|
Yeah, let me know if it uh, works. Good luck with that. Any time I've ever tried to do anything microsoft over a weak WAN connection, it's LOL NOPE
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 20:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 02:21 |
|
|
Yup. I don't really have much of a choice about the WAN link unfortunately  Obviously there are going to be problems but I'm curious what they'll be. I've done old fashioned mirroring over this same link and it's actually hilarious what happens to it sometimes. It's partially why I drink.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 20:58
|
|
|
CLAM DOWN posted:Have any of you done SQL Server 2012/2014 AlwaysOn Availability Groups over a weak WAN connection between sites? Usually 300-400ms ping with occasionally noticeable packet loss. I'm curious what kind of issues I'm going to have. yikes
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 21:36
|
|
|
Irritated Goat posted:Just to poke in, Where I am, we use Teampass It's encrypted, lets you import your keepass db and supports two-factor auth if needed by using google-authenticator.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 22:10
|
|
|
Docjowles posted:I too got tired of the "everyone has a personal Keepass file, each subtly different" method of managing credentials. Fellow goon madsushi recommended Secret Server to me and it's been pretty awesome. It's a bit heavy weight and "enterprisey" but I haven't come across anything better. If you don't need the more advanced features, the Express edition is a ridiculous value at $10. They also periodically have an insane promotion on it that massively increases the limit on total number of saved passwords and concurrent users, and it looks like that's active again right now. The msp I work for uses Secret Server. I don't manage it, but from a user perspective it works perfectly well. Seems to be decently customizable too if you're into that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 22:27
|
|
|
CLAM DOWN posted:Yup. I don't really have much of a choice about the WAN link unfortunately If you do manage to get this to work, please let me know. I'm facing a similar problem at my new place (their LOB app uses a SQL database, multiple sites connected across some very poor connections).
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 23:27
|
|
|
Colonial Air Force posted:If you do manage to get this to work, please let me know. I'm facing a similar problem at my new place (their LOB app uses a SQL database, multiple sites connected across some very poor connections). Why the need for the app and the database to live apart? Why not have access the app remotely and not chop it up?
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 23:32
|
|
|
Sickening posted:Why the need for the app and the database to live apart? Why not have access the app remotely and not chop it up? I have the same problem, and the company responsible in this case basically said gently caress off, we don't support it unless you're accessing the app remotely and it has local subnet access to the SQL DB. When we did packet captures etc., the problem appeared to basically be this, and as the one comment on that post says "this would have been so useful if it OFFERED ANY loving SOLUTIONS" (paraphrased). So yeah we just went with RemoteApp, which isn't awful but is annoying that we had to do that. To answer your question, it would have been nice not to have to devote the RDS CALs and server RAM to run this app instead of running it locally on the machines.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 00:01
|
|
|
I found a feather in the box for a new Dell monitor, no idea what kind but it looks like a large down feather. I wonder what happened to the rest of the bird 
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 00:52
|
|
|
CLAM DOWN posted:Yup. I don't really have much of a choice about the WAN link unfortunately If you don't have any option to upgrade the WAN you could use a WAN optimizer like one from Riverbed. We used them on satcom links in the military and it makes a big difference in throughput over a high latency connection.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 00:55
|
|
|
Irritated Goat posted:Just to poke in, Looks like the product was just bought by Kaseya, but ScorpionSoft AuthAnvil has a security suite that includes password management and dual-factor authentication. May be worth looking into.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
lampey posted:If you don't have any option to upgrade the WAN you could use a WAN optimizer like one from Riverbed. We used them on satcom links in the military and it makes a big difference in throughput over a high latency connection. I don't, so I will look into that. Thanks!
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 01:01
|
|
|
CLAM DOWN posted:I don't, so I will look into that. Thanks! I have to ask, why do you want to do this over a lovely WAN link? Is there an fat application on both sides that needs access to the data? You are almost certainly better served by just using RDS / XenApp.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 01:02
|
|
|
Irritated Goat posted:Just to poke in, I use Pass for this, which is open-source, based on git and GPG. Works like a charm for people that are technically inclined.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 04:30
|
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:I have to ask, why do you want to do this over a lovely WAN link? Is there an fat application on both sides that needs access to the data? You are almost certainly better served by just using RDS / XenApp. One reason I could see is a transactionally consistent off-site backup of the database. I know I'm planning on adding availability groups to my current SQL cluster for that reason. Local SQL cluster for redundancy, with a standalone remote database as part of the group. We take transaction log backups every 10 minutes, but even a loss of 10 minutes worth of transactions would be a major shitstorm with our clients.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 04:32
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:One reason I could see is a transactionally consistent off-site backup of the database. I know I'm planning on adding availability groups to my current SQL cluster for that reason. Local SQL cluster for redundancy, with a standalone remote database as part of the group. We take transaction log backups every 10 minutes, but even a loss of 10 minutes worth of transactions would be a major shitstorm with our clients. But in that case, wouldn't you choose a target site with a decent WAN connection? Unless your secondary site need to be in Afghanistan or something?
