NVMe on shared hosting servers: is it really a big advantage or, for the most part, an exaggeration?

Hello,

I know that NVMe offers much better performance (if implemented correctly) but it also presents a number of challenges and even compromises: there are only a few RAID solutions (basically, all I know is that Intel VROC, HighPoint SSDxxxx NVMe and mdraid controllers) , all are hybrid solutions (the CPU is doing RAID calculations), it seems that the riser card used in 1U servers can generate significant incompatibilities (according to HighPoint support, one of the few NVMe raid solutions).

But in addition to these challenges, those of you who managed to implement this correctly and got those great speeds of several GB / s, what kind of overall increase in server performance are you seeing? Is it worth all the trouble?

Thank you!

field curvature: what is the advantage of a lens with a curved focal plane?

The distinctive "aspect" it provides. In addition to adding a more pleasant bokeh blur to background objects near the edges of the frame, it also allows objects on the periphery that are in the same plane as the subject when that plane is perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens to blur as good, although not to the same extent as the background elements.

Some people want it, especially in portrait lenses where the edges are usually intentionally blurred. Some people, such as those who perform the reproduction of flat documents or macro work, do not want it and prefer a flat field. You pay your money and make your choice.

Here is a typical image linked to Flickr. In all honesty, the curvature of the field in front of the flat field would not matter much with it because there is nothing near the edge of the frame that is in the plane plane perpendicular to the optical axis of the lens at the distance of the subject. Here is another one. See how the parts of the bench facing the model but closer to the edge of the field of view are as sharp as the focus point, while the parts of your arms that are the same distance as your camera face are not everything so sharp? Also this one (where the flowers in the same flat plane as the focus point in the middle but near the edge of the frame are more blurred) and this one (in which the elements at the edges are not as sharp as the elements in the center , although all are in the same plane that is parallel to the camera sensor).

Note that in this, even raindrops that are the same distance from the camera as the subject are blurred. In this case, the railing in the lower left part that is closer than the main subject is focused and shows the shape of the frontal focal plane that is a part of a sphere.

On the contrary, observe how the EF 100 mm f / 2.8 L IS macro maintains a flat focus field to the edge of the frame. It is demonstrated in this case by the tree along the left edge. The hair of the subjects on the right in this shows the flat field. With this, the flat field of the EF 100mm f / 2.8 L IS Macro made the shoulder in the lower left part of the frame as sharp as the subjects' faces. If a lens with field curvature had been used, such as the EF 85 mm f / 1.2 L II, the shoulder would have softened slightly and perhaps less distract the subject's face. The same could be said of this.

Another advantage of using a lens with field curvature is that there is less error in focusing distance when using a & # 39; focus and recomposition technique & # 39; if the camera rotates around the optical center of the lens. Most of the error usually introduced with & # 39; focus and recompose & # 39; It is because the center of rotation is in the center of the photographer instead of the center of the lens. But even when the camera rotates around the optical center of the lens, there is more error with a lens that has a flatter focal plane than one with a field curvature that matches the focal length of the lens.


Update: the two photos included in this question are perfect examples of the types of shots for which an uncorrected field curvature lens would be useful.

enter the description of the image here

Encryption system – Cost of Numenera's "disruptive touch" ability if the player has an advantage in both speed and power.

Disrupting Touch is a skill that can only be used when the player has already declared the use of the "Phase Sprint" ability. The player's manual states for the Sprint phase:

Keep in mind that some of your other special abilities allow
actions you can take while using Phase Sprint. For example when
using Disrupting Touch, you can make a one-touch attack while moving … "

and for Phase Sprint

You can turn your Sprint Phase into a melee attack deliberately
grazing another creature while running.

The character in question has an Edge of 1 in Speed ​​and an Edge of 1 in Might.

So the question is, are they played in combat as two actions, or one, and how is the cost paid? It is:

  1. Phase Sprint is action 1 that costs 0 due to Speed ​​Edge; The disruptive touch cannot be made until the next turn, but it also costs 0 due to Might Edge;
    Phase Sprint continues until the attack is made.
  2. Phase Sprint is declared as an action, and its cost is zero (1 Edge in Speed), then Disrupting Touch is declared as a modification to the action but its cost is 1 Might (because Edge was already used during this turn). Phase Sprint ends at the end of the turn (in sync with the attack).
  3. Phase Sprint is declared as an action, and its cost is zero (1 Edge in Speed), then Disrupting Touch is declared as a modification to the action and its cost is zero (due to 1 Edge in Might). Phase Sprint ends in sync with the attack at the end of the turn.

The player, of course, would prefer # 2, but we would all prefer to be sure that we applied the system rules correctly.

dnd 5e – Does the kobold player race feature, Pack Tactics, give advantage of ranged attacks?

To start, congratulations on the ingenuity. In most cases, in the games I've played and played GM, my players never really considered it, and neither did I. But when you think about it, it would make sense.

The text of VGtM does not explicitly indicate otherwise; in fact, just state that as long as you are attacking a creature and have an ally within 5 feet of it, you have an advantage.

The only way I see this going wrong is if you fail critically and your arrow goes out of the target a bit, just to aim at your ally … Just don't try to throw a fireball at some creature while your ally is standing there. . That would be messy.

dnd 5e – When I move away from an enemy that I am flanking and fire an attack of opportunity, do I have an advantage in my attack of the Riposte maneuver?

I'm playing a rogue who plans to dip 1-5 levels in fighter. If I reach Fighter level 3, I will take the Battle Master archetype and take the Parry, Riposte and Feinting attack maneuvers.

Our group uses the "Optional Rule: Flanking" of the DMG.

