My itec professor is a genius

[randay]

Originally posted by: TreyRandom

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: TreyRandom

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: MrPickins

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: MrPickins

Originally posted by: randay
Whats your point anyway? this is the 3rd time I have to say this:

I AM NOT DISPUTING THE FACT THAT RAID 0 OFFERS NO FAULT TOLERANCE!!!

Yet you still fail to qualify a "RAID0" as redundant. Thats is the point.

"RAID0" is a level zero RAID.

How does that address redundancy, as per the dictionary definition?

Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks.

redundant

1. characterized by verbosity or unnecessary repetition in expressing ideas; prolix: a redundant style.
2. being in excess; exceeding what is usual or natural: a redundant part.
3. having some unusual or extra part or feature.
4. characterized by superabundance or superfluity: lush, redundant vegetation.
5. Engineering. a. (of a structural member) not necessary for resisting statically determined stresses.
b. (of a structure) having members designed to resist other than statically determined stresses; hyperstatic.
c. noting a complete truss having additional members for resisting eccentric loads. Compare complete (def. 8), incomplete (def. 3).
d. (of a device, circuit, computer system, etc.) having excess or duplicate parts that can continue to perform in the event of malfunction of some of the parts.
6. Linguistics. characterized by redundancy; predictable.
7. Computers. containing more bits or characters than are required, as a parity bit inserted for checking purposes.
8. Chiefly British. removed or laid off from a job.

array

?verb (used with object) 1. to place in proper or desired order; marshal: Napoleon arrayed his troops for battle.
2. to clothe with garments, esp. of an ornamental kind; dress up; deck out: She arrayed herself in furs and diamonds.
?noun 3. order or arrangement, as of troops drawn up for battle.
4. military force, esp. a body of troops.
5. a large and impressive grouping or organization of things: He couldn't dismiss the array of facts.
6. regular order or arrangement; series: an array of figures.
7. a large group, number, or quantity of people or things: an impressive array of scholars; an imposing array of books.
8. attire; dress: in fine array.
9. an arrangement of interrelated objects or items of equipment for accomplishing a particular task: thousands of solar cells in one vast array.
10. Mathematics, Statistics. a. an arrangement of a series of terms according to value, as from largest to smallest.
b. an arrangement of a series of terms in some geometric pattern, as in a matrix.
11. Computers. a block of related data elements, each of which is usually identified by one or more subscripts.
12. Radio. antenna array.

of Inexpensive Disks.

But, dude... per that definition, the array cannot function in the event of a malfunction of some of the parts!! Again, it is not an Array of Inexpensive Redundant Disks.

If you don't understand that the array is what is redundant, then I guess you will have to continue to disagree with every technical website and writer out there.

thats not what the definition says. the definition says that the duplicate parts can continue to perform after a malfunction of other parts.

Then continue to disagree with every technical writer and website out there.

I am not disagreeing with them. RAID 0 is a valid RAID and industry standard. You are the one saying that RAID 0 is not a "true" RAID and that it is not industry standard. Please quote to me where I say specifically "RAID 0 is redundant". If I did say that then I was technically wrong, probably meant to say that RAID 0 is a true RAID, but I don't remember saying it. Too lazy to read these posts again either.

 

[randay]

Originally posted by: TreyRandom

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: TreyRandom

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: ryan256

Originally posted by: randay
I did not drop out, I could sign up next semester and finish it if I wanted to. The class is from 12 noon to 3pm, I would have to take off a large chunk of time out from work. The prof is a senile(he strays from a subject and completely forgets to go back to it) old man teaching something I already have tons of real world experience(telecom) in and also is completely unrelated to my career goals. The degree I will get means nothing when put up against the 8 years of real IT experience I have. Basically I dont give a crap about the peice of paper, and Im happy that I actually had a few classes where I learned something.

Wow.... who sold you that load??
Let me tell you what your experience will get you. My father retired from the Air Force after doing coding and technical writing work for the better part of his 20 years in the service. Thats nearly 20 years of real world, on the job experience! But when he hit the civilian world he had a very hard time even getting companies to interview him. Why?? No college degree. Could he do the jobs he was applying for?? Absolutely! He could do them probably even better than the ones hired. Problem is you have to get past HR first. And HR is pre-programmed to look for college degrees and certifications. Those without them get their resume file 13'd.

