> how does [100BASE-TX] save power vs [1000BASE-T] running at low throughput?
100BASE-TX uses just two pairs (lanes), one for sending and one for receiving. 1000BASE-T uses all four pairs, for both sending and receiving. Therefore, a 100BASE-TX interface that's only receiving needs to power up one pair. A 1000BASE-T interface needs to power all four pairs all the time.
I recall reading about some extensions that allow switching off some of the pairs some of the time ("Green Ethernet"), but I think that they require support on both sides of the link, and I'm not sure if they are widely deployed.
My only annoyance with "Green Ethernet" things is that often they seem to work poorly.
The dedicated machine I still keep around for Windows things has two onboard 2.5GbE ports. It will apparently sometimes, even with all power saving features turned off, randomly negotiate down to 100 mbit if I leave the machine alone for a bit, and then stay at that speed forever unless I manually reset the link after wondering why transferring large amounts of data is bottlenecking severely.
100 mode saved me once when I really really really needed to have a connection in that moment, but the ethernet cable glued to the wall that I was using had only three out of eight wires even functioning.
According to the technician I spoke with, he could only detect three on their end.
The cable was chewed through by cats, so perhaps it was three just in that moment.
I also appreciate the 10/100 support. I recently needed it for some old voip equipment, and it was shockingly difficult to find an SFP+ module that worked in my 10G switch and supported 100mbps.
Isn’t that only relevant for network topologies that rely heavily on broadcasting to multiple nodes. Eg token ring, WiFi and powerline adapters?
For regular Ethernet, the switch will have a table of which IPs are on which NIC and thus can dynamically send packets at the right transmission protocols supported by those NICs without degrading the service of other NICs.
I’ve seen some vlans hit 1mbit BUM filters, I think we had about 800 users on that one. To saturate a 10m link would require a help of a lot of broadcast traffic.
100m is fine. 10m is fine but I can’t think of anything that negotiates 10m other than maybe WOL (I don’t use it enough to be sure from memory).
If I didn ahve something esoteric it would be on a specialised vlan anyway.
Is that really true? If so, is there a saner way to handle this than upgrade all the things to 10GBE? Like a POE ethernet condom that interfaces with both network and devices at native max speeds without the core network having to degrade?
I'm guessing different mainboards could offer better USB port support for Gen 2 2x2, but right now the Ryzen AI 13" chips at least top out at USB4 / 3.2 Gen 2x1
I believe the Minio developers are aware of the alternatives, having only their own commercial solution listed as alternatives might be a deliberate decision. But you can try merging the PR, there's nothing wrong with it
I used bubbletea for a while but quit it because of inconsistencies in the design. Went to ratatui and never looked back. Go and Bubbletea are nice, but rust is much more suited for building tuis.
I'd love to hear more about those inconsistencies. Would you be willing to share?
I built RatatuiRuby recently, and I'm currently building Rooibos, its MVU framework to compete with BubbleTea. I'd love to avoid repeating Charm's mistakes.
Ratatui dev here. We love both Bubbletea and Textual (though I'm personally not a huge fan of either Go or Python). They're inspirations for us to make good looking stuff.
absolutely, it will work with any other embedded Rust application. The backend only provides a bridge between the embedded-graphics library and the Ratatui widget renderer.
They are great, although I wouldnt use the articles advice on using hashtext to get a number for the lock. This may cause collisions, especially when used with a large number of locks.
In a project Im working on we have a single go package that holds a list of all advisory lock numbers as constants.
> — ‘Distribution’ or ‘Communication’: any act of selling, giving, lending, renting, distributing, communicating, transmitting, or otherwise making available, online or offline, copies of the Work or providing access to its essential functionalities at the disposal of any other natural or legal person.
I believe there is a problem/conflict with the networked-software clause and the EUPL's compatibility clause. It allows anyone to fork a project under the GPL license. When someone makes a fork of an EUPL project under the GPL license, they are then bypassing the extra conditions set out in the AGPL. I believe this to be a mistake/loophole in the EUPL. But I am not a lawyer so I really hope an actual legal expert can weigh in on this.
I use TrueNAS Scale as root OS and have it run a Linux VM, which is easily done via their 'Virtualization' feature. No need for Proxmox. Afaik it works a lot better to give zfs direct access to underlying hdds.
TrueNAS also has an 'Apps' feature, which are basically glorified helm chart installs on k3s that TrueNAS installs for you. But I prefer more control so I have k8s on the Linux VM. Whats also great is that the k8s on the Linux VM can use the TrueNAS storage via democratic-csi.
The deprecation caused me to move to something more neutral and stay away from all 'native' apps of TrueNAS and migrated to ordinary docker-compose, because that seem to be the most approachable.
I was also looking into running a Talos k8s cluster, but that didn't seem to be as approachable to me and a bit overkill for a single-node setup.
It feels as if the text on top of the device is upside down.. Should be directed at the user of the device, who sits behind the device (on the side of the small screen)
reply