The floor is in…
Well, today, the nice carpet men came and finished putting our flooring in...
...so we can now start moving furniture in, and things to go on the furniture! Hopefully we'll be back in our home soon! It's only been NINE MONTHS...
Well, today, the nice carpet men came and finished putting our flooring in...
...so we can now start moving furniture in, and things to go on the furniture! Hopefully we'll be back in our home soon! It's only been NINE MONTHS...
The scene: I, with my family, are in a Little Chef. Jean, bless her, has got food all over herself, so I go out to the van, in the car park, to get wet wipes.
I unlock the back, hop in, go to the box of stuff, and start rooting about for wipes. I feel a slight motion, and wonder if it's strong wind rocking the van, or if somebody bumped into it while getting into an adjacent car as I continue to root. Then I feel a bigger rocking motion, and look outside to, to my horror, see the world moving... the van's rolling backwards, with me in the cargo bay and nobody in the front!
yawn
5:30am and I haven't slept a wink yet! I really need to sort out my lifestyle so I get (a) exercise and (b) time to think every day. Time to think is important for me; if I don't get enough, then when I go to bed, I lie there and think. Lots.
Tonights thoughts have included:
pair? my-record-type? etc. Or more complex predicate expressions on groups of arguments, so we can support multivariate typeclasses in the Haskell sense, as a rich interface/implementation system as well as a traditional records-with-single-inheritance class system. To do this properly we also need declarations that one predicate implies another - (number? x) -> (integer? x) - so that a method on numbers will be used for integers, yet a more specific integer method can override it. I'm not sure how decidable the "most specific method wins" thing can be with complex multivariate type predicates, though. Must experiment and ask knowledgeable formal logic folks.It's now 6am. Do I try and go to sleep, or try and last the day out? Hmmm...
Whew. On Monday I upgraded some of the software on my primary web server, since it was running some old stuff with security holes in.
Annoyingly, the www/apache2 package in NetBSD seemed to now conflict with devel/subversion-base since apache 2 required devel/apr0 while devel/subversion-base required devel/apr and they were conflicting packages. So, I had to upgrade to www/apache22. Fair enough.
One recompile later, and I start apache, and start checking out different web applications I host to see if they all still work...
...and my browser times out. Hmm, OK. I go to an open ssh window to look at the log files, and it's frozen.
I quickly check the network hasn't failed, then resign myself to the fact that my server has just dropped off of the net. It won't even ping, and I can't reach any of the services it forwards in to the backend server either, so the network stack is totally down.
So that evening I head down to the datacentre and take a look... to find that it's died handling the exit() syscall from Apache. Apparently an assertion failure inside knote_destroy or something.
Reboot. Start Apache. Start taking a look at sites.
Kerboom! It dies again in the same way.
Hmmm... Clearly, my three year old NetBSD 2.0 kernel is none too happy with Apache 2.2. It looks like Apache's doing something that triggers a bug in the kernel; knotes are event notification things, so I bet Apache's doing some kind of asynch I/O, and triggering a bug in the kernel code that implements it, causing it to leave the knote state of the process in an invalid state, so that the kernel panics when trying to close down the process state after process termination.
So I reboot it again, stop Apache starting, and leave it at that for the time being. No web service, but everything else works.
Then this evening (the day after), I returned, now with a shiny NetBSD 4.0 install CD in hand. Nervously I backed up some critical directories, then bit the bullet and did an upgrade.
And, to my delight, it was nearly seamless. The NetBSD installer upgraded and rebooted into a nearly perfectly working system. All my existing software, compiled under 2.0, ran fine under 4.0's 2.0 emulation, with the mysterious exception of net/bind9, which wouldn't start. A quick cd /usr/pkgsrc/net/bind9; make install later, and it was starting fine. Even Apache worked without hosing the system!
I had to compile a custom kernel with routing enabled, to allow the NAT that the server provides between the single public IP of the love.warhead.org.uk cluster and the backend server infatuation; then a quick reboot and that was working too.
All in all a successful mission, and it only took an hour or two. I still need to recompile all of my packages, but only to avoid the risk of there being a problem in the 2.0 emulation. While I was there I recompiled bash and sudo, just because it's nice to be able to rely on them.
I've just finished reading A Commonsense Approach to the Theory of Error-Correcting Codes. The book does exactly what it says on the tin; it explains error correcting codes in terms of linear modulo-2 algebra, only getting into Galois fields and all that in an appendix.
And, as such, it does little more than scratch the surface. It only goes into Reed-Solomon codes that can correct single word errors, for example. But hey, I'm not complaining - it's done a great job of giving me an intuitive understanding of Hamming codes, cyclic codes (such as CRCs), the single-word-correcting RS codes, and so on. And I've learnt a lot about Linear feedback shift registers.
But it strikes me that the whole field of error correcting code is a bit insular. The maths required to really grasp it are really complex. Finite fields are bizarre things. While lots of people can experiment with things like data compression or basic encryption, error correction codes, the third cornerstone of low-level coding technology, is quite inscrutable.
This sucks.
Powered by WordPress