I am a sysadmin in a 15 person office making over 40k in Hawaii. got offered the job on day of interview. no degree. no certs. noone sold me any "load". I see it for myself day in day out for the last 5-6 years, just after all this cert stuff got popular.

It's little wonder you're only making $40K in a high cost-of-living environment after 8 years in IT.

Well I am 25. I think I am doing alright. Also Hawaii is a small island and jobs are hard to come by. seeing as how last time I checked, 45K was average for my position. I believe I am doing quite well.

And, as we have seen, you will believe what you want to believe.

And as I have seen, you will make up what you want to believe.

 

[TreyRandom]

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: TreyRandom

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: TreyRandom

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: ryan256

Originally posted by: randay
I did not drop out, I could sign up next semester and finish it if I wanted to. The class is from 12 noon to 3pm, I would have to take off a large chunk of time out from work. The prof is a senile(he strays from a subject and completely forgets to go back to it) old man teaching something I already have tons of real world experience(telecom) in and also is completely unrelated to my career goals. The degree I will get means nothing when put up against the 8 years of real IT experience I have. Basically I dont give a crap about the peice of paper, and Im happy that I actually had a few classes where I learned something.

Wow.... who sold you that load??
Let me tell you what your experience will get you. My father retired from the Air Force after doing coding and technical writing work for the better part of his 20 years in the service. Thats nearly 20 years of real world, on the job experience! But when he hit the civilian world he had a very hard time even getting companies to interview him. Why?? No college degree. Could he do the jobs he was applying for?? Absolutely! He could do them probably even better than the ones hired. Problem is you have to get past HR first. And HR is pre-programmed to look for college degrees and certifications. Those without them get their resume file 13'd.

I am a sysadmin in a 15 person office making over 40k in Hawaii. got offered the job on day of interview. no degree. no certs. noone sold me any "load". I see it for myself day in day out for the last 5-6 years, just after all this cert stuff got popular.

It's little wonder you're only making $40K in a high cost-of-living environment after 8 years in IT.

Well I am 25. I think I am doing alright. Also Hawaii is a small island and jobs are hard to come by. seeing as how last time I checked, 45K was average for my position. I believe I am doing quite well.

And, as we have seen, you will believe what you want to believe.

And as I have seen, you will make up what you want to believe.

How am I making it all up when I'm the only one providing more than dictionary links?

 

[TreyRandom]

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: TreyRandom

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: TreyRandom

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: MrPickins

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: MrPickins

Originally posted by: randay
Whats your point anyway? this is the 3rd time I have to say this:

I AM NOT DISPUTING THE FACT THAT RAID 0 OFFERS NO FAULT TOLERANCE!!!

Yet you still fail to qualify a "RAID0" as redundant. Thats is the point.

"RAID0" is a level zero RAID.

How does that address redundancy, as per the dictionary definition?

Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks.

redundant

1. characterized by verbosity or unnecessary repetition in expressing ideas; prolix: a redundant style.
2. being in excess; exceeding what is usual or natural: a redundant part.
3. having some unusual or extra part or feature.
4. characterized by superabundance or superfluity: lush, redundant vegetation.
5. Engineering. a. (of a structural member) not necessary for resisting statically determined stresses.
b. (of a structure) having members designed to resist other than statically determined stresses; hyperstatic.
c. noting a complete truss having additional members for resisting eccentric loads. Compare complete (def. 8), incomplete (def. 3).
d. (of a device, circuit, computer system, etc.) having excess or duplicate parts that can continue to perform in the event of malfunction of some of the parts.
6. Linguistics. characterized by redundancy; predictable.
7. Computers. containing more bits or characters than are required, as a parity bit inserted for checking purposes.
8. Chiefly British. removed or laid off from a job.

array

?verb (used with object) 1. to place in proper or desired order; marshal: Napoleon arrayed his troops for battle.
2. to clothe with garments, esp. of an ornamental kind; dress up; deck out: She arrayed herself in furs and diamonds.
?noun 3. order or arrangement, as of troops drawn up for battle.
4. military force, esp. a body of troops.
5. a large and impressive grouping or organization of things: He couldn't dismiss the array of facts.
6. regular order or arrangement; series: an array of figures.
7. a large group, number, or quantity of people or things: an impressive array of scholars; an imposing array of books.
8. attire; dress: in fine array.
9. an arrangement of interrelated objects or items of equipment for accomplishing a particular task: thousands of solar cells in one vast array.
10. Mathematics, Statistics. a. an arrangement of a series of terms according to value, as from largest to smallest.
b. an arrangement of a series of terms in some geometric pattern, as in a matrix.
11. Computers. a block of related data elements, each of which is usually identified by one or more subscripts.
12. Radio. antenna array.

of Inexpensive Disks.