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 04:49
|
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:But in that case, wouldn't you choose a target site with a decent WAN connection? Unless your secondary site need to be in Afghanistan or something? Clam down works in security stuff. It's probably a condition of that. E: gently caress oracle rac btw jaegerx fucked around with this message at 05:10 on Apr 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 04:54
|
|
|
Hungry Computer posted:I found a feather in the box for a new Dell monitor, no idea what kind but it looks like a large down feather. I wonder what happened to the rest of the bird Probably living/nested in the factory/warehouse's rafters. I still tell the story about finding a dead giant cockroach in a JBOD's packaging drop-shipped from the manufacturer. It gets interesting reactions.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 06:17
|
|
|
Red Barn Computers ships t-shirts in their larger server orders. This would be neat if, when you call their support number, they didn't make you press 1 for computers or 2 for custom t-shirts. I think there was a bunch of candy in the bottom of the box once.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 08:14
|
|
|
Sickening posted:Why the need for the app and the database to live apart? Why not have access the app remotely and not chop it up? In my case, the remote connectivity is crap. This is at a mountain resort, so Internet is choppy at best. The remote sites sometimes have issues connecting, and that causes problems. I'd rather have a synced copy of the database somewhere closer, but I'm not sure it's possible.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 11:43
|
|
|
Weak WAN Connection, lmao
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 15:05
|
|
|
Internet Explorer posted:Is there an fat application on both sides that needs access to the data? There is, I don't want to detail exactly what I'm doing in this thread but I don't have many options. I wanted to make the best of what I have available to me, and see what kind of issues I'd run into because I know I will probably want to off myself by the end of this.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 17:22
|
|
|
Working in IT 3.0: Usually 300-400ms ping with occasionally noticeable packet loss. Yes, you probably will want to off yourself. SQL is extremely, extremely picky.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 17:42
|
|
|
I realize that, that's why I specifically asked about the kind of problems I will encounter when using Availability Groups over that kind of lovely connection.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 17:48
|
|
|
CLAM DOWN posted:I realize that, that's why I specifically asked about the kind of problems I will encounter when using Availability Groups over that kind of lovely connection. As long as the AG is in 'Asynchronous-commit' mode you'll be fine, as you probably know you still need to get to the master to write to the DB but able to read from your 400ms/crap WAN copy. note that will asynch-commit you never have automatic fail over it's a forced manual process and you may incur some small data loss depending on how out of sync the copy is.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 17:59
|
|
|
Well, good luck. Try not to stress about your impossible position during non-work hours and  if it gets too bad.In other news: Working in IT 3.0 going from F-1 -> H-1B is beyond hosed for these people. I knew it was bad, but not this bad. And one scumbag makes it all possible. quote:According to several former ConceptsIT candidates who spoke to Vocativ, the company was using a common scheme to recruit recent graduates on F-1 student visas, whose bachelor’s degrees make them eligible for H-1Bs. On the first day of training, a ConceptsIT staffer told Kanoria that the job was his and that they would sponsor his visa, but there would be a catch: Kanoria would have to use a new résumé, furnished by ConceptsIT, that would claim he had years of work experience he did not. It meant, he says, that ConceptsIT could market Kanoria to its clients as an expert and charge them more for his services. He learned that he would also be locked into a contract with ConceptsIT that would allow them to take a cut of his wages (Kanoria claims, for example, that they would charge a client $61 per hour and pay him only $27) and levy a heavy financial penalty if he left before his full year was up. As Kanoria puts it, “We would receive our H-1B visas by the following year if we did whatever they asked us to.” quote:Each year, the U.S. caps the number of H-1B visas available to 65,000, with various exemptions. Manish Sangal’s companies eat up a disproportionately large number of those spots. quote:ConceptsIT employees, Kanoria says, “We’re all the same person with different names. All the prior internships and work experience I had gained during my life would be useless. I would not be allowed to talk about any of it.” Although their actual degrees would remain the same, he says, the graduation dates would be omitted so that clients wouldn’t become suspicious about a 22-year-old a few weeks out of college with six years of work experience. Bhodi fucked around with this message at 18:04 on Apr 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 18:00
