Slow TimeMachine backups on osx lion

So, approx 2 months ago I upgraded my laptop to lion. My backups became noticeably slower - they were slow has hell before but in 10.7 they were just unbelievable. Think system lagging to the point of unusable - that slow or worse.

I did find a good solution: Disable spotlight services.

sudo launchctl unload -w /System/Library/LaunchDaemons/com.apple.metadata.mds.plist

Considering I never use spotlight to find anything, its just wasted cpu cycles anyway.

My backups now take a small fraction of the time they used to take - few minutes at a time unless I pulled down something big ( think os patches or something )

My laptop ( 2008 macbook pro ) is now usable though I think I'm going to need to replace the fans and am considering replacing the hard drive since its about 5 years old already. Hmmm, ssd? http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-830-MZ-7PC512N-Internal-Laptop/dp/B005T3GPXO/ref=wl_it_dp_o_npd?ie=UTF8&coliid=I2K5BO82B7593V&colid=1HSSX1GJ9ZT27 or maybe one of the intel drives but I'm thinking of just saving the $400 or so.

64-bit goodness?

so I've been doing load testing with emprix eload/oracle application testing suite. among the many issues I've had with it: running out of heap on the. controller and agent process

starting in version 9, they switched from a fairly light install ) about 400 meg ) to a rather hefty 1.5gb download. they used to run jboss 4 ( which was old at the time anyway but! ) and was 100% windows based. also was only 32-bit

starting in 9.2 they posted some support for 64-bit. I've regularly had oom issues on both the controller and the agent. because its 32-bit I'm restricted to 2gb heap which is a shame. their support tech tells me "well, you clearly need more heap - upgrade the hosts to 64-bit windows and that should fix your problem

I ran the upgrade, 64-bit 2008R2. guess what, installed 9.3 ( latest as of today ) and it's ..... 32-bit. great ;) opened a ticket 24 hours ago and guess what - no response yet ;) I'm so shocked!

alternative to jpackage for java alternatives on rhel/centos

I find this much easier :->

cd /usr/java/default/bin
slaves=""
for bin in $(ls)
do
if [ $bin != "java" ];
then
slaves="$slaves --slave /usr/bin/$bin $bin /usr/java/default/bin/$bin"
fi
done
sudo alternatives --install /usr/bin/java java /usr/java/default/bin/java 2 $slaves
sudo alternatives --set java /usr/java/default/bin/java

$ java -version
java version "1.6.0_29"
Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.6.0_29-b11)
Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 20.4-b02, mixed mode)

I have always found the jpackage rpms and various dependencies just annoying...

Java, Oracle and Hadoop

Was reading the summary of a /. article ( http://developers.slashdot.org/story/11/09/30/1855204/oracle-proud-self-reliant-increasingly-isolated )and it got be wondering again - what is the fate of Hadoop and the JDK.

Kind of wonder what it would take for a new implementation of hadoop ( or similar implementation ) but in a different language. What if Oracle were to basically reach a point where there was the public domain Java that goes basically stagnant and a commercial version for-pay suddenly exploding the cost of your cluster beyond servers and some switches.

Sure there are some other frameworks ( MongoDB, Cassandra, probably many others ) but in the same idea as the marriage of HDFS and the map/reduce framework itself.

Would OpenJDK even be an option? I've not tried using it for anything. Then again, I just administer hadoop clusters I don't program for them ;)

speculative execution

Running some benchmarks of hadoop using teragen/terasort. One of the recommendations I was given was to disable speculative execution. Noticed something rather strange when I forced it to disabled in the config.

Runtime with speculative execution: 18.5 minutes
Runtime without speculative execution: 1 hour

Seems that 2-3 map tasks are taking longer than the rest.

Question now is: why. Each map task is responsible for generating the same % of data - why would speculative execution make the job run quicker. Does this point to hardware differences ( if so, the slow tasks are on different machines - I have not noticed a pattern yet ), configuration problems elsewhere, or just random bad luck.

it is bottled!

Now a few weeks settling for carbonation.

2 full cases plus 3 bottles, not a bad yield.

The final gravity is 1.020 so it did not ferment off much more. Thats good, that just means the fermentable sugars are pretty much all digested. Its a little sweet but not too bad. Very smooth, a little oaky ( go fig! ) and you can really tell the difference with the Glenlivet. I think this recipe is done - probably will not change it.

Need to archive off a few bottles plus keep from giving away too much of this one. Speak up now for forever hold your peace!

cd /pub; more beer

A short while ago I picked up a really great book from the local homebrew supply shop. Extreme brewing ( http://store.dogfish.com/item/Extreme_Brewing/796/for_your_reading_pleasure/40/index.htm) by Sam Calagione over at dogfish head. I picked this book up for a few reasons:

1) It was the first homebrew book I had seen which discussed the use of oak chips and beer
2) The book has recipes to some of my favorite beers ( no, not just ones from Dog Fish Head! )
3) It has the recipe for Midas Touch :-> ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midas_Touch_Golden_Elixir )

I got an idea from a few different sources:
1) The local brewery Barleys, they make a beer called Jack Frost which is a winter ale aged in a Jack Daniels cask
2) There is a recipe in the Extreme Brewing book which discusses using oak chips soaked in Port
3) I really love whisky!

Here is the idea:

Take a basic recipe - in this case the nut brown ale recipe from Dog Fish Head. Then take oak chips soaked in some kind of whisky - add to the secondary fermenter for a while. I tried this idea out 8 months ago or so with Jack Daniels whisky. I must say, it was one of my best brews to date. All of my friends and family ask me: When are you making that whisky beer again?

Well, Here we go. It has been brewed!

The recipe ( slightly modified from the original )

2lbs 2-row barley
10oz British amber malt
10oz chocolate malt
2oz roasted barley
2 cans light lme ( Alexanders I believe )
2lbs dark amber honey
1/2 oz warrior hops for the boil
1oz vanguard hops, last 15 minutes

I toasted some oak chips. Very simple, covered a cookie pan with aluminum foil, dropped the chips onto the tray and then cover with aluminum foil. Cook over a flame for about 15 minutes and then leave to cool. Some of the chips were pretty charred, some were not - which is ok that is what I want. Once the chips cooled, I tossed them into an air-tight canister along with 2oz or so of Glenlivet 12-year whisky ( I know, to some this is alcohol abuse but hey, its got a purpose! )




The recipe called for ringwood yeast but the local brew supply did not have this strain. I picked up the Wyeast 1028 London yeast which should be fairly close - we'll see.

Upon racking, the beer had a pretty strong foam on top. I assume this to be the protein rich brew. I awoke the next morning to the wonderful aroma of the digestion gasses of the yeast. The wife hates it - personally I love it :-> Beer had a nice rocky head and the airlock was going bonkers.





The steps still remaining for this batch:

1) Transfer to the secondary fermenter
2) Add the oak chips ( drain the whisky off, should cut down on sediment )
3) Leave in the secondary for at least 2 months - maybe more

I think the really long stay in the secondary should help this batch ferment out fully. The original gravity was 1.080 or so, but the temp may have been a little higher than the hydrometer accounted for. The difference is probably almost nothing.