But, dude... per that definition, the array cannot function in the event of a malfunction of some of the parts!! Again, it is not an Array of Inexpensive Redundant Disks.

If you don't understand that the array is what is redundant, then I guess you will have to continue to disagree with every technical website and writer out there.

thats not what the definition says. the definition says that the duplicate parts can continue to perform after a malfunction of other parts.

Then continue to disagree with every technical writer and website out there.

I am not disagreeing with them. RAID 0 is a valid RAID and industry standard. You are the one saying that RAID 0 is not a "true" RAID and that it is not industry standard. Please quote to me where I say specifically "RAID 0 is redundant". If I did say that then I was technically wrong, probably meant to say that RAID 0 is a true RAID, but I don't remember saying it. Too lazy to read these posts again either.

But you are disagreeing with them. Check those links. They ALL say that RAID 0 offers no redundancy, and most of them state that RAID 0 isn't a true RAID. I never said it wasn't an industry standard.

The reason you don't want to go back and click them is because they state exactly what I'm telling you.

 

[TreyRandom]

Originally posted by: JDMnAR1

Originally posted by: franksta

Originally posted by: JDMnAR1

Originally posted by: supafly
Also, all RAID setups have built in fault tolerance. Isn't that special?

If by "special" you mean "incorrect". RAID 0 has no fault tolerance.

It also fails in the "R" part of RAID.

How so? By definition, you have multiple disks in an array, thus meeting the "redundant" portion. Fault-tolerance <> redundancy in and of itself.

Here's one quote...

 

[tfinch2]

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: TreyRandom

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: MrPickins

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: MrPickins

Originally posted by: randay
Whats your point anyway? this is the 3rd time I have to say this:

I AM NOT DISPUTING THE FACT THAT RAID 0 OFFERS NO FAULT TOLERANCE!!!

Yet you still fail to qualify a "RAID0" as redundant. Thats is the point.

"RAID0" is a level zero RAID.

How does that address redundancy, as per the dictionary definition?

Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks.

redundant

1. characterized by verbosity or unnecessary repetition in expressing ideas; prolix: a redundant style.
2. being in excess; exceeding what is usual or natural: a redundant part.
3. having some unusual or extra part or feature.
4. characterized by superabundance or superfluity: lush, redundant vegetation.
5. Engineering. a. (of a structural member) not necessary for resisting statically determined stresses.
b. (of a structure) having members designed to resist other than statically determined stresses; hyperstatic.
c. noting a complete truss having additional members for resisting eccentric loads. Compare complete (def. 8), incomplete (def. 3).
d. (of a device, circuit, computer system, etc.) having excess or duplicate parts that can continue to perform in the event of malfunction of some of the parts.
6. Linguistics. characterized by redundancy; predictable.
7. Computers. containing more bits or characters than are required, as a parity bit inserted for checking purposes.
8. Chiefly British. removed or laid off from a job.

array

?verb (used with object) 1. to place in proper or desired order; marshal: Napoleon arrayed his troops for battle.
2. to clothe with garments, esp. of an ornamental kind; dress up; deck out: She arrayed herself in furs and diamonds.
?noun 3. order or arrangement, as of troops drawn up for battle.
4. military force, esp. a body of troops.
5. a large and impressive grouping or organization of things: He couldn't dismiss the array of facts.
6. regular order or arrangement; series: an array of figures.
7. a large group, number, or quantity of people or things: an impressive array of scholars; an imposing array of books.
8. attire; dress: in fine array.
9. an arrangement of interrelated objects or items of equipment for accomplishing a particular task: thousands of solar cells in one vast array.
10. Mathematics, Statistics. a. an arrangement of a series of terms according to value, as from largest to smallest.
b. an arrangement of a series of terms in some geometric pattern, as in a matrix.
11. Computers. a block of related data elements, each of which is usually identified by one or more subscripts.
12. Radio. antenna array.

of Inexpensive Disks.

