AF:
NF:0
PS:10
SRH:1
SFN:
DSR:
MID:
CFG:
PT:0
S:andy.sharp@lsi.com
RQ:
SSV:mhbs.lsil.com
NSV:
SSH:
R:<David.Olien@lsi.com>,<Richard.Hardiman@lsi.com>,<Chris.Greiveldinger@lsi.com>,<Jobi.Ariyamannil@lsi.com>
MAID:2
X-Sylpheed-Privacy-System:
X-Sylpheed-Sign:0
SCF:#mh/Mailbox/sent
RMID:#imap/LSI/INBOX	0	6C678488C5CEE74F813A4D1948FD2DC7B7972B10@cosmail02.lsi.com
X-Sylpheed-End-Special-Headers: 1
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2010 17:32:17 -0800
From: Andrew Sharp <andy.sharp@lsi.com>
To: "Olien, David" <David.Olien@lsi.com>
Cc: "Hardiman, Richard" <Richard.Hardiman@lsi.com>, "Greiveldinger, Chris"
 <Chris.Greiveldinger@lsi.com>, "Ariyamannil, Jobi"
 <Jobi.Ariyamannil@lsi.com>
Subject: Re: summary of talk about my desktop machine
Message-ID: <20100217173217.54187c2b@ripper.onstor.net>
In-Reply-To: <6C678488C5CEE74F813A4D1948FD2DC7B7972B10@cosmail02.lsi.com>
References: <98BD48946A20FF48932378FFD26CE9057DB9F373@cosmail01.lsi.com>
	<20100217152811.12e3c012@ripper.onstor.net>
	<6C678488C5CEE74F813A4D1948FD2DC7B7972B10@cosmail02.lsi.com>
Organization: LSI
X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.6.0 (GTK+ 2.8.20; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Right, well my point is that the vnc thing is a workable temporary
stopgap, but is crappy and not the most efficient setup.  Plenty of
edit/compile cycles can be done locally to the engineer before some bits
need to be thrown down to Campbell.  And that is a momentary use of
the network, not largely subject to constant latency botherations.  Nor
does it pile up on the bandwidth meter like all of you running vnc
sessions.

Having a Linux workstation at hand makes it possible to utilize more
tools like that, which would make the whole thing much more efficient
for everyone, IT admins included. Don't get me wrong, I'm just offering
an alternative to using a dirty, disgusting Windows laptop for everyday
programmer tasks.  Anyone who wants to continue to use that setup is
more than welcome to.  I give people things, I don't take them away.
Usually.  Unless they are infected with malware that launches a ddos
attack against my filer.

So that brings another point, which is if someone has a request for yet
a different setup not mentioned, they should mention it, because we aim
to please.

I'll not order any more monitors ~:^)



On Wed, 17 Feb 2010 18:14:21 -0700 "Olien, David"
<David.Olien@lsi.com> wrote:

