Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

The Random Ramblings About UL Thread

Options
12467…22

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    rmacm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,039 ✭✭✭rmacm


    digiking wrote: »
    Just as well...IMO

    I reckon if they tried to ban it they'd probably end up causing major network problems due to additional network hardware/software required + ICT use mostly dell hardware which isn't known for being the best gear you can buy from the start - In my dads place we have 3 hp servers and they've being running for 3yrs without a problem!!!

    Bwhahahahhahah.....no it wouldn't there are numerous ways to do it none of which would cause major or minor network problems. The proxy could be reconfigured to route all requests for Bebo to something that's not Bebo e.g. www.bebousersaretossers.com (not that I'm calling all Bebo users tossers :) ).

    It doesn't require any extra hardware to do it. I've used Dell kit on numerous occasions and haven't found much fault with it. Their server equipment is excellent and as Pete said both Dell and HP make commodity servers so it's quiet likely the same gear is going in to both.


  • Options
    #93
    cson
    Registered Users Posts: 14,467 ✭✭✭✭cson


    Can someone please translate this comp-syser language? :p

    T'was nice to be back amongst people that speak my own language last night. I'd forgotten what good craic Galway is. Wouldn't go to College there though, know the place far too well. Better layout of the pubs and clubs as opposed to Limerick.


  • Options
    #94
    rmacm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,039 ✭✭✭rmacm


    cson wrote: »
    Can someone please translate this comp-syser language? :p

    A rough translation would be:

    digiking is talking shite and Rory and Pete are in agreement that he's talking shite and should be punished for his crimes against humanity.

    digiking just in case you decide to take this personally you should know that it is meant in jest for the most part :)

    And yes I did talk about myself in the 3rd person above.


  • Options
    #95
    kaimera
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,396 ✭✭✭✭kaimera


    I see you're still battling with the swear filter eh Rory? :/


  • Options
    #96
    rmacm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,039 ✭✭✭rmacm


    [nocensor]****ity **** ****[/nocensor]
    [nofilter]****ity **** ****[/nofilter]
    [censor]****ity **** ****[/censor]
    [FILTER]****ity **** ****[/FILTER]

    meh


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    cooperguy
    Registered Users Posts: 2,650 ✭✭✭cooperguy


    Ya that fucking swear filter is really shity:D


  • Options
    #98
    bluedolphin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,421 ✭✭✭bluedolphin


    cooperguy wrote: »
    Ya that fucking swear filter is really shity:D

    I saw what you did there. You made a funny. Didn't you? Yeah... Damn fucking right you did! :D


  • Options
    #99
    cson
    Registered Users Posts: 14,467 ✭✭✭✭cson


    bluedolphin wrote: »
    I saw what you did there. You made a funny. Didn't you? Yeah... Damn fucking right you did! :D

    U maded a funneh too, hehe :)


  • Options
    #100
    Peteee
    Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 2,432 Mod ✭✭✭✭Peteee


    bluedolphin wrote: »
    I saw what you did there. You made a funny. Didn't you? Yeah... Damn fucking right you did! :D
    cson wrote: »
    U maded a funneh too, hehe :)

    Swearing is big, and very fucking clever :p


  • Options
    #101
    bluedolphin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,421 ✭✭✭bluedolphin


    Peteee wrote: »
    Swearing is big, and very fucking clever :p

    So am I. :)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    Ginger
    Registered Users Posts: 2,931 ✭✭✭Ginger


    digiking wrote: »
    Just as well...IMO

    I reckon if they tried to ban it they'd probably end up causing major network problems due to additional network hardware/software required + ICT use mostly dell hardware which isn't known for being the best gear you can buy from the start - In my dads place we have 3 hp servers and they've being running for 3yrs without a problem!!!


    Ha ha ha ha ha ha .. probably the stupidest thing i have heard in a while, comparing the network infrastructure of UL to 3 servers in an office..


  • Options
    #103
    Mossin
    Registered Users Posts: 2,219 ✭✭✭Mossin


    Peteee wrote: »
    Swearing is big, and very fucking clever :p
    bluedolphin wrote: »
    So am I. :)

    We shall have to wait until we meet you to confirm this. ;)


  • Options
    #104
    kaimera
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,396 ✭✭✭✭kaimera


    Mossin wrote: »
    We shall have to wait until we meet you to confirm this. ;)
    Get in line newb.


