OT: XP SP2 Security Hole

[Brian K. White]

Jean-Pierre A. Radley wrote:
> Transpower at aol.com propounded (on Sun, Oct 03, 2004 at 11:41:11AM
> -0400):
>> In a message dated 10/2/2004 9:08:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
>> fp at wjv.com writes:
>>
>>> Transpower at aol.com, the prominent pundit, on Sat, Oct 02 11:19
>>> while half mumbling half-witicized:
>>>
>>>> One positive thing about XP SP2:? I installed it several days
>>>> ago and I must say that my computer (specifically disk reads and
>>>> writes) appears to be much faster than with SP1.
>>>
>>> Appearances can be deceiving.  In other words, do you have any
>>> benchmarks you ran before and after.  I do that on disk systems and
>>> save the results in the Unix servers.
>>
>> No benchmarks yet; my demo copy of Performance Test ran out.  Next
>> time I do a backup I'll let you know if there's any difference.  By
>> the way, backing up 13 GB used to take 1 hour, 20 minutes on an HP
>> Ultrium LTO; after changing settings so that system cache (rather
>> than programs) is optimized (and setting System Mechanic so that XP
>> writes the cache every 2 seconds), I got the backup time down to 20
>> minutes! And shadow copy now works properly.
>
> Speaking of backups, on OSR 5.0.7, I've installed a SCSI Iomega REV
> drive.  A complete backup which took 62 minutes to a DDS-4 tape takes
> 20 minutes to a REV drive.

We have one of those too on our new box but I don't have a way to make a 
good comparison like that.
Old box didn't have dds-4 but dds-3 and the tape was on a 20 or 40mhz scsi 
card while the rev is on udma 100 or 133 IDE.
Old box let the tape drive do the compression, new box per-force must do the 
compression in cpu. Old box had a plain 80mhz or u160 scsi drive on a 
ordinary 33mhz x 32bit pci card, new box has a raid-10 array of u320 drives 
spread over 2 u320 channels on a 133mhz x 64bit pci-x card etc etc etc...

It's taking me 3:45 hours to back up and 4:05 to verify 54 gigs.
which is compressing down to only 17 gigs of raw media space!

---snip BackupEDGE summary---
Files Encountered      = 757032
Total Data             = 54.48GB
Data Written           = 17.18GB
Volume Left            = 15.40GB
SW Compression         = 76%
Elapsed Time           = 03:47:39
Data Transfer Speed    = 1351477 bytes/sec
Net Transfer Rate      = 77.11 MB/min
--------

This includes about 4 gigs of jpegs and pngs (scanned documents that are 
already highly compressed)
and about 42 gigs of customers bacups, mostly in the form of complete rsync 
copies of customers filepro trees (just the menus, config & filepro dir, no 
binaries) and a few sets of compressed tars that revolve every night. The 
tars are bzip2 but the rsync'ed trees are straight fp and very compressible.

What I do have for comparison is the ctar summary from the old box, which 
due to the smaller media had a lot of things excluded from the backup...
----snip----
        FILES: 236725
        Total DATA: 8.026Gb (Gigabytes)
        Actual Tape Data Written: 8.185Gb (Gigabytes)
        ROOM LEFT on this Volume: 15.253Gb (Gigabytes)

        Elapsed Time:  42 minutes  53 seconds
        Data Transfer Speed: 3420199 bytes/sec  ( 195.7 Mb/min)
----snip----

I'm almost positive that someone somewhere told me that the rev was faster 
than dat, (I don't remember if it was backupedge or seneca data, or who...) 
but... this shows the old std-9000 drive working twice as fast as the rev.

So all in all, I'm pretty dissapointed.

Brian K. White  --  brian at aljex.com  --  http://www.aljex.com/bkw/
+++++[>+++[>+++++>+++++++<<-]<-]>>+.>.+++++.+++++++.-.[>+<---]>++.
filePro BBx  Linux SCO  Prosper/FACTS AutoCAD  #callahans Satriani