Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Windows7ge

Member
  • Content Count

    7,514
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Reputation Activity

  1. Informative
    Windows7ge got a reaction from Pascal... for a status update, I had no plans of doing a status update today but the room I keep my servers in flood   
    I had no plans of doing a status update today but the room I keep my servers in flooded. The good news is I keep them up on a table so the water never touched them. The 3 UPS units didn't get as lucky being closer to the ground. They're still fine as well but the cabling is wet and I need to replace the box they sit on.
     
    I did have some equipment in the adjacent garage that got wet though. My poor gear.
     
    The exact cause of the flood hasn't been fully determined but we see no other probable source than the sub-pump failing to run.
     
    The good news out of all of this is we have no legitimate basement so the water only ever ran over the hole it didn't grow into a lake (though it did pool in the garage into a good sized puddle.)
     
    Looks like I'm cancelling my plans to babysit the sub-pump. It seemly is working so we can't tell for sure what the real cause or problem is.
     
  2. Informative
    Windows7ge got a reaction from Cyberspirit for a status update, I had no plans of doing a status update today but the room I keep my servers in flood   
    I had no plans of doing a status update today but the room I keep my servers in flooded. The good news is I keep them up on a table so the water never touched them. The 3 UPS units didn't get as lucky being closer to the ground. They're still fine as well but the cabling is wet and I need to replace the box they sit on.
     
    I did have some equipment in the adjacent garage that got wet though. My poor gear.
     
    The exact cause of the flood hasn't been fully determined but we see no other probable source than the sub-pump failing to run.
     
    The good news out of all of this is we have no legitimate basement so the water only ever ran over the hole it didn't grow into a lake (though it did pool in the garage into a good sized puddle.)
     
    Looks like I'm cancelling my plans to babysit the sub-pump. It seemly is working so we can't tell for sure what the real cause or problem is.
     
  3. Informative
    Windows7ge got a reaction from Ultrasnoop for a status update, I had no plans of doing a status update today but the room I keep my servers in flood   
    I had no plans of doing a status update today but the room I keep my servers in flooded. The good news is I keep them up on a table so the water never touched them. The 3 UPS units didn't get as lucky being closer to the ground. They're still fine as well but the cabling is wet and I need to replace the box they sit on.
     
    I did have some equipment in the adjacent garage that got wet though. My poor gear.
     
    The exact cause of the flood hasn't been fully determined but we see no other probable source than the sub-pump failing to run.
     
    The good news out of all of this is we have no legitimate basement so the water only ever ran over the hole it didn't grow into a lake (though it did pool in the garage into a good sized puddle.)
     
    Looks like I'm cancelling my plans to babysit the sub-pump. It seemly is working so we can't tell for sure what the real cause or problem is.
     
  4. Informative
    Windows7ge got a reaction from TopHatProductions115 for a status update, I had no plans of doing a status update today but the room I keep my servers in flood   
    I had no plans of doing a status update today but the room I keep my servers in flooded. The good news is I keep them up on a table so the water never touched them. The 3 UPS units didn't get as lucky being closer to the ground. They're still fine as well but the cabling is wet and I need to replace the box they sit on.
     
    I did have some equipment in the adjacent garage that got wet though. My poor gear.
     
    The exact cause of the flood hasn't been fully determined but we see no other probable source than the sub-pump failing to run.
     
    The good news out of all of this is we have no legitimate basement so the water only ever ran over the hole it didn't grow into a lake (though it did pool in the garage into a good sized puddle.)
     
    Looks like I'm cancelling my plans to babysit the sub-pump. It seemly is working so we can't tell for sure what the real cause or problem is.
     
  5. Funny
    Windows7ge got a reaction from Tech_Dreamer for a status update, It would appear my reputation could not be found at least until it gets updated again   
    It would appear my reputation could not be found

    at least until it gets updated again.
  6. Like
    Windows7ge got a reaction from FloRolf for a status update, It would appear my reputation could not be found at least until it gets updated again   
    It would appear my reputation could not be found

    at least until it gets updated again.
  7. Funny
    Windows7ge got a reaction from Pascal... for a status update, It would appear my reputation could not be found at least until it gets updated again   
    It would appear my reputation could not be found

    at least until it gets updated again.
  8. Like
    Windows7ge got a reaction from TopHatProductions115 for a status update, As is the natural progression of learning, things get easier as you go along. Little   
    As is the natural progression of learning, things get easier as you go along. Little by little your knowledge grows until what you've learned becomes easy. You can pick out the key components for what it is you want to accomplish and get it done in short time.
     
