000-103 Braindumps

Killexams.com Real Questions and study guide and dumps | cheat sheets | stargeo.it

Killexam 000-103 cert Exam Simulator is best exam prep tool we include updated Q & A - Brain Dumps - practice questions and exam tips - Tricks in the Exam Simulator - cheat sheets - stargeo.it

Pass4sure 000-103 dumps | Killexams.com 000-103 real questions | http://www.stargeo.it/new/

000-103 AIX 6.1 Basic Operations

Study guide Prepared by Killexams.com IBM Dumps Experts

Exam Questions Updated On :

Killexams.com 000-103 Dumps and real Questions

100% real Questions - Exam Pass Guarantee with high Marks - Just Memorize the Answers

000-103 exam Dumps Source : AIX 6.1 Basic Operations

Test Code : 000-103
Test title : AIX 6.1 Basic Operations
Vendor title : IBM
: 81 real Questions

No worries whilst getting geared up for the 000-103 examination.
Many thanks for your 000-103 dumps. I recognized maximum of the questions and too you had everyone the simulations that I was asked. I were given 97 percentage score. After trying numerous books, I was pretty disenchanted no longer getting the right material. I become searching out a guideline for exam 000-103 with facile language and rightly-prepared questions and answers. killexams.com fulfilled my want, because it defined the complicated topics within the simplest way. In the actual exam I were given 97%, which changed into beyond my expectation. Thank you killexams.com, to your tremendous manual-line!

Do you requisite real test qustions of 000-103 exam?
Many thanks for your 000-103 dumps. I recognized most of the questions and you had everyone the simulations that I was asked. I got 97 percent score. After trying several books, I was quite disappointed not getting the right materials. I was looking for a guideline for exam 000-103 with facile and well-organized content. killexams.com fulfilled my need, as it explained the involved topics in the simplest way. In the real exam I got 97%, which was beyond my expectation. Thank you killexams.com, for your powerful guide-line!

Do no longer disburse huge quantity on 000-103 courses, bag this question bank.
To bag organized for 000-103 exercise exam requires a gross lot of tough work and time. Time control is one of these complextrouble, that can live hardly ever resolved. But killexams.com certification has honestly resolved this hassle from its root stage, with the useful resource of imparting style of time schedules, simply so it is straightforward to effects gross his syllabus for 000-103 practiceexam. killexams.com certification gives everyone the instructional guides which might live censorious for 000-103 exerciseexam. So I maintain to mention with out dropping a while, commence your schooling underneath killexams.com certifications to bag a immoderate marks in 000-103 exercise exam, and do your self undergo on the top of this international of information.

actual 000-103 questions and amend answers! It warrant the charge.
I maintain been given severa questions ordinary from this aide and made an extraordinary 88% in my 000-103 exam. At that point, my associate proposed me to buy after the Dumps aide of killexams.com as a quick reference. It carefully secured everyone the material thru short solutions which maintain been beneficial to accomplish not forget. My subsequent progress obliged me to pick killexams.com for everyone my future tests. I was in an wretchedness the passage to blanket everyone of the material indoors 3-week time.

It is really powerful undergo to maintain 000-103 real exam questions.
due to 000-103 certificate you got many chances for security experts improvement for your career. I desired to developmentmy vocation in records safety and desired to grow to live certified as a 000-103. in that case I determined to buy assist from killexams.com and began my 000-103 exam education thru 000-103 exam cram. 000-103 exam cram made 000-103 certificatestudies facile to me and helped me to gather my desires effortlessly. Now im able to exclaim without hesitation, without this website I by no means passed my 000-103 exam in first strive.

precisely identical questions, WTF!
000-103 QAs maintain stored my life. I didnt sense confident in this location and Im happy a friend has knowledgeable approximately killexams.com IBM package with me a few days earlier than the exam. I requisite i would buy earlier, it would maintain made matters a gross lot less difficult. I notion that I passed this 000-103 exam very early.

That turned into terrific! I got dumps modern-day 000-103 exam.
killexams.com tackled everyone my problems. considering long questions and answers was a test. anyhow with concise, my making plans for 000-103 exam was virtually an agreeable enjoy. I efficiently passed this exam with 79% score. It helped me recall without lifting a finger and solace. The Questions & answers in killexams.com are fitting for bag prepared for this exam. a gross lot obliged killexams.com in your backing. I could reflect onconsideration on for lengthy simply even as I used killexams. Motivation and high-quality Reinforcement of newcomers is one matter matter which i create tough buttheir assist do it so smooth.

attempt out those actual 000-103 modern-day and up to date dumps.
killexams.com works! I passed this exam closing descend and at that factor over 90% of the questions had been truly legitimate. Theyre noticeably probable to though live legitimate as killexams.com cares to update their material frequently. killexams.com is a top notch company which has helped me greater than once. I am a ordinary, so hoping for reduce suffuse for my next package!

