OT ish Slow Windows

On 03/08/2015 21:21, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Oh. So the running programs haven't had the update applied?
Isn't that a bit of a problem if they are services that never restart and are available from the network?
Andy
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 04/08/15 21:20, Vir Campestris wrote:

Normally the update will restart them if they are daemons.

--
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Except that for no good reason they also prevent you from moving or renaming the file. No justification for that.

I expect you write the new file and delete the old one, then rename (or some sequence). The old file will not actually be deleted (as in, space freed) until the last program using it stops doing so, so there are no longer any open file handles on it. Not sure of the details but I think the delete also renames it to either a null file name of some flavour of illegal one so no new program can open the old one. This means that 20 progs could be using the old one for some time. If they are restarted they get the new library.
--
"That excessive bail ought not to be required, nor excessive fines imposed,
nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted" -- Bill of Rights 1689
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 21:24:58 +0100, Tim Streater wrote:

No, there just isn't a file name at that point. Directory entry points to the inode. The inode describes the file.
When the file is replaced, the directory entry points to the new inode. The 'use count' in the old inode drops to zero (this is 'use' in the sense of the number of directory entries pointing to it, not now many users of the file there are).
When the *user count* of that inode drops to zero, then the file is deleted and the inode is freed.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 03/08/2015 21:12, Vir Campestris wrote:

Neither does TNP or he would say how.
One way would be to send a kill to restart the process but that doesn't fit with never doing restarts.
Of course you could use the kernel thread locking to lock the kernel so no user programs are actually using it and then update the bits in the kernel which will work as long as no functional changes are made, just bug fixes. It won't work if the code is part of the lock handling though, so if you find a bug there you are stuffed.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 03/08/2015 21:33, dennis@home wrote:

You can also do stuff with the shadow copy locking facility... that's how backup programs are able to get access to files that applications have an exclusive lock on.
--
Cheers,

John.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 21:12:39 +0100, Vir Campestris wrote:

Indeed, they don't.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 31/07/2015 22:09, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

My colleagues tell me that Linux is much better than Windows because when you get a kernel update you don't have to reboot the machine when you install it.
They've failed to explain when it starts being used.
Andy
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 02 Aug 2015 22:02:16 +0100, Vir Campestris wrote:

Immediately, I thought that would be obvious.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 02/08/15 22:02, Vir Campestris wrote:

you dont need to, know..