> Hi Andy,
> 
> I appreciate the attention you've given this issue.
> First, I need to tell you that we did get the monitors we
> Need.  It turns out that the laptops we have can support
> Dual monitors when used with a docking station.  We got some
> Reasonably nice 24 inch monitors.
> 
> So we don't need any more monitors.
> 
> About getting more stations in our cube, we've
> Got an arrangement to use vnc to linux desktop equipment
> In Campbell that is working for now.
> 
> The work station That Richard just set up there for us came 
> at an excellent Time.  We had two new developers join this week,
> and there was no desktop available for them there in Campbell.
> So they're sharing the machine Richard set up there.
> 
> So for now, we're doing OK.  If the budget will allow
> It, We could use one more desktop There in Campbell, so our two 
> new developers wouldn't have To share one.  After that, we can 
> wait for a bit with ordering New workstations.
> 
> However,
> 
> The workstations we have been using there in Campbell are
> Kind of wimpy.  Mine is a one-core Pentium 4, with 1 gig ram.
> I think our new developers using the new workstation,
> are getting much better compile time and interactive performance.
> 
> So if the budget allows, I personally wouldn't mind replacing
> The older workstations there in Campbell with new ones.  These
> Could eventually be relocated to Beaverton when the other
> Issues are resolved (see below). But that's Not for me to decide.
> 
> Longer term, I think it would be great to have our development
> Work stations here in Beaverton.  The vnc environment we're
> Using is OK, but it is laggy.
> 
> But in order to do that, we'd need to mirror mightydog
> On a cougar here in Beaverton.  Then we could nfs mount
> From the mirror.  I don't know what the network bandwidth
> Requirements for maintaining that mirror would be.  One
> Observation on this:
> 
> About a week ago We noticed some hiccups on our network 
> connection between Here and Campbell.  There was about 3 or 4 days 
> where we Were getting lots of 15 to 30 second delays over 
> the network connection (which is noticeable when you're using vnc.
> A network browser probably wouldn't notice). I even had an afternoon 
> where my vnc connection was dropped several Times.
> 
> I THINK this happened because a cougar had just been placed in the
> Milpitas office, and they were creating the initial mirror
> From Campbell.  So the 10 megabit link between Campbell and Milpitas
> Was I THINK being saturated enough that we noticed these delays
> With vnc.  The link into Beaverton is only 8 megabit.  Maintaining
> An already established mirror would probably be less demanding.
> 
> We'd also need some kind of machine room to put a cougar in.
> There is a big lab here, but it's "owned" by another group within
> LSI.  I don't what it would take to get space there for a cougar.
> 
> The IT person here in Beaverton (Melissa) has been very helpful
> And competent.  She's very aware, however, of the limits on
> What she can do for us.  Resolving these network bandwidth 
> issues between sites and the lab space issues is above her pay grade.
> 
> So longer term we would need some commitment of time
> And budget from a manager.  I don't know who that would be.
> 
> Dave
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Sharp [mailto:andy.sharp@lsi.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2010 3:28 PM
> To: Olien, David
> Cc: Hardiman, Richard; Greiveldinger, Chris
> Subject: Re: summary of talk about my desktop machine
> 
> Hi David,
> 
> Let me reply to this somewhat.
> 
> First, the role of IT there in Beaverton, and elsewhere, is to serve
> you and your needs.  S/he needs to find more bandwidth if that's what
> you need.  If they're aren't clear on what their role is, I can start
> a dialog with them ~:^)
> 
> That said, I don't think you regularly need too terribly much.  The
> idea of the workstations I'm getting for you guys is to have a
> development machine under your fingertips that makes you productive,
> efficient and happy with your tools.  It's not meant to replace
> clients and other things down here that are used for testing.
> 
> Obviously, if you do a build on a machine in B-town, you need to get
> that new binary a bit closer to the hardware it's running on.  We can
> set up, or you can do it yourselves, some fast and easy rsync based
> commands to handle everything.  You would still use the clients here
> in Campbell to run tests on that need high bandwidth (network
> proximity) to the filers.  If you're using them as NFS servers for
> your filers, you can do that as well.
> 
> This is just the first of the workstations, one or two will be ordered
> each week until somebody screams 'stop'.  One of the reasons they
> aren't all being done at once is I don't want an avalanche of
> machines on Rich.  There are several other reasons as well.
> 
> Let me know if that sounds sane.
> 
> BTW, you should have received some monitors.  Those can be shared out
> amongst you folks up there as needed.  There are more of those coming
> as well. I've been ordering 2 per workstation.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> a
> 
> 
> On Tue, 16 Feb 2010 17:50:00 -0700 "Hardiman, Richard"
> <Richard.Hardiman@lsi.com> wrote:
> 
> > Hey Andy,
> > Here is the email from David Olien.
> > 
> > ________________________________
> > From: Olien, David
> > Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2010 2:33 PM
> > To: Hardiman, Richard; Ariyamannil, Jobi
> > Cc: Greiveldinger, Chris
> > Subject: summary of talk about my desktop machine
> > 
> > Richard, Jobi,
> > 
> > I just wanted to summarize what we talked about through messaging
> > and voice mail.
> > 
> > Richard has acquired a desktop machine for me, as I had originally
> > requested.  It's a nice machine, 4 cores and 8 gigabytes or ram.
> > Much more substantial than the desktops we're using at Campbell at
> > the moment (mine is 1 core, 1 gigabytes of ram).  It's difficult to
> > do other work on these older desktops when you have a compile going
> > on.
> > 
> > However, the network bandwidth into the Beaverton site here is 8
> > megabit.  I've already had complaints from the network administrator
> > complaining about my bandwidth usage (I downloaded from mightydog
> > the .mp4 files that are  video tapes of the technical presentations
> > on Bobcat... they came to about 15 gigabytes total).  So I think
> > doing our work in  a way that involves lots of transferring of data
> > between Beaverton and Campbell is probably not workable.  When we
> > have a Cougar on-site here in Beaverton to mirror the content of
> > mightydog, we can reconsider this.  But that'll take time and budget
> > money.
> > 
> > So in the mean time, we're already short of desktop machines in
> > Campbell.  Our new employees here in Beaverton, Terence and Brent,
> > are sharing desktops with Chris and David.  I'd like to take this
> > new machine added to the pool of desktops that we're already using
> > there in Campbell.  This new machine will be much more shareable
> > than our current desktops.  So I think two people could share it.
> > We can figure out who uses which machine once this new machine is
> > available.
> > 
> > Sound OK to both of you?
> > 
> > Dave
> > 