    Sometimes though, when you decide to teach others something that you've grown to consider simple you really start to remember why you thought it was hard in the first place.
     
    Because sometimes, there's A LOT of f***ing steps.
     
    I swear it's not as bad as it looks .
     
     
    Also in case anyone was curious you can attach at least 57 pictures to a single post...
  9. Like
    Windows7ge got a reaction from wkdpaul for a status update, As is the natural progression of learning, things get easier as you go along. Little   
    As is the natural progression of learning, things get easier as you go along. Little by little your knowledge grows until what you've learned becomes easy. You can pick out the key components for what it is you want to accomplish and get it done in short time.
     
    Sometimes though, when you decide to teach others something that you've grown to consider simple you really start to remember why you thought it was hard in the first place.
     
    Because sometimes, there's A LOT of f***ing steps.
     
    I swear it's not as bad as it looks .
     
     
    Also in case anyone was curious you can attach at least 57 pictures to a single post...
  10. Like
    Windows7ge got a reaction from lewdicrous for a status update, As is the natural progression of learning, things get easier as you go along. Little   
    As is the natural progression of learning, things get easier as you go along. Little by little your knowledge grows until what you've learned becomes easy. You can pick out the key components for what it is you want to accomplish and get it done in short time.
     
    Sometimes though, when you decide to teach others something that you've grown to consider simple you really start to remember why you thought it was hard in the first place.
     
    Because sometimes, there's A LOT of f***ing steps.
     
    I swear it's not as bad as it looks .
     
     
    Also in case anyone was curious you can attach at least 57 pictures to a single post...
  11. Like
    Windows7ge reacted to TopHatProductions115 for a status update, It finally came!   
    It finally came! 


  12. Like
    Windows7ge got a reaction from TopHatProductions115 for a status update, I feel like I'm testing the limitations of how many pictures you can attach to a post   
    I feel like I'm testing the limitations of how many pictures you can attach to a post. Get the feeling there should be a number limit...
     

     
    At current projections that's about 65% of them...
     
    Once again I find myself writing another Tutorial that is so long it warrants an Index...
     
    But when it can make your two monitor desktop look like this:

     
    I'd say it's worth it. 😎
     
    GPU Passthough w/ Looking Glass KVM Tutorial coming soon...
  13. Informative
    Windows7ge got a reaction from jjdrost for a status update, I feel like I'm testing the limitations of how many pictures you can attach to a post   
    I feel like I'm testing the limitations of how many pictures you can attach to a post. Get the feeling there should be a number limit...
     

     
    At current projections that's about 65% of them...
     
    Once again I find myself writing another Tutorial that is so long it warrants an Index...
     
    But when it can make your two monitor desktop look like this:

     
    I'd say it's worth it. 😎
     
    GPU Passthough w/ Looking Glass KVM Tutorial coming soon...
  14. Like
    Windows7ge got a reaction from dual290x for a status update, I feel like I'm testing the limitations of how many pictures you can attach to a post   
    I feel like I'm testing the limitations of how many pictures you can attach to a post. Get the feeling there should be a number limit...
     

     
    At current projections that's about 65% of them...
     
    Once again I find myself writing another Tutorial that is so long it warrants an Index...
     
    But when it can make your two monitor desktop look like this:

     
    I'd say it's worth it. 😎
     
    GPU Passthough w/ Looking Glass KVM Tutorial coming soon...
  15. Like
    Windows7ge got a reaction from lewdicrous for a status update, I feel like I'm testing the limitations of how many pictures you can attach to a post   
    I feel like I'm testing the limitations of how many pictures you can attach to a post. Get the feeling there should be a number limit...
     

     
    At current projections that's about 65% of them...
     
    Once again I find myself writing another Tutorial that is so long it warrants an Index...
     
    But when it can make your two monitor desktop look like this:

     
    I'd say it's worth it. 😎
     
    GPU Passthough w/ Looking Glass KVM Tutorial coming soon...
  16. Informative
    Windows7ge got a reaction from jjdrost for a status update, A short time ago someone posted a question correlating the length of a network cable   
    A short time ago someone posted a question correlating the length of a network cable with the speed of which data is transmitted. Although this is false (expect perhaps in the event of packet loss but that normally shouldn't occur between a point-to-point connection) it got me thinking.
     
    Now common knowledge will dictate that technically with a longer distance to travel it takes longer for a message to get from Point A to Point B. This can apply to walking, driving, electrons travelling along a conductor, and even light along a path (fibre).
     
    So this made me curious. Although throughput should be unaffected by distance (up to 100m over Cat5e at Gigabit) what about ping? Is it possible to get a measurable difference in ping on a single P2P connection between a Point A & B.
     
    Now most networking is measured in ms (milliseconds) this is 1/1000th of a second. This is as much resolution as Windows CMD provides but on Linux the Terminal will provide and accuracy down to one microsecond. This is 1/1000th of a millisecond or 1/1000000 of a second. I really didn't know if the speed of electrons were "slow" enough to be measurable in the microsecond range.
     
    Getting my test setup ready I measured out two cables. One 100m (328ft.) and one 1m using bulk Cat5e UTP riser cable.

    If anybody cares I terminated them using the T568-B standard and used a cable tester to verify connectivity on all 8 conductors.
     
    Using a 1Gbit interface on two different computers and verifying connectivity at 1Gbit with both cables I started the test and the results were disappointing honestly.
     
    1m cable:

     
    100m cable:

     
    I tried tests using a -c of 100 but this didn't show any discernible difference in ping so I upped it to 1000. Aside from the odd really high value or really low value which skews the results above the overwhelming majority of the tests were right around ~0.135 microseconds regardless of 1m or 100m.
     
    So not only does cable length not matter for just about any application you may have but the measurable difference is so small that a resolution of microseconds still isn't enough to tell the difference.
     
    So that's kind of cool to know. I learned that electrons travel faster than 100m (328ft.) per microsecond.
  17. Like
    Windows7ge got a reaction from VegetableStu for a status update, A short time ago someone posted a question correlating the length of a network cable   
    A short time ago someone posted a question correlating the length of a network cable with the speed of which data is transmitted. Although this is false (expect perhaps in the event of packet loss but that normally shouldn't occur between a point-to-point connection) it got me thinking.
     
    Now common knowledge will dictate that technically with a longer distance to travel it takes longer for a message to get from Point A to Point B. This can apply to walking, driving, electrons travelling along a conductor, and even light along a path (fibre).
     
    So this made me curious. Although throughput should be unaffected by distance (up to 100m over Cat5e at Gigabit) what about ping? Is it possible to get a measurable difference in ping on a single P2P connection between a Point A & B.
     
    Now most networking is measured in ms (milliseconds) this is 1/1000th of a second. This is as much resolution as Windows CMD provides but on Linux the Terminal will provide and accuracy down to one microsecond. This is 1/1000th of a millisecond or 1/1000000 of a second. I really didn't know if the speed of electrons were "slow" enough to be measurable in the microsecond range.
     
    Getting my test setup ready I measured out two cables. One 100m (328ft.) and one 1m using bulk Cat5e UTP riser cable.

    If anybody cares I terminated them using the T568-B standard and used a cable tester to verify connectivity on all 8 conductors.
     
    Using a 1Gbit interface on two different computers and verifying connectivity at 1Gbit with both cables I started the test and the results were disappointing honestly.
     
    1m cable:

     
    100m cable:

     
    I tried tests using a -c of 100 but this didn't show any discernible difference in ping so I upped it to 1000. Aside from the odd really high value or really low value which skews the results above the overwhelming majority of the tests were right around ~0.135 microseconds regardless of 1m or 100m.
     
    So not only does cable length not matter for just about any application you may have but the measurable difference is so small that a resolution of microseconds still isn't enough to tell the difference.
     
    So that's kind of cool to know. I learned that electrons travel faster than 100m (328ft.) per microsecond.
  18. Like
    Windows7ge got a reaction from lewdicrous for a status update, A short time ago someone posted a question correlating the length of a network cable   
    A short time ago someone posted a question correlating the length of a network cable with the speed of which data is transmitted. Although this is false (expect perhaps in the event of packet loss but that normally shouldn't occur between a point-to-point connection) it got me thinking.
     
    Now common knowledge will dictate that technically with a longer distance to travel it takes longer for a message to get from Point A to Point B. This can apply to walking, driving, electrons travelling along a conductor, and even light along a path (fibre).
     
    So this made me curious. Although throughput should be unaffected by distance (up to 100m over Cat5e at Gigabit) what about ping? Is it possible to get a measurable difference in ping on a single P2P connection between a Point A & B.
     
    Now most networking is measured in ms (milliseconds) this is 1/1000th of a second. This is as much resolution as Windows CMD provides but on Linux the Terminal will provide and accuracy down to one microsecond. This is 1/1000th of a millisecond or 1/1000000 of a second. I really didn't know if the speed of electrons were "slow" enough to be measurable in the microsecond range.
     