well fine.
The point being made by the link I posted is simple. Windows cannot overwrite a library file that is 'in use' by a running program.
Its not a question of the fact that that program wont get the update until it shuts down and restarts, its that the update cannot take place while it is running.
Its one of those windows 'features' that didt make any difference back in the day when updates came on a set of floppy disks once every 2 years and took and hour to apply.
Its the same with the awful disk systems and algorithms. de fragging used to be someting you do once every 5 years, now it is needed almost annually or worse, simply because the way the disk layouts work is utterly insane.
Unix was designed for multi tasking and multi users in a busy environment where one of the more important things was that you didn't take a machine with hundreds of users on it down unless you had to.
The internet was mostly BUILT out of Unix computers. Networking is in its blood.
Linux as 'son of Unix' took all the best features off it, and reverse engineered them. The result is that while Bill Gates and Steve Bullmer were busy adding chrome and tailfins to a dung cart., Linus Torvalds and the professionals were busy firstly making sure they had a totally reliable chassis, and then adding just enough of a dashboard and controls to drive it.
Sure the 'user experience' lagged windows - but the reliability of *nix platforms and the basic speed and efficiency of them was never in doubt, which is why apart from a few Windows desktop and laptop users, a few vanishing Symbian users and other legacy kit, and CISCOS IOS (and some dedicated low level OSes used by real time hardware on very small chips everyone else is using a *nix OS whether they realise it or not. And that includes all Macs post OS9 and all android devices.
There never was a 'year of unix' or 'the linux breakthrought'
What has happened instead is that the world has wherever possible not used Microsoft, because it costs and it runs like diarrhoea, but instead used a *nix derivative: As memory cost plummeted it simply became easier to stock in enough memory to run a more or less full *nix system even on a tuppeny ha'penny ARM chipset, which nonetheless probably has more processing power than an IBM mainframe of the 1970s...
My point is that *nix and Linux are the professionally engineered highly developed reliable ubiquitous operating systems in use on nearly all new devices.
The only exception to that is desktops and laptops, where there is a huge installed base of utter crap that has to be allowed for: And that's why the abortion called Windows 10 is on offer.
BUT - and its a huge but - the desktop and even laptop market is collapsing for domestic and consumer users. Fondleslabs, mainly running android (based on Linux as it happens) are taking over.
Only offices are really still buying PC's where they need to still run specialised windows apps.
But as each year passes the number of desktops goes down, and the number of free open source programs that do everything that paid for programs used to do, as well as, or in many cases better than, is increasing.
Windows strength was always the GUI - it wasn't great, but it was better than X-windows used to be...simply because the driving force of Microsoft was in that area, not in the fundamental sound engineering practice of 'what lies beneath'. OSX built on BSD Unix with a pretty decent GUI and that of course now exists, along with a decent developmnent toolkit to allow 3rd party apps developers to port to it.
Linux desktop design took a huge leap forward with the gnome project, as typified by Ubuntu, and that finally - in my opinion - overtook Windows in terms of sheer usability in the shape of MATE and Cinnamon - both being driven by a desire to recreate the main features of Windows XP and OSX , but better.
And that's Linux Mint: optimised for easy transition from XP or windows Vista, and unbelievably easy to install.
The reality is that Windows and Microsoft are now retreating into a niche market: Legacy desktops. They lost the embedded market, the real time market and the mobile market to *nix and derivatives thereof. They lost the server market years ago - they were never really there - and they never were in the mini/mainframe arena - that's all Linux these days as well.
If Microsoft had any sense they would have bitten the bullet the way Apple did, and produced a new version of Windows as a desktop app and GUI running on Linux/Unix.
They failed. They could have ported MS office to *nix. They failed.
The future will be *nix, simply because everybody who makes hardware or writes apps wants a platform that doesn't owe anything to a monster of a marketing company that dictates what you can do.
Its in everyones interest but Microsoft's to contribute and spend billions developing a common operating system that is license free, and that's what they have done. The list of companies actively supporting linux development is vast.
http://www.linuxfoundation.org/node/4463
"Highlights include:
• Who is Writing Linux? o Every Linux kernel is being developed by nearly 1,000 developers working for more than 200 different corporations. This is the foundation for the largest distributed software development project in the world. o Since 2008, the number of individual developers has increased by 10 percent, reflecting the ubiquity of Linux across industries.
• Who is Sponsoring Linux? o More than 70 percent of total contributions to the kernel come from developers working at a range of companies including Red Hat, IBM, Novell, Intel, Oracle, Fujitsu, among many others. These companies, and many others, find that by improving the kernel they have a competitive edge in their markets. o Red Hat, Google, Novell, Intel and IBM top the list of companies that employ developers who are reviewing and approving Linux development.
• How Fast is Linux Developed and Released? o A net of 2.7 million lines of code have been added since April 2008. o An average of 10,923 lines of code are added a day, representing a rate of change larger than any other public software project of any size. o An average of 5,547 lines are removed every day, ensuring that the code is high quality and relevant for the most important implementations of the kernel. "
Linux isn't a nerdy geeky amateur operating system, Its a professionally written and supported massive engineering project in progress. No one owns it, but everybody contributes and everybody benefits.
Except Microsoft.
The only reason its not on the desktop more than it is, is because Microsoft still charges enough and allows manufacturers to charge for installing it on every PC you buy retail by and large.
And those application developers who make money out of selling software still want a platform that is of that model: But they are shrinking too - the new model is either 'software as a service' - as a cloud app that doesn't need MS to access it or 'free code, paid support' for professional users.
Which is the Red Hat model, and largely the IBM model.
It doesn't matter how much we argue about the merits of Windows versus linux. The facts are what the facts are, and I doubt that Microsft will exist in its current form in ten years time, or indeed windows.
It faces the same difficult choice that IBM faced in the 70's and 80s when it had to recognise that by and large its real business was supporting large businesses in large application design and support: It make a lot less hardware than it used to, and it runs Linux more than any other OS.
The trouble is that MS has run out of things to add to Office that make sense. Its stuck with a creaky OS that is 20 years out of date and not fit for the internet. It still cant decide whether its in the professional or the consumer market, and is in danger of losing both.
Apple decided where it stood. Fashionable consumer hardware and high end workstation. Not operating systems.
Honestly if I were running Microsoft I'd probably leave.