  • Options
    #105
    cooperguy
    Registered Users Posts: 2,650 ✭✭✭cooperguy


    Mossin wrote: »
    We shall have to wait until we meet you to confirm this. ;)
    She is the only (fucking) person hopping around on a fin with a blueish tinge how could you have missed her round campus up until now:D


  • Options
    #106
    kaimera
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,396 ✭✭✭✭kaimera


    Whats with all the swearing guys?

    saddam.png

    Relax


  • Options
    #107
    Mossin
    Registered Users Posts: 2,219 ✭✭✭Mossin


    cooperguy wrote: »
    She is the only (fucking) person hopping around on a fin with a blueish tinge how could you have missed her ropund campus up until now:D

    Touché good sir...

    Maybe if she turned up to a BULBS I may have made her acquaintance before now!! ;) :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #108
    rmacm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,039 ✭✭✭rmacm


    Ginger wrote: »
    Ha ha ha ha ha ha .. probably the stupidest thing i have heard in a while, comparing the network infrastructure of UL to 3 servers in an office..

    Indeed now I demand that digiking come back and answer for his crimes

    /me stomps feet and sulks.
    Mossin wrote: »
    We shall have to wait until we meet you to confirm this. ;)

    hahaha an intelligent woman :p
    kaimera wrote: »
    Get in line newb.

    I didn't think she was that kind of girl although now that you mention it.
    kaimera wrote: »
    Whats with all the swearing guys?

    saddam.png

    Relax

    Lol


  • Options
    #109
    digiking
    Registered Users Posts: 487 ✭✭digiking


    Ginger wrote: »
    Ha ha ha ha ha ha .. probably the stupidest thing i have heard in a while, comparing the network infrastructure of UL to 3 servers in an office..

    Well, It just so happens that these severs are running a 60,000 euro voice over ip phone system!!! - So judge what you like - this system is the dogs balls when it comes to ICT!!!


  • Options
    #110
    Ginger
    Registered Users Posts: 2,931 ✭✭✭Ginger


    ok, lets examine for a moment shall we.

    Doing a basic calculation here..

    Exchange 2003 accounts for approx 10,000 students, and 4,000 faculty and staff. CALs for said accounts and computers. MS Office licences for same. Now this is probably all covered under academic licencing from MS so its probably a lot lower than it would be to the normal punter... anyways.. the volume is bigger.

    Now if we look at best practices, they say not to have more than 5000 user accounts on any one server, so you are looking at 3 servers here for that.. + exchange boxes, and probably some MOMS and SMS boxen too. Maybe 2 or more SQL Server boxes thrown in.

    Start to see a trend here, that is before we start looking at the distribution of the network and all that. Wired and wireless. Or access controls, spam filters, AntiViral solutions etc etc. Or staff machines.

    And we still havent looked at the digital PABX system yet or the AV gear.

    Now, on your VOIP system, it would be very easy to use virtualisation software and condense your 3 server solution down to one, and also reduce your licencing costs by a third. Because if the servers are 3 years old, its quite possibly easier to image them and admin them from a single machine.


  • Options
    #111
    digiking
    Registered Users Posts: 487 ✭✭digiking


    True, Your points are all valid - if ITD only adheared to ms best practices there'd be a lot less trouble!!!

    But they don't and and allowing people to send out email to all users with a 17mb attachment is just retarded - yes this did happen when some dude tried to sell his car before christmas


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    Ginger
    Registered Users Posts: 2,931 ✭✭✭Ginger


    Strangely enough they do adhere to them..

    Email spam in the form of adverts from people is against the ITD code of conduct

    As that happens the person could have their email revoked and computing privelages as well..

    Now no matter how well you advertise these rules, people ignore them or say they dont apply to me.

    Anyways, the original comment was in relation to your comparison of a 3 computer system to an obviously larger computing network.


  • Options
    #113
    rmacm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,039 ✭✭✭rmacm


    digiking wrote: »
    Well, It just so happens that these severs are running a 60,000 euro voice over ip phone system!!! - So judge what you like - this system is the dogs balls when it comes to ICT!!!

    Wonderful UL's network is still far larger and more complex than your 3 server VoIP system. You were still talking ****e in your previous post(s) :p
    digiking wrote: »
    True, Your points are all valid - if ITD only adheared to ms best practices there'd be a lot less trouble!!!