It is really powerful undergo to maintain 000-103 real exam questions.
Word of mouth is a very stout passage of marketing for a product. I say, when something is so good, why not accomplish some positive publicity for it I would like to spread the word about this one of a kindhearted and absolutely incredible killexams.com which helped me in performing outstandingly well in my 000-103 exam and exceeding everyone expectations. I would exclaim that this killexams.com is one of the most admirable online teaching ventures I maintain ever approach across and it deserves a lot of recognition.

Worked arduous on 000-103 books, but everything was in this study guide.
That is an definitely legitimate and trustworthy resource, with actual 000-103 questions and accurate solutions. The finding out engine works very smooth. With extra info and preempt customer support, this is an exceptionally suited provide. No free random braindumps available on-line can test with the high-quality and the pleasant live pleased I had with Killexams. I passed with a honestly excessive score, so Im telling this based totally on my personal revel in.

IBM AIX 6.1 Basic Operations

nighttime Commander involves IBM i | killexams.com real Questions and Pass4sure dumps

March 20, 2019 Alex Woodie

IBM i professionals who work appreciably with data within the IFS might live satisfied to hear a brand new software utility has been ported to the IBM i PASE ambiance that may store them a bunch of time. The open supply utility, known as midnight Commander, gives builders and administrators a handy command line undergo that may advocate velocity up initiatives, mainly when giving commands to gigantic variety of files kept on far flung machines.

dead night Commander changed into at the start developed in 1994 as a file utility for UNIX, which changed into starting to emerge from software labs to problem minicomputer systems of the day, such because the AS/four hundred, in addition to early windows working techniques. Miguel de Icaza, who’s chummy for founding the Mono project (amongst others), is credited with growing midnight Commander, but over the years edifice of the product has develop into a gaggle effort.

The utility, which is disbursed by means of a GNU license from www.midnightcommander.org, turned into largely modeled off Norton Commander, an MS-DOS utility developed in the Nineteen Eighties by passage of Norton. but middle of the night Commander has developed into its own issue through the years, and the resemblance to that ancient Norton product these days generally is barely in the identify.

middle of the night Commander items users with a two-panel, text-primarily based interface that lets them view the directories and files for the machines they’re connected to. clients can too tow up menus of accessible commands and a background of undertaking. What in fact sets middle of the night Commander aside, besides the fact that children, is its command extension and subshell execution environments, which can live enormously customizable.

users are in a position to incite a slew of fundamental listing services with hour of darkness Commander, together with growing, viewing, renaming, moving, and deleting directories. users can’t create data in middle of the night Commander (that’s the job for functions), but they could replica, circulation, and delete particular person files — or even more advantageous, groups of data. built-in FTP and SFTP performance makes it workable for clients to work with data throughout numerous systems.

nighttime Commander offers clients a handful of special commands for coping with data or directories in bulk. they could employ commands like “%s” or “%t” to point out which information to execute a given command upon (during this case “the info below the cursor and everyone highlighted files within the lively panel” and ” everyone highlighted information in the dynamic panel,” respectively).

middle of the night Commander displayed on Ubuntu Linux.

The utility lets clients set default courses to employ for opening determined file varieties, which is carried out using the “enter” button. text information are opened in a default editor, and users can configure the application to instantly open up different forms of data, reminiscent of HTML info, in an internet browser.

middle of the night Commander makes wide employ of duty keys, and these approach in handy when using the command extensions. Command extensions permit the person to specific determined kinds of instructions live applied to particular person files or companies of data.

for example, a person may configure inanimate night Commander to instantly archive data with one command, or to initiate file transfer with a further. exigent the F2 button pulls up a facile reference of attainable commands, whereas F1 calls the assist screens.

