better user experience regardless of any cloud latency.
Never underestimate the power of stupid things in large numbers
--- Serious Sam
|
|
|
|
|
Ever noticed how the disk performance drops if you start e.g. copying multiple files at the same time?
if you have more (parallel) requests on the disk the access speed drops. if you have faster drive then the impact of such things gets reduced.
|
|
|
|
|
An end user accessing data from cloud storage may not see too much of a benefit, as you say, but a cloud based application (eg CodeProject Workspaces) that has the entire application, caching and database on hosted servers will always benefit from have its data storage on fast disks.
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: CodeProject Workspaces
First time I've seen this, is this a new service for CP members?
"I've seen more information on a frickin' sticky note!" - Dave Kreskowiak
|
|
|
|
|
Imagine a service running on the cloud that needs to constantly access data - fast SSDs will be a major perf boost here.
|
|
|
|
|
The benefit isn't so much for a single user; but for multiple concurrent users. In IO bound workloads going to SSD storage can get a 5-10x reduction in server count/rackspace used (more of the latter since a server with a pair of mirrored SSDs is a lot smaller than one with a large raid for speed not capacity).
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, waging all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
Most cloud servers actually use stripped SSD arrays.
|
|
|
|
|
power consumption and heat generation are much lower on SSDs. which might be a factor if you're using a lot of drives.
|
|
|
|
|
There was an absolutely great article The Insider reported on regarding SSD's. I'm caught up in fixing broken tests at the moment, otherwise I'd try and find it for you.
Marc
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
)