But, dude... per that definition, the array cannot function in the event of a malfunction of some of the parts!! Again, it is not an Array of Inexpensive Redundant Disks.

If you don't understand that the array is what is redundant, then I guess you will have to continue to disagree with every technical website and writer out there.

thats not what the definition says. the definition says that the duplicate parts can continue to perform after a malfunction of other parts.

It cannot continue to perform. Your data is fvcked. Like I said before, the data is logically contiguous but not physically contiguous. If half of your data is on disk 0, and the other half is on disk 1, if drive 0 fails half of your data is gone.

 

[Sensai]

all aside.... he probably used these slides for the past 2 years and didnt want to show laziness so he acted like the stuff is the future! ... any points for that?

 

[randay]

Originally posted by: TreyRandom

Originally posted by: JDMnAR1

Originally posted by: franksta

Originally posted by: JDMnAR1

Originally posted by: supafly
Also, all RAID setups have built in fault tolerance. Isn't that special?

If by "special" you mean "incorrect". RAID 0 has no fault tolerance.

It also fails in the "R" part of RAID.

How so? By definition, you have multiple disks in an array, thus meeting the "redundant" portion. Fault-tolerance <> redundancy in and of itself.

Here's one quote...

oops - thats not ME.

 

[TreyRandom]

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: randay
If one disk fails, the other disk still works.
If you have only one disk, if one disk fails, there are no other disks that still work.

from wikipedia

The term RAID was first defined by David A. Patterson, Garth A. Gibson and Randy Katz at the University of California, Berkeley in 1987.[2] They studied the possibility of using two or more disks to appear as a single device to the host system and published a paper: "A case for Redundant Arrays of Inexpensive Disks (RAID)" in June 1988 at the SIGMOD conference.

Nope. The Entire volume worthless if you lose one disk.

Youre confusing the disks with the data. RAID 0 is RAID LEVEL 0, appropriately named 0 since there is no fault tolerance. But the RAID part of the whole thing refers to the array of disks, not the fault tolerance of the data. the LEVEL is what refers to the redundancy or fault tolerance of the data.

Take a real world example. You can buy one 750gb disk for 400 dollars, or you can buy 2 500 gig disks for 150. If you raid them you then can have an array that is as effective if not more effective then one single drive, for less money. If one drive fails, you replace it for 150 dollars. If you went with a single drive, you replace it for 400 dollars. This is where the "redundant" comes into play. The RAID LEVEL doesnt matter.

Here's another where you are trying to state that RAID 0 is redundant, and that the RAID level doesn't matter as far as redundancy is concerned.

 

[randay]

Originally posted by: TreyRandom

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: TreyRandom

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: TreyRandom

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: ryan256

Originally posted by: randay
I did not drop out, I could sign up next semester and finish it if I wanted to. The class is from 12 noon to 3pm, I would have to take off a large chunk of time out from work. The prof is a senile(he strays from a subject and completely forgets to go back to it) old man teaching something I already have tons of real world experience(telecom) in and also is completely unrelated to my career goals. The degree I will get means nothing when put up against the 8 years of real IT experience I have. Basically I dont give a crap about the peice of paper, and Im happy that I actually had a few classes where I learned something.

Wow.... who sold you that load??
Let me tell you what your experience will get you. My father retired from the Air Force after doing coding and technical writing work for the better part of his 20 years in the service. Thats nearly 20 years of real world, on the job experience! But when he hit the civilian world he had a very hard time even getting companies to interview him. Why?? No college degree. Could he do the jobs he was applying for?? Absolutely! He could do them probably even better than the ones hired. Problem is you have to get past HR first. And HR is pre-programmed to look for college degrees and certifications. Those without them get their resume file 13'd.

I am a sysadmin in a 15 person office making over 40k in Hawaii. got offered the job on day of interview. no degree. no certs. noone sold me any "load". I see it for myself day in day out for the last 5-6 years, just after all this cert stuff got popular.

It's little wonder you're only making $40K in a high cost-of-living environment after 8 years in IT.

Well I am 25. I think I am doing alright. Also Hawaii is a small island and jobs are hard to come by. seeing as how last time I checked, 45K was average for my position. I believe I am doing quite well.

And, as we have seen, you will believe what you want to believe.