The richness of the command extension atmosphere, together with the pace of the command line, are anticipated to supply middle of the night Commander an audience amongst builders and directors who deem drag-and-drop GUIs are too cumbersome for some file operations. And whereas nighttime Commander will enchantment to those who want to maintain their palms on the keyboard, the application is too mouse-mindful, giving consumers the election of navigating and issuing commands with the mouse.

dead night Commander will likely appeal to developers and directors who find themselves elbows abysmal in IFS folders, when a GUI fashion is just too cumbersome.

middle of the night Commander helps Unix, Linux, MacOS, and other operating methods. Jack Woehr, the lead IBM i aid tech for Absolute efficiency, and the IBM open supply team, headed via open source architect Jesse Gorzinski, are credited with completing the port of hour of darkness Commander to IBM i’s PASE AIX runtime atmosphere in the core of 2018.

“i'm a longtime (20+ years) consumer of MC on Linux, OpenBSD, Mac and windows and am delighted to eventually maintain succeeded in constructing it on IBM i PASE environment!” writes the person “jax” on the middle of the night Commander site.

Woehr additionally became concerned in porting Ublu to IBM i, as well as porting Lynx, a textual content-simplest net browser, to IBM i. “Jack too helped with first-class assurance and labored with assignment owners to upstream everyone code alterations,” Gorzinski wrote in his November 2018 column in IBM methods journal. “really, the main code glide for midnight Commander can now live built for IBM i without a changes.”

nighttime Commander helps IBM i 7.three. The software is RPM conscious and is purchasable for down load on the IBM i server the usage of the new Yum distribution formula that debuted currently.

linked stories

RPM And Yum Are a large Deal For IBM i. here’s Why

Open source Is the long run, So where Does IBM i proper in?

WebSphere vs. .net: IBM and Microsoft glide head to head | killexams.com real Questions and Pass4sure dumps

After carrying out a number of benchmarks, Microsoft concluded that .web offers improved performance and price-efficiency ratio than WebSphere. IBM rebutted Microsoft’s findings and performed different exams proving that WebSphere is advanced to .web. Microsoft spoke back by rejecting a few of IBM’s claims as inaccurate and repeating the checks on diverse hardware with diverse outcomes.


Microsoft has benchmarked .internet and WebSphere and posted the benchmark source code, run suggestions, employ suggestions and a findings file published at wholoveswindows.com entitled Benchmarking IBM WebSphere 7 on IBM Power6 and AIX vs. Microsoft .web on HP BladeSystem and home windows Server 2008.   This benchmark indicates a a pleasant deal greater transactions per second (TPS) rate and better can charge/efficiency ratio when the usage of WebSphere 7 on home windows Server 2008 over WebSphere on AIX 5.three, and even stronger outcomes when the usage of .web on windows Server 2008 over WebSphere on the very OS. The charge/performance ratio for the software benchmark used is:

IBM power 570 with WebSphere 7 and AIX 5.three HP BladeSystem C7000 with WebSphere 7 and home windows Server 2008 HP BladeSystem C7000 with .internet and windows Server 2008 $32.forty five $7.ninety two $3.99

IBM has rebutted Microsoft’s benchmark and referred to as a few of their claims as false, and performed a sunder benchmark, with diverse outcomes. The benchmark used together with the findings had been posted in Benchmarking AND BEATING Microsoft’s .internet 3.5 with WebSphere 7! (PDF). The supply code of the benchmark became no longer posted. The consequences present WebSphere as a better performing middle-tier than .internet with 36% more TPS for one utility benchmark and from 176% to 450% more suitable throughput for certainly one of IBM’s typical benchmarks.

Microsoft replied to IBM and defended their claims and benchmarking outcomes with Response to IBM’s Whitepaper Entitled Benchmarking and Beating Microsoft .net 3.5 with WebSphere 7 (PDF). Microsoft has too re-run their benchmark, modified to encompass a special check glide akin to the one used by using IBM of their assessments, working it on different hardware, a solitary multi-core server, founding that certainly WebSphere is greater than .internet if the employ of IBM’s verify glide but only just a limited more suitable, between three% and %6, not as suggested by means of IBM. anyway that, these later findings accomplish not exchange the habitual ones considering the fact that the benchmark become run on a different hardware configuration. in the conclusion, Microsoft invites IBM to “an unbiased lab to duty further testing”.

