Look ma, it works! Posting this non-article from my iPhone! (Thanks Ken at ibiblio for opening mod_sec so xmlrpc.php works.)
Also, picked up my iPhone 3G today from the Apple Store. On my third attempt. AT&T sucks. That may be a subject for another post…
Precipitate: search Google Docs and Bookmarks from Spotlight:
“Google’s Mac group has released Precipitate, a plugin which allows you to search Google Docs and Google Bookmarks from the same interface that you search you Mac. It works with both Spotlight and Google Desktop for Mac….”
iPhone 2.0 Worldwide Launch on June 9th | Gadget Lab from Wired.com:
A June 9 launch date for the iPhone 2? No surprises there, and now it looks like inside sources are confirming the June 9 date, which is also when Steve Jobs’ keynote at Apple’s Worldwide Developers Conference is scheduled.
But Gizmodo’s Jesus Diaz has got wind of the details of the launch, and his source tells him that the Second Coming will be a worldwide event — not just in the United States. He also claims that his snitch, “someone very, very close to the 3-G iPhone launch”, says that the current fixed pricing model will be discontinued in favor of a more Euro-friendly flexible price point, one that can shift subject to the markets and the whims of the telcos.
The last point concerns Spain. As we reported this morning, Telefónica will indeed carry the iPhone, and will be launching it along with its brand new Madrid megastore on June 18.
Via Wired.com
I was contemplating ordering one of these with a Mac Pro because I wanted to use it in RAID 10. RAID 10 is a stripe (RAID 0) across two or more mirrored pairs (RAID 1). Conversely, RAID 0+1 is a mirror across two or more striped pairs. But as the manual clearly states, it doesn’t do RAID 10. It does RAID 0+1, and that’s not so good.
There are dramatic differences between these two configurations:
“Mathematically, the difference is that the chance of system failure with two drive failures in a RAID 0+1 system with two sets of drives is (n/2)/(n - 1) where n is the total number of drives in the system. The chance of system failure in a RAID 1+0 system with two drives per mirror is 1/(n - 1). So, using the 8 drive systems shown in the diagrams, the chance that losing a second drive would bring down the RAID system is 4/7 with a RAID 0+1 system and 1/7 with a RAID 1+0 system.”
Another difference between the two RAID configurations is performance when the system is in a degraded state, i.e. after it has lost one or more drives but has not lost the right combination of drives to completely fail. In a RAID 0+1 configuration, the loss of any drive in a set causes the failure of that entire set and the set is removed from the RAID system. Generally (in the two set case) this means you are left with a RAID 0 system made up of the remaining set of disks. This probably slightly improves write performance and slightly degrades read performance (but that’s just a WAG, I haven’t done any testing). In a RAID 1+0 system, you would see the same effect on each mirror that loses a drive, but not the whole system. In other words, a RAID 1+0 configuration will tend to show similar, but less dramatic, changes in performance when in a degraded mode than RAID 0+1.
RAID 1+0 only has to re-mirror one drive, whereas RAID 0+1 has to re-mirror the entire failed set. So RAID 1+0 will recover significantly faster.
Given these pretty significant failings of RAID 0+1 as compared to RAID 10, it’s a pretty good question as to why Apple would choose the much poorer option for its ‘Pro’ RAID card, for which it charges $720. I’m just really left scratching my head.
Shame on you Apple, shame!