And as I have seen, you will make up what you want to believe.

How am I making it all up when I'm the only one providing more than dictionary links?

Where was the link to average salaries for sysadmins in the state of Hawaii? I must have missed it.

 

[TreyRandom]

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: MrPickins
You need to get off the name thing...

RAID0 is not a true RAID. Nothing is redundant. If you think so, you may need to read the definition of redundant again.

I suppose you could technically call it "AID."

The physical disk drives are redundant. Thats why its called RAID!

Here's yet another where you say that RAID 0 is redundant because the physical drives are redundant. But every web site and technical book will tell you... RAID 0 is not redundant.

 

[randay]

Originally posted by: TreyRandom

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: spidey07

Originally posted by: randay
If one disk fails, the other disk still works.
If you have only one disk, if one disk fails, there are no other disks that still work.

from wikipedia

The term RAID was first defined by David A. Patterson, Garth A. Gibson and Randy Katz at the University of California, Berkeley in 1987.[2] They studied the possibility of using two or more disks to appear as a single device to the host system and published a paper: "A case for Redundant Arrays of Inexpensive Disks (RAID)" in June 1988 at the SIGMOD conference.

Nope. The Entire volume worthless if you lose one disk.

Youre confusing the disks with the data. RAID 0 is RAID LEVEL 0, appropriately named 0 since there is no fault tolerance. But the RAID part of the whole thing refers to the array of disks, not the fault tolerance of the data. the LEVEL is what refers to the redundancy or fault tolerance of the data.

Take a real world example. You can buy one 750gb disk for 400 dollars, or you can buy 2 500 gig disks for 150. If you raid them you then can have an array that is as effective if not more effective then one single drive, for less money. If one drive fails, you replace it for 150 dollars. If you went with a single drive, you replace it for 400 dollars. This is where the "redundant" comes into play. The RAID LEVEL doesnt matter.

Here's another where you are trying to state that RAID 0 is redundant, and that the RAID level doesn't matter as far as redundancy is concerned.

Is english your first language?

 

[randay]

Originally posted by: TreyRandom

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: MrPickins
You need to get off the name thing...

RAID0 is not a true RAID. Nothing is redundant. If you think so, you may need to read the definition of redundant again.

I suppose you could technically call it "AID."

The physical disk drives are redundant. Thats why its called RAID!

Here's yet another where you say that RAID 0 is redundant because the physical drives are redundant. But every web site and technical book will tell you... RAID 0 is not redundant.

for fvcks sake. RAID and RAID0 are two different things. I DID NOT EVER SAY THAT RAID0 IS REDUNDANT. LEARN2FVCKINGREADANDSTOPMAKINGSH!TUPGOD!

 

[TreyRandom]

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: TreyRandom

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: TreyRandom

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: TreyRandom

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: ryan256

Originally posted by: randay
I did not drop out, I could sign up next semester and finish it if I wanted to. The class is from 12 noon to 3pm, I would have to take off a large chunk of time out from work. The prof is a senile(he strays from a subject and completely forgets to go back to it) old man teaching something I already have tons of real world experience(telecom) in and also is completely unrelated to my career goals. The degree I will get means nothing when put up against the 8 years of real IT experience I have. Basically I dont give a crap about the peice of paper, and Im happy that I actually had a few classes where I learned something.

Wow.... who sold you that load??
Let me tell you what your experience will get you. My father retired from the Air Force after doing coding and technical writing work for the better part of his 20 years in the service. Thats nearly 20 years of real world, on the job experience! But when he hit the civilian world he had a very hard time even getting companies to interview him. Why?? No college degree. Could he do the jobs he was applying for?? Absolutely! He could do them probably even better than the ones hired. Problem is you have to get past HR first. And HR is pre-programmed to look for college degrees and certifications. Those without them get their resume file 13'd.

I am a sysadmin in a 15 person office making over 40k in Hawaii. got offered the job on day of interview. no degree. no certs. noone sold me any "load". I see it for myself day in day out for the last 5-6 years, just after all this cert stuff got popular.

It's little wonder you're only making $40K in a high cost-of-living environment after 8 years in IT.

Well I am 25. I think I am doing alright. Also Hawaii is a small island and jobs are hard to come by. seeing as how last time I checked, 45K was average for my position. I believe I am doing quite well.