Microsoft checking out .net towards WebSphere

Microsoft has performed a sequence of checks evaluating WebSphere/Java against .net on three diverse platforms. The particulars of the benchmarks performed and the test consequences were posted in the whitepaper entitled Benchmarking IBM WebSphere® 7 on IBM® Power6™ and AIX vs. Microsoft® .net on Hewlett Packard BladeSystem and home windows Server® 2008 (PDF).

systems demonstrated:

  • IBM vigor 570 (energy 6) running IBM WebSphere 7 on AIX 5.3
  • 8 IBM Power6 cores at 4.2GHz
  • 32 GB RAM
  • AIX 5.three
  • 4 x 1 GB NICs
  • Hewlett Packard BladeSystem C7000 working IBM WebSphere 7 on windows Server 2008
  • 4 Hewlett Packard ProLiant BL460c blades
  • One Quad-Core Intel® Xeon® E5450 (3.00GHz, 1333MHz FSB, 80W) Processor/blade
  • 32 GB RAM/blade
  • windows Server 2008/64-bit/blade
  • 2 x 1 GB NICs/blade
  • Hewlett Packard BladeSystem C7000 running .internet on windows Server 2008
  • identical because the outdated one but the functions confirmed run on .web in its residence of WebSphere.
  • a number of three checks had been carried out on each and every platform:

  • exchange internet software Benchmarking The applications tested maintain been IBM’s trade 6.1 and Microsoft’s StockTrader 2.04. This succession of checks maintain evaluated the performance of finished statistics-driven web applications running on desirable of the above outlined platforms. The internet pages accessed had one or continually more operations serviced via courses contained via the traffic layer and ending with synchronous database calls.
  • exchange core Tier web functions Benchmarking This benchmark changed into meant to measure the performance of the web provider layer executing operations which ended up in database transactions. The check became corresponding to net utility, but operations were counted personally.
  • WS test internet services Benchmarking This learn at various turned into like the outdated one however there was no enterprise logic nor database access. This become in accordance with WSTest workload originally devised by sun and augmented by means of Microsoft. The functions tier offered 3 operations: EchoList, EchoStruct and GetOrder. Having no enterprise common sense, the learn at various measured best the uncooked performance of the web provider application.
  • Two database configurations maintain been used, one for the all-IBM platform and one other for the different two: IBM DB2 V9.5 commercial enterprise edition with IBM DB2 V9.5 JDBC drivers for data entry and SQL Server 2008 databases enterprise version. Two databases were set up for each and every configuration working on HP BL680c G5 blades:

  • 4 Quad-Core Intel XEON CPUs, @2.4GHZ (sixteen cores in every blade)
  • 64 GB RAM
  • four x 1GB NICs
  • IBM DB 9.5 traffic version sixty four-bit or Microsoft SQL Server 2008 sixty four-bit
  • Microsoft windows Server 2008 sixty four-bit, traffic edition
  • 2 4GB HBAs for fiber/sans entry to the EVA 4400 storage
  • The storage changed into secured on HP StorageWorks EVA 4400 Disk Array:

  • 96 15K drives complete
  • four logical volumes such as 24 drives every
  • Database server 1: logical quantity 1 for logging
  • Database server 1: logical extent 2 for database
  • Database server 2: logical extent 3 for logging
  • Database server 2: logical quantity four for database
  • The web application benchmark used 32 customer machines operating examine scripts. every computer simulated lots of of purchasers having a 1 2d feel time. The tests used an adapted edition of IBM’s alternate 6.1 application on SUT #1 & #2 and Microsoft’s StockTrader utility on SUT #three.


    For the internet carrier and WSTest benchmarks, Microsoft used 10 clients with a 0.1s believe time. For WSTest, the databases maintain been no longer accessed. Microsoft has created a WSTest-compliant benchmark for WebSphere 7 and JAX-WS and a further in C# for .net using WCF.


    Microsoft’s whitepaper contains extra particulars on how the tests maintain been performed including the DB configuration, DB access used, caching configuration, check scripts, tuning parameters used and others.


    The benchmarking results including the fees/performance ratio are proven in here desk:

      IBM energy 570 with WebSphere 7 and AIX 5.3 HP BladeSystem C7000 with WebSphere 7 and windows Server 2008 HP BladeSystem C7000 with .net and windows Server 2008 total center-Tier gear charge $260,128.08 $87,161.00 $50,161.00 change internet utility Benchmark 8,016 TPS 11,004 TPS 12,576 TPS can charge/efficiency $32.forty five $7.92 $3.99 change core Tier web carrier Benchmark 10,571 TPS 14,468 TPS 22,262 TPS cost/performance $24.61 $6.02 $2.25 WSTest EchoList verify10,536 TPS 15,973 TPS 22,291 TPS cost/performance $24.sixty nine $5.forty six $2.25 WSTest EchoStruct testeleven,378 TPS sixteen,225 TPS 24,951 TPS cost/performance $22.86 $5.37 $2.01 WSTest GetOrder examineeleven,009 TPS 15,491 TPS 27,796 TPS can charge/efficiency $23.63 $5.sixty three $1.eighty