|
|
|
Those kind of articles make me really depressed.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 18:08
|
|
|
CLAM DOWN posted:I realize that, that's why I specifically asked about the kind of problems I will encounter when using Availability Groups over that kind of lovely connection. I wasn't making fun of you or anything, I'm pretty sure you know your stuff, much more than me even. I'm just laughing at your situation  . (which is still lovely of me anyway)
orange sky fucked around with this message at 18:13 on Apr 2, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
Nebulis01 posted:As long as the AG is in 'Asynchronous-commit' mode you'll be fine, as you probably know you still need to get to the master to write to the DB but able to read from your 400ms/crap WAN copy. Awesome, thanks, yeah I was assuming there was no realistic way I could run it in synchronous mode, I do want plan to make the remote secondary readable though, so I'll see what kind of delay there will be with the commits. orange sky posted:I wasn't making fun of you or anything, I'm pretty sure you know your stuff, much more than me even. I'm just laughing at your situation Yeah it's cool, no problem, I fully realize what I'm trying to do is asking for trouble, just don't have many options so trying to do the best I can with what I have.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 18:20
|
|
|
CLAM DOWN posted:Awesome, thanks, yeah I was assuming there was no realistic way I could run it in synchronous mode, I do want plan to make the remote secondary readable though, so I'll see what kind of delay there will be with the commits. Would depend on how large your update/insert statements are. Also a reminder that as soon as you read from that secondary copy it needs to be fully licensed, many people forget that portion of the program.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 18:30
|
|
|
Made the mistake of asking what a coworker (but not an IT person) makes, and then made the further mistake of not realizing what he meant when they said "$70" I thought he meant $70 per hour to do what he does - my mood has never changed so quickly in my life. Only to then realize he meant $70k per year, oh okay yeah you have my permission to make that given what you do. Never ask. Never ask.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
But it's so interesting to know! I always wonder what people make. I'm now at my first company that isn't gov't, so before you could pretty easily just lookup anyones salaries since it was published.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 20:07
|
|
|
TeMpLaR posted:But it's so interesting to know! I always wonder what people make. I'm now at my first company that isn't gov't, so before you could pretty easily just lookup anyones salaries since it was published. Don't do it. It's going to depress you knowing that worthless idiot in Marcom makes 50 K more than the IT stud in your department the company would fall apart without
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 20:34
|
|
|
ElGroucho posted:Don't do it. It's going to depress you knowing that worthless idiot in Marcom makes 50 K more than the IT stud in your department the company would fall apart without I have to bet they think the same about us.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 20:36
|
|
|
its a good way to get yourself terminated for 'performance issues'
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 20:44
|
|
|
go3 posted:its a good way to get yourself terminated for 'performance issues' http://www.nlrb.gov/rights-we-protect/whats-law/employers/interfering-employee-rights-section-7-8a1 It is a legally protected right to discuss your salary with coworkers. By not discussing salary you are shortchanging yourself and your coworkers.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 21:06
|
|
|
lampey posted:http://www.nlrb.gov/rights-we-protect/whats-law/employers/interfering-employee-rights-section-7-8a1 You don't understand. Just because it's protected doesn't mean they won't find another reason to fire you.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 21:11
|
|
|
MC Fruit Stripe posted:I thought he meant $70 per hour to do what he does - my mood has never changed so quickly in my life. Thanks to HR leaving paperwork right out in the open, I know of at least one nurse that makes a bit more than this. Makes me want to start taking nursing classes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
TWBalls posted:Thanks to HR leaving paperwork right out in the open, I know of at least one nurse that makes a bit more than this. Makes me want to start taking nursing classes. $70 an hour is very doable in IT and doesn't require cleaning up poo poo (actual, non-metaphorical poo poo) or decades or seniority.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 21:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 20, 2024 02:21 |
|
|
NippleFloss posted:$70 an hour is very doable in IT and doesn't require cleaning up poo poo (actual, non-metaphorical poo poo) or decades or seniority. Doing what exactly? I'm assuming this is what the CCIEs/MCSEs/RHCA get....
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2015 21:30
|
|