And, as we have seen, you will believe what you want to believe.

And as I have seen, you will make up what you want to believe.

How am I making it all up when I'm the only one providing more than dictionary links?

Where was the link to average salaries for sysadmins in the state of Hawaii? I must have missed it.

I didn't provide one. However, I can tell you how much a network admin and technical writer makes with 8+ years of experience in Tennessee... quite a bit more than $40K.

 

[ryan256]

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: TreyRandom

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: ryan256

Originally posted by: randay
I did not drop out, I could sign up next semester and finish it if I wanted to. The class is from 12 noon to 3pm, I would have to take off a large chunk of time out from work. The prof is a senile(he strays from a subject and completely forgets to go back to it) old man teaching something I already have tons of real world experience(telecom) in and also is completely unrelated to my career goals. The degree I will get means nothing when put up against the 8 years of real IT experience I have. Basically I dont give a crap about the peice of paper, and Im happy that I actually had a few classes where I learned something.

Wow.... who sold you that load??
Let me tell you what your experience will get you. My father retired from the Air Force after doing coding and technical writing work for the better part of his 20 years in the service. Thats nearly 20 years of real world, on the job experience! But when he hit the civilian world he had a very hard time even getting companies to interview him. Why?? No college degree. Could he do the jobs he was applying for?? Absolutely! He could do them probably even better than the ones hired. Problem is you have to get past HR first. And HR is pre-programmed to look for college degrees and certifications. Those without them get their resume file 13'd.

I am a sysadmin in a 15 person office making over 40k in Hawaii. got offered the job on day of interview. no degree. no certs. noone sold me any "load". I see it for myself day in day out for the last 5-6 years, just after all this cert stuff got popular.

It's little wonder you're only making $40K in a high cost-of-living environment after 8 years in IT.

Well I am 25. I think I am doing alright. Also Hawaii is a small island and jobs are hard to come by. seeing as how last time I checked, 45K was average for my position. I believe I am doing quite well.

Well... then why don't you try to get one of those better jobs? Wouldn't 48K be better than your current salary? Start sending out your resumes with all your experience and apparent lack of education and technical knowledge. See how far you get.

 

[TreyRandom]

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: TreyRandom

Originally posted by: JDMnAR1

Originally posted by: franksta

Originally posted by: JDMnAR1

Originally posted by: supafly
Also, all RAID setups have built in fault tolerance. Isn't that special?

If by "special" you mean "incorrect". RAID 0 has no fault tolerance.

It also fails in the "R" part of RAID.

How so? By definition, you have multiple disks in an array, thus meeting the "redundant" portion. Fault-tolerance <> redundancy in and of itself.

Here's one quote...

oops - thats not ME.

You are correct. My apologies.

 

[randay]

Originally posted by: ryan256

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: TreyRandom

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: ryan256

Originally posted by: randay
I did not drop out, I could sign up next semester and finish it if I wanted to. The class is from 12 noon to 3pm, I would have to take off a large chunk of time out from work. The prof is a senile(he strays from a subject and completely forgets to go back to it) old man teaching something I already have tons of real world experience(telecom) in and also is completely unrelated to my career goals. The degree I will get means nothing when put up against the 8 years of real IT experience I have. Basically I dont give a crap about the peice of paper, and Im happy that I actually had a few classes where I learned something.

Wow.... who sold you that load??
Let me tell you what your experience will get you. My father retired from the Air Force after doing coding and technical writing work for the better part of his 20 years in the service. Thats nearly 20 years of real world, on the job experience! But when he hit the civilian world he had a very hard time even getting companies to interview him. Why?? No college degree. Could he do the jobs he was applying for?? Absolutely! He could do them probably even better than the ones hired. Problem is you have to get past HR first. And HR is pre-programmed to look for college degrees and certifications. Those without them get their resume file 13'd.

I am a sysadmin in a 15 person office making over 40k in Hawaii. got offered the job on day of interview. no degree. no certs. noone sold me any "load". I see it for myself day in day out for the last 5-6 years, just after all this cert stuff got popular.

It's little wonder you're only making $40K in a high cost-of-living environment after 8 years in IT.

Well I am 25. I think I am doing alright. Also Hawaii is a small island and jobs are hard to come by. seeing as how last time I checked, 45K was average for my position. I believe I am doing quite well.