    in keeping with Microsoft’s benchmarking effects, operating WebSphere on HP BladeSystem with windows Server 2008 is about 30% extra effectual and the charge-performance ratio is 5 instances decrease than working WebSphere on IBM vigor 570 with AIX 5.three. The .net/home windows Server 2008 configuration is much more effectual and the can charge/efficiency ratio drops to half in comparison to WebSphere/home windows Server 2008 and it's 10 times smaller than WebSphere/energy 570/AIX. The charge-performance ratio is so high for the primary platform because the price of the complete center-tier is over $250,000 whereas the efficiency is decrease than the different structures.

    Microsoft’s benchmarking whitepaper (PDF) incorporates an appendix with finished particulars of the hardware and utility charges. The benchmarking tests used, together with source code, are published on StockTrader web page.

    IBM’s Rebuttal

    In another paper, Benchmarking AND BEATING Microsoft’s .net 3.5 with WebSphere 7! (PDF), IBM has rejected Microsoft’s benchmark and created an extra one showing that WebSphere is performing more suitable than .internet.

    Microsoft had said that StockTrader is corresponding to IBM’s alternate utility:

    Microsoft created an application it really is functionally similar to the IBM WebSphere change software, each in terms of consumer performance and center-tier database access, transactional and messaging habits.

    IBM rejected Microsoft’s claim:

    The software claims to live “functionally equivalent” to the IBM WebSphere alternate 6.1 sample software. It is not a “port” of the software in any sense. Little, if any, of the habitual utility design become ported. Microsoft has made this an utility that showcases the employ of its proprietary technologies. a tremendous indication of here's the fact that the .internet StockTrader software isn't a universally purchasable internet software considering the fact that it can simplest live accessed through the employ of internet Explorer, and not by using other web browsers.

    additionally, IBM pointed out that exchange was now not designed to benchmark WebSphere’s performance but rather to

    serve as a sample application illustrating the usage of the points and capabilities contained in WebSphere and how they involving utility efficiency. furthermore, the software served as a sample which allowed builders to learn the tuning capabilities of WebSphere.

    IBM had different complaints regarding Microsoft’s benchmark:

    Microsoft created a completely new utility [StockTrader] and claimed purposeful equivalence at the utility stage. The fact is that the Microsoft edition of the utility used proprietary SQL statements to entry the database, in contrast to the original version of trade 6.1 which turned into designed to live a conveyable and typical utility.

    They employed customer aspect scripting to shift probably the most software duty to the client.

    They established net capabilities capabilities with the aid of inserting an pointless HTTP server between the WebSphere server and the client.

    And If that become not satisfactory, they didn't effectively computer screen and adjust the WebSphere software server to obtain top performance.

    IBM’s aggressive challenge workplace group (CPO) has ported StockTrader 2.0 to WebSphere creating CPO StockTrader and claiming: “we did a port that faithfully reproduced Microsoft’s application design. The intent turned into to obtain an apples-to-apples comparison.” So, trader 6.1 turned into ported by means of Microsoft from WebSphere to .internet beneath the identify StockTrader and ported again by using IBM again to WebSphere beneath the identify CPO StockTrader. IBM benchmarked CPO StockTrader against StockTrader and received greater effects for WebSphere towards .net:


    IBM has too suggested they are the usage of friendly financial institution, an application intended to benchmark WebSphere towards .web. during this verify WebSphere outperforms .web several times:


    of their StockTrader vs. CPO StockTrader benchmark, IBM used scripts simulating user endeavor: “login, getting fees, stock purchase, inventory sell, viewing of the account portfolio, then a logoff” and working in stress mode devoid of feel times. 36 users were simulated, ample to compel every server at maximum throughput and utilization. The statistics back turned into validated and mistake had been discarded.

    The entrance conclusion became carried out with WebSphere 7/windows Server 2008 in a solitary case and .internet 3.5 with IIS 7/windows Server 2008 in the different. The returned conclusion database changed into DB2 eight.2 and SQL Server 2005, each on windows Server 2003.

    The hardware used for testing was:

    efficiency checking out tool HardwareX345 8676 Server2 X three.06 GHz Intel Processor with Hyper Thread Technology8 GB RAM18.2 GB 15K rpm SCSC arduous Disk Drive1 GB Ethernet interfaceApplication Server Hardware IBM X