Comments for wagamama.ca http://wagamama.ca Tech & Tokyo – A Gaijin in Japan Tue, 17 Aug 2021 10:38:28 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.5.5 Comment on Super Micro IPMI Firmware – X7DWT-INF by rgunther http://wagamama.ca/super-micro-ipmi-firmware-x7dwt-inf/#comment-28 Wed, 23 Aug 2017 10:17:01 +0000 http://wagamama.ca/?p=271#comment-28 Not really, the IPMI is not so great. Especially now with more browsers disabling Java.

We have mostly converted to servers running Intel AMT on vPro processors, it works much better.

]]>
Comment on Super Micro IPMI Firmware – X7DWT-INF by xavier http://wagamama.ca/super-micro-ipmi-firmware-x7dwt-inf/#comment-27 Wed, 23 Aug 2017 04:37:41 +0000 http://wagamama.ca/?p=271#comment-27 hey man, I have the same issue! did you ever get around to find a solution to this? Please let me know if you can

Thank you

]]>
Comment on Google Street View – Did It Catch Me? by Google Street View – Yes, They Caught Me! | wagamama.ca http://wagamama.ca/google-street-view-did-it-catch-me/#comment-33 Sat, 20 May 2017 04:19:09 +0000 http://wagamama.ca/?p=481#comment-33 […] Back in January I did a post called Google Street View – Did It Catch Me? […]

]]>
Comment on Is Amazon EC2 Really What You Need? by Can Amazon AWS win this time? | wagamama.ca http://wagamama.ca/is-amazon-ec2-really-what-you-need/#comment-20 Mon, 19 Dec 2016 06:11:32 +0000 http://wagamama.ca/?p=121#comment-20 […] have previously written two posts about the cost of using Amazon AWS, one way back in May 2010 and one in August 2015. In both cases the costs involved with running a rack full of servers 24/7 […]

]]>
Comment on Benchmark Amazon by Can Amazon AWS win this time? | wagamama.ca http://wagamama.ca/benchmark-amazon/#comment-30 Mon, 19 Dec 2016 06:09:35 +0000 http://wagamama.ca/?p=349#comment-30 […] written two posts about the cost of using Amazon AWS, one way back in May 2010 and one in August 2015. In both cases the costs involved with running a rack full of servers 24/7 365 was much more […]

]]>
Comment on Intel Cache Acceleration Software – Performance Test by Common – where are MySQL impressive numbers? | wagamama.ca http://wagamama.ca/intel-cache-performance/#comment-32 Thu, 14 Apr 2016 07:36:38 +0000 http://wagamama.ca/?p=379#comment-32 […] cards, I’ve tried SSD, I’ve tried normal hard drives with PCI SSD as a cache using Intel CAS. Bottom line, nothing works to improve the performance in any significant […]

]]>
Comment on WD Red Drives – Inconsistent Performer by 2.5 Inch Drives Are Not Quick | wagamama.ca http://wagamama.ca/wd-red-drives-inconsistent-performer/#comment-31 Sat, 05 Sep 2015 03:32:38 +0000 http://wagamama.ca/?p=360#comment-31 […] Last year I built two servers using WD Red drives running in RAID 10. The performance is not that great and also not very consistent. […]

]]>
Comment on Boosting Old Technology – Can Caching Help? by Another cheap rack of compute power | wagamama.ca http://wagamama.ca/old-technology-will-caching-help/#comment-29 Sun, 05 Jul 2015 02:02:13 +0000 http://wagamama.ca/?p=279#comment-29 […] last year we used WD Red drives and attempted to implement read caching using Fusion-IO cards. The caching concept did not work very well, the performance improvement seen was not worth the […]

]]>
Comment on Testing NO RAID vs RAID 5 vs RAID 10 by Old Technology – Will Caching Help? | wagamama.ca http://wagamama.ca/testing-no-raid-raid-5-raid-10/#comment-26 Tue, 07 Apr 2015 02:09:42 +0000 http://wagamama.ca/?p=213#comment-26 […] The hard drives use the on-board Intel RAID controller. Operating in RAID 10, which based on my previous testing gave the best write […]

]]>
Comment on Testing NO RAID vs RAID 5 vs RAID 10 by Adam Satern http://wagamama.ca/testing-no-raid-raid-5-raid-10/#comment-25 Thu, 29 Jan 2015 21:28:00 +0000 http://wagamama.ca/?p=213#comment-25 Be mindful of hard errors which are the reason that RAID no longer lives up to its original promise.
If one of the drives fails, then during the rebuild if you get an error – the entire array will die.

http://www.zdnet.com/article/why-raid-5-stops-working-in-2009/

SATA drives are commonly specified with an unrecoverable read error rate (URE) of 10^14. Which means that once every 12.5 terabytes, the disk will not be able to read a sector back to you.

]]>