207 reputation
413
bio website blog.assaflavie.com
location Israel
age 35
visits member for 5 years, 6 months
seen Nov 20 at 12:55

Sep
13
comment ntpd on Ubuntu fails to sync with status 2040
I've updated the server list above. Not sure what to make of the strace output. As I said, ntpd from command line works - just not when run as a service.
Sep
13
comment ntpd on Ubuntu fails to sync with status 2040
Running on Linode: linode.com
Apr
15
comment Configure non-destructive Amazon S3 bucket policy
great suggestion, thanks. too bad they don't have support for this feature in their console - you have to code to turn it on (or use some 3rd party explorer).
Apr
15
comment Configure non-destructive Amazon S3 bucket policy
That dog won't hunt. The idea is to make it impossible to destroy data.
Jun
26
comment Cannot connect to postgres installed on Ubuntu
Thanks, but using the other psql binary yielded the same results.
May
24
comment Is it possible to completely avoid a single-point-of-failure in a web back-end?
Not experiencing downtime at all. Just need to prepare for all sorts of scenarios (like what happened at AWS a few weeks ago). Thanks.
May
22
comment Is it possible to completely avoid a single-point-of-failure in a web back-end?
So unless I have a really tiny TTL this means the user experiences downtime until it expires. Seems like a sub-optimal solution.. basically eliminates DNS cache altogether.
May
22
comment Is it possible to completely avoid a single-point-of-failure in a web back-end?
But what happens if the DNS gave the browser an IP address of a machine in a data center that a moment later has gone down. Why would the browser retry different DNS servers? Won't it just assume the host is unreachable?
May
22
comment Is it possible to completely avoid a single-point-of-failure in a web back-end?
What happens if after the DNS query yields an IP address of a proxy server this server goes away? Will a browser know to perform a DNS query again? Or will it just see an unreachable host?
May
22
comment Is it possible to completely avoid a single-point-of-failure in a web back-end?
more related: serverfault.com/questions/69870/…
May
22
comment Is it possible to completely avoid a single-point-of-failure in a web back-end?
Related: serverfault.com/questions/60553/…
May
22
comment Is it possible to completely avoid a single-point-of-failure in a web back-end?
doesn't this rely on the browser to "do the right thing" and correctly try alternative DNS servers in case the IP it has already resolved is suddenly unavailable?
Mar
12
comment Sending mail through local MTA while domain MX records point to Google Apps
I mean after you send a few emails their server's stop accepting your SMTP authentication and direct you to a CAPTCHA page to unblock your account.
Mar
12
comment Sending mail through local MTA while domain MX records point to Google Apps
I want to send email from an address like: noreply@mydomain.com. Can I setup reverse DNS with my hosting provider with mydomain.com as the record or must is be some-host.mydomain.com? And if the latter, won't that necessitate sending email from address@some-host.mydomain.com?
Nov
30
comment Weird SSH unavailability of a hosted Ubuntu
I'll try this next time I experience downtime, thanks.
Mar
16
comment psloglist -w into a file
4k buffering is indeed what's happening. But the .cmd workaround didn't fix it. Any ideas how to work around this?
Mar
15
comment psloglist -w into a file
thanks. psloglist outputs each event immediately with the -w switch. There's no buffering that I can see. If anything it's the redirection (>) itself that might be adding the buffering, but that seems strange. If that were true it would have been the same for every command line program in Windows...
Dec
3
comment How the heck is http://to./ a valid domain name?
Chrome takes me from to to that same site (to.)
May
27
comment revision control for database schema and configuration
yes, this was asked on SO.
May
27
comment Should our company allow employees to forward their Exchange email to GMail?
I trust Google more than our own backup. And when a "formal" email has to be sent, people can still use Outlook (since they're well aware of the header confusion). I did not quite get the audit part (maybe our legal system is a bit different) - can you explain what you mean?