--
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Mon, 03 Aug 2015 09:49:06 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Shame about Symbian. I had to stop using the joke in my operating systems lectures:
"Whatever you do, don't leave the 'm' out..."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Particularly in Google image searches ...
--
Today is Setting Orange, the 69th day of Confusion in the YOLD 3181
I don't have an attitude problem.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 03/08/2015 09:49, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Linux can't either, if it did then the program could start executing random code if it had to drag in a page from the library that you have just changed. At best linux can add another library to the system and the program may start to use that library when it is restarted. If you can do as you claim it would be one hell of a security hole.

You never need to defrag NTFS, you know the one that was introduced about 15 years ago.

Odd that we used to have to defrag the Plexus machines we had >15 years ago. Of course it wasn't called defrag, it was called testing the backups and you used to reload the backup which removed the fragmentation from the drive. You used to test the backup whenever the machines started to slow down.

When it consisted of three machines that was true.
Networking came much later than Unix.

We weren't, System X ran on a real-time OS not unix but I did add a unix SVr5 subsystem onto all the exchanges to manage the billing and communications with the backend offices.

Not yet, probably never.

Only since it became free as Unix was far more expensive than windows.

My point is that Unix was a professionally engineered and *expensive* OS. Linux came along and destroyed the Unix market just like you want it to destroy windows.
Snip more windows bashing based on irrelevant personal views (not experience).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Unclear. I first saw unix running on a PDP-11/45 at DEC Western Research Lab (Palo Alto) in 1977. Earlier than that, at CERN, we had been building networks, based on our own hardware and software and using coax cable. These were point to point links up to a few km and running (for the shorter links) at up to 5Mbps.
Xerox produced XNS, which is what the Altos and Stars used over early ethernet in the early 80s. AIUI, that might have become the wider networking standard except that Xerox refused to release the specs for some of the higher networking layers. Also by this time the unix boys were busy creating IP, which then took over from XNS because it was free and available with unix, and people had started writing IP stacks for other machines, such as VAXes and some IBM systems.
But mail and file transfer had been going on using ad-hoc methods anyway for some years.
--
"If you're not able to ask questions and deal with the answers without feeling
that someone has called your intelligence or competence into question, don't
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Tim Streater wrote:

I thought Ethernet was invented in the early 70s at Palo Alto.
And you must be right about email as HM sent her first email in 1976 over ARPANET :)
--
Robin
reply to address is (meant to be) valid
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It was, initially 3Mb/s, referred to as "research Ethernet" at Xerox. But what protocol(s) ran over it were a different matter. At one time there were a number of competing ones; X25, XNS, IPX/SPX (which was related to XNS), AppleTalk, DECNet. Mostly gone now & replaced by TCP/IP.
--
Today is Setting Orange, the 69th day of Confusion in the YOLD 3181
I don't have an attitude problem.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 03/08/15 18:29, Huge wrote:

Not sure X25 wasn't an entirely different wire level protocol. You are correct with the others though.
I remember getting TCP/IP to work over X25 and indeed token ring...

--
New Socialism consists essentially in being seen to have your heart in
the right place whilst your head is in the clouds and your hand is in
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 03/08/2015 19:56, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

I remember the first ethernet I ordered and installed used ISO protocols, TCP was just a labs thing.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I expect he means X.25, but being dennis he probably thinks it was tiny goblins, a la Terry Pratchett.
--
Today is Setting Orange, the 69th day of Confusion in the YOLD 3181
I don't have an attitude problem.
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 03/08/2015 21:49, Huge wrote:

I know what x25 is, I designed the hardware and wrote the firmware for the x25 card used on System X before I designed the whole thing out in favour of a Unix system and networking a few years later..
It wasn't x25 and your lack of knowledge about the early days of networking is only matched by your current lack.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.