Let's say it's my turn and I'm currently flanking an enemy with a friendly PC. When I move straight away from the enemy, they can try to hit me with an attack of opportunity. If it hits, I use Parry and reduce the damage. If it fails, I use my reaction to Riposte to hit him back.

Would I have an advantage in Riposte's attack because I'm still flanking? Or because I started to walk away, wouldn't I be flanking anymore?

My group uses the optional rules of flanking and playing on a grid. (We are still working to get custom thumbnails, so we are using D6 of additional colors to represent enemies and PCs).

Side note: I started thinking about this because I wanted to maximize my Sneak Attack damage. I can do Sneak Attack when they hit me out of my turn and I use Riposte. So I thought maybe I could trigger an attack to cause double damage from Sneak Attack reliably. But then I realized that it would still be my turn, and the description of Sneak Attack is quite specific when it says "once per turn." However, I kept wondering about the flank / lead advantage.

dnd 5e: do I have an advantage with Riposte by moving away from a flanked enemy and activating an attack of opportunity?

yes

You flank when you are adjacent to an enemy:

Flanking Squares. When a creature and at least one of its allies are adjacent to an enemy and on opposite sides or corners of the enemy's space, they flank that enemy.

You are adjacent when you are within range, and you are within range at the time of the OA:

The attack interrupts the movement of the creature it causes, which occurs just before the creature leaves your reach.

So yes, if the enemy has a range of 5 feet, you are still flanking at the time of this enemy's opportunity attack.

Unless your DM says otherwise

The Standard Caveat: D&D 5th edition enables DM in ways that the 3rd, 3.5 and 4th did not. While the zero rule has always been applied, the fifth edition chooses not to explicitly code many things. If your DM says you are not, you are not.

Programming languages: advantage of stack-based allocation for local variables

While learning the assignment of the stack, I found this paragraph in the textbook (Programming Language Pragmatics – 3rd Edition):

Even in a language without recursion, it can be advantageous to use a battery to
local variables, instead of assigning them statically. In most programs, the pattern of potential calls between subroutines does not allow all those subroutines to be active at the same time. As a result, the total space required for the local variables of the currently active subroutines is rarely as large as the total space in all subroutines, active or not. Therefore, a battery may require substantially less memory at runtime what would be necessary for static allocation.

I would appreciate if someone could explain how the allocation of the stack would save memory when used to allocate local variables. I tried to read this many times. But I can't understand what the author meant.

dnd 5e – How would this Chamber govern the combined Advantage / Disadvantage impact rolls?

According to the rules of advantage / disadvantage:

If circumstances make a roll have both advantages
and disadvantage, it is considered that it has none of
them, and you throw a d20. This is true even if it is multiple
circumstances impose disadvantages and only one grant
advantage or vice versa. In such a situation, it has neither advantage nor disadvantage.

(PBR 60)

While I understand that the main point of this is to simplify things and avoid the accumulation of madness of the individual bonuses found in 3.5e, it is disappointing that the advantage and disadvantage of accumulation is the same as having none. I am thinking of a house rule like this:

If circumstances make a roll have both advantage and disadvantage, instead roll three d20s and take the average value.

My gut says that this would keep the average roll at 10.5, but it tends to group the rolls around 10 instead of the uniform distribution of a single roll, but I'm not sure how to really calculate the distribution. No matter, throwing dice is fun, so this seems like a way to keep things balanced and at the same time keep the thrill of throwing additional dice that come from advantages or disadvantages

Would this method really keep the average output equal to 1d20? Are there extreme cases or unforeseen circumstances in which this would be more advantageous or disadvantageous than it should be?

Ergodox advantage vs Kinesis | Web Hosting Talk

I have a Freestyle Kinesis for 10 years, but I was never really happy with it. One problem is that the letters in the left half are tilted to the left, as in a normal keyboard. An ergo keyboard should have those tilted to the right.

Anyway, now he is about to die, so I need to replace him and I am trying to decide whether to get an Ergodox os Kinesis Advantage. On the one hand, people say that Kinesis Advantage is more ergo, but what makes me nervous is that it is not a divided keyboard and I have my keyboard divided with each half at an angle of 20 or 30 degrees. So I'm not sure …

An idea or experience with these?

dnd 5e: Does the advantage deny the disadvantage (for things like the sneak attack)?

Yes, the advantage would deny the disadvantage to the effects of the sneak attack.

According to the rules of advantage and disadvantage (PHB 173, my emphasis):

If circumstances make a roll have both advantage and disadvantage, It is considered that you do not have any of them, and you get a d20. This is true even if multiple circumstances impose disadvantages and only one grants advantage or vice versa. In such a situation, it has neither advantage nor disadvantage.

So, for example, if you (the rogue) have an advantage and disadvantage in an attack roll against an enemy while your ally is less than 5 feet from the target, you could make a sneak attack because they treat you like you don't have a disadvantage when making the roll. This meets the requirements for Sneak Attack (PHB 96, my emphasis):

Once per turn, you can deal (extra) damage to a creature that you hit with an attack if you have an advantage in the attack roll … You don't need an advantage in the attack roll if another enemy of the target is within 5 feet of it , that enemy is not incapacitated, and you have no disadvantage in the attack roll.

However, if the ally was absent in that situation, you could not make a Sneak Attack because they treat you as if you had no advantage in making the roll.

The same reason would apply to characteristics other than the Sneak Attack that depend on the advantage or disadvantage of any attack roll, skill check or save throw. When any of these rolls is made with advantage and disadvantage, the roll is made as if it really had neither advantage nor disadvantage. In this case, no feature that requires advantage or disadvantage would be activated, and no feature that prohibits the advantage or disadvantage would be excluded.