    But they don't and and allowing people to send out email to all users with a 17mb attachment is just retarded - yes this did happen when some dude tried to sell his car before christmas

    ITD follow HEAnets guidelines for computer usage which as Ginger pointed out covers the sending of Spam. I believe they are also ISO:9001 certified. On the issue of sending a 17MB attachment, well there really is no accounting for the stupidity of some people. UL's data network is pretty solid and just incase anyone wants to bash ITD for the performance of the network they should know it is actually managed by an external company (can't remember the name off the top of my head). ITD manage the services that run over the network e.g. DNS, DHCP, Mail etc.


  • Options
    #114
    digiking
    Registered Users Posts: 487 ✭✭digiking


    I'm not bashing ITD really - It's just simple reliability issues i'm talking about

    For instance - look at the way the system is configured regarding routing and dns etc - i've never seen that side of the system go down - its just stuff like exchange falling over...yes i know it happens in way more places than just UL.

    ITD should really switch the mail over to the google apps solution - they are using it in trinity and by all accounts its working fantastic + plus google have the infrastructure and know how to make a rock solid system.

    And regarding the Student Administration Portal - presumably if they load it onto a new dual/quad xeon server with 4+ gb of ram its not gonna go down - and do load balancing across to lan cards also

    Alan


  • Options
    #115
    rmacm
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,039 ✭✭✭rmacm


    digiking wrote: »
    And regarding the Student Administration Portal - presumably if they load it onto a new dual/quad xeon server with 4+ gb of ram its not gonna go down - and do load balancing across to lan cards also

    Throwing hardware at it isn't necessarily the best solution. If the software is crap then pretty much no amount of hardware resources will make it any better.....the hardware may be able to keep up with the load being placed on it but the software may not be able to handle it.


  • Options
    #116
    digiking
    Registered Users Posts: 487 ✭✭digiking


    rmacm wrote: »
    Throwing hardware at it isn't necessarily the best solution. If the software is crap then pretty much no amount of hardware resources will make it any better.....the hardware may be able to keep up with the load being placed on it but the software may not be able to handle it.

    Well, Either way something has to be done about it - i am one of the class reps and we had a big meeting about it during council and a petition was passed around the college regarding the late delivery of exam results by almost a week.


  • Options
    #117
    Mossin
    Registered Users Posts: 2,219 ✭✭✭Mossin


    digiking wrote: »
    Well, Either way something has to be done about it - i am one of the class reps and we had a big meeting about it during council and a petition was passed around the college regarding the late delivery of exam results by almost a week.

    When were the results delayed by a week??
    I have always gotten mine on time, so what am I after missing? :(


  • Options
    #118
    digiking
    Registered Users Posts: 487 ✭✭digiking


    They were delayed for a week for some people due to the fact that it took itd approximately 1 week to get the system running stable - well at-least thats what the SU are saying. Personally i took we about 8 or 9 attempts to get my results.

    Saying that - some people on my course had to call to the office to get theirs...


  • Options
    #119
    Ginger
    Registered Users Posts: 2,931 ✭✭✭Ginger


    In the case of load balancing a web server, you usually seperate out the servers and use an NLB in front of them to route the traffic correctly.

    That is assuming that the issue is requests rather than in your data layer. If the DB holding the information is incorrectly designed/partitioned or indexed you will get a crawling application.

    Consider also the following. What do you do once people have checked their results and the whole results checking has died down, you are left with expensive hardware doing nothing till the next rush.. it doesnt make sense to throw massive hardware at it, its not so economically viable.


  • Options
    #120
    Mossin
    Registered Users Posts: 2,219 ✭✭✭Mossin


    digiking wrote: »
    They were delayed for a week for some people due to the fact that it took itd approximately 1 week to get the system running stable - well at-least thats what the SU are saying. Personally i took we about 8 or 9 attempts to get my results.

    Saying that - some people on my course had to call to the office to get theirs...

    You are taking the SU's word on this?
    Sceptre any comments???


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    digiking
    Registered Users Posts: 487 ✭✭digiking


    well, personally i find it hard to believe that they cant resolve it - virtualization mite be the solution on this one.

    Oh, As mentioned earlier about consolidating voip servers - hmm - surely thats gonna add a few more milliseconds delay to the audio - and the software manufacturers don't recommend it.

    I was told that by the students union - it's probably just a way to force the issue with ITD


Advertisement