Well... then why don't you try to get one of those better jobs? Wouldn't 48K be better than your current salary? Start sending out your resumes with all your experience and apparent lack of education and technical knowledge. See how far you get.

I like my job and I havent been here for a year yet. I will see where this one goes first before trying to get a new one. Oh btw, how old are you, where do you live, what do you do, and how much do you make again?

 

[TreyRandom]

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: TreyRandom

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: MrPickins
You need to get off the name thing...

RAID0 is not a true RAID. Nothing is redundant. If you think so, you may need to read the definition of redundant again.

I suppose you could technically call it "AID."

The physical disk drives are redundant. Thats why its called RAID!

Here's yet another where you say that RAID 0 is redundant because the physical drives are redundant. But every web site and technical book will tell you... RAID 0 is not redundant.

for fvcks sake. RAID and RAID0 are two different things. I DID NOT EVER SAY THAT RAID0 IS REDUNDANT. LEARN2FVCKINGREADANDSTOPMAKINGSH!TUPGOD!

Stress much?

We were specifically speaking of RAID 0. You answered our questions, which were about RAID 0 (which is why I included the previous quote as well).

Not making anything up. We said RAID 0 isn't true RAID. You said that the physical disk drives are redundant, and thats why its called RAID. What am I making up?

 

[Goosemaster]

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: TreyRandom
The parity provides the redundancy of data, and thus, the integrity of the array is maintained. It is "extra" information, over and above the normal data. Is that not part of your Dictionary.com definition, way above?

Again, your definition of redundant doesn't agree with the industry standard definition. Is that our fault?

contradict much? which definition do you believe is correct here? the dictionaries definition, or your "industry standard definition" ????

LOFL..funniest sh!t I've read all day....

 

[ryan256]

Originally posted by: randay
I like my job and I havent been here for a year yet. I will see where this one goes first before trying to get a new one. Oh btw, how old are you, where do you live, what do you do, and how much do you make again?

31, Birmingham-AL, Field Tech, 41K
Average wage for my job given this city's cost of living is 38k.

 

[randay]

Originally posted by: TreyRandom

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: TreyRandom

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: MrPickins
You need to get off the name thing...

RAID0 is not a true RAID. Nothing is redundant. If you think so, you may need to read the definition of redundant again.

I suppose you could technically call it "AID."

The physical disk drives are redundant. Thats why its called RAID!

Here's yet another where you say that RAID 0 is redundant because the physical drives are redundant. But every web site and technical book will tell you... RAID 0 is not redundant.

for fvcks sake. RAID and RAID0 are two different things. I DID NOT EVER SAY THAT RAID0 IS REDUNDANT. LEARN2FVCKINGREADANDSTOPMAKINGSH!TUPGOD!

Stress much?

We were specifically speaking of RAID 0. You answered our questions, which were about RAID 0 (which is why I included the previous quote as well).

Not making anything up. We said RAID 0 isn't true RAID. You said that the physical disk drives are redundant, and thats why its called RAID. What am I making up?

no, I have said about 4 or 5 times that I believe you are confusing the two, RAID, and RAID levels.

 

[randay]

Originally posted by: ryan256

Originally posted by: randay
I like my job and I havent been here for a year yet. I will see where this one goes first before trying to get a new one. Oh btw, how old are you, where do you live, what do you do, and how much do you make again?

31, Birmingham-AL, Field Tech, 41K
Average wage for my job given this city's cost of living is 38k.

:thumbsup:

 

[randay]

lol, anyway time for lunch, thanks for killing time with me!

 

[TreyRandom]

Originally posted by: randay

Originally posted by: TreyRandom
Stress much?

We were specifically speaking of RAID 0. You answered our questions, which were about RAID 0 (which is why I included the previous quote as well).

Not making anything up. We said RAID 0 isn't true RAID. You said that the physical disk drives are redundant, and thats why its called RAID. What am I making up?

no, I have said about 4 or 5 times that I believe you are confusing the two, RAID, and RAID levels.

What's the difference? How can you have a discussion on RAID without discussing the only thing that matters in RAID, the levels? Otherwise, you've got a JBOD.

 

[TreyRandom]

Originally posted by: randay
lol, anyway time for lunch, thanks for killing time with me!

Nice bail. :roll:

Where's Kelvrick when you need him? Too bad he doesn't keep his list anymore.