    Getting my test setup ready I measured out two cables. One 100m (328ft.) and one 1m using bulk Cat5e UTP riser cable.

    If anybody cares I terminated them using the T568-B standard and used a cable tester to verify connectivity on all 8 conductors.
     
    Using a 1Gbit interface on two different computers and verifying connectivity at 1Gbit with both cables I started the test and the results were disappointing honestly.
     
    1m cable:

     
    100m cable:

     
    I tried tests using a -c of 100 but this didn't show any discernible difference in ping so I upped it to 1000. Aside from the odd really high value or really low value which skews the results above the overwhelming majority of the tests were right around ~0.135 microseconds regardless of 1m or 100m.
     
    So not only does cable length not matter for just about any application you may have but the measurable difference is so small that a resolution of microseconds still isn't enough to tell the difference.
     
    So that's kind of cool to know. I learned that electrons travel faster than 100m (328ft.) per microsecond.
  19. Informative
    Windows7ge got a reaction from imreloadin for a status update, A short time ago someone posted a question correlating the length of a network cable   
    A short time ago someone posted a question correlating the length of a network cable with the speed of which data is transmitted. Although this is false (expect perhaps in the event of packet loss but that normally shouldn't occur between a point-to-point connection) it got me thinking.
     
    Now common knowledge will dictate that technically with a longer distance to travel it takes longer for a message to get from Point A to Point B. This can apply to walking, driving, electrons travelling along a conductor, and even light along a path (fibre).
     
    So this made me curious. Although throughput should be unaffected by distance (up to 100m over Cat5e at Gigabit) what about ping? Is it possible to get a measurable difference in ping on a single P2P connection between a Point A & B.
     
    Now most networking is measured in ms (milliseconds) this is 1/1000th of a second. This is as much resolution as Windows CMD provides but on Linux the Terminal will provide and accuracy down to one microsecond. This is 1/1000th of a millisecond or 1/1000000 of a second. I really didn't know if the speed of electrons were "slow" enough to be measurable in the microsecond range.
     
    Getting my test setup ready I measured out two cables. One 100m (328ft.) and one 1m using bulk Cat5e UTP riser cable.

    If anybody cares I terminated them using the T568-B standard and used a cable tester to verify connectivity on all 8 conductors.
     
    Using a 1Gbit interface on two different computers and verifying connectivity at 1Gbit with both cables I started the test and the results were disappointing honestly.
     
    1m cable:

     
    100m cable:

     
    I tried tests using a -c of 100 but this didn't show any discernible difference in ping so I upped it to 1000. Aside from the odd really high value or really low value which skews the results above the overwhelming majority of the tests were right around ~0.135 microseconds regardless of 1m or 100m.
     
    So not only does cable length not matter for just about any application you may have but the measurable difference is so small that a resolution of microseconds still isn't enough to tell the difference.
     
    So that's kind of cool to know. I learned that electrons travel faster than 100m (328ft.) per microsecond.
  20. Like
    Windows7ge reacted to 2FA for a status update, Found a new CLI text editor that I like quite a bit called 'micro'. Has the simplicit   
    Found a new CLI text editor that I like quite a bit called 'micro'. Has the simplicity of nano along with more advanced features. https://micro-editor.github.io/
  21. Agree
    Windows7ge reacted to Arika S for a status update, in the age of google, how do we have people ON THIS FORUM not know how to search for   
    in the age of google, how do we have people ON THIS FORUM not know how to search for the most basic of basic information.....
  22. Like
    Windows7ge got a reaction from Lurick for a status update, How much UPS is too much? I get the feeling 162lbs(73.5kg) of UPS is too much UPS.   
    How much UPS is too much?

    I get the feeling 162lbs(73.5kg) of UPS is too much UPS.
  23. Like
    Windows7ge got a reaction from Gegger for a status update, How much UPS is too much? I get the feeling 162lbs(73.5kg) of UPS is too much UPS.   
    How much UPS is too much?

    I get the feeling 162lbs(73.5kg) of UPS is too much UPS.
  24. Like
    Windows7ge got a reaction from Karlo Topic for a status update, How much UPS is too much? I get the feeling 162lbs(73.5kg) of UPS is too much UPS.   
    How much UPS is too much?

    I get the feeling 162lbs(73.5kg) of UPS is too much UPS.
  25. Like
    Windows7ge got a reaction from TopHatProductions115 for a status update, How much UPS is too much? I get the feeling 162lbs(73.5kg) of UPS is too much UPS.   
    How much UPS is too much?

    I get the feeling 162lbs(73.5kg) of UPS is too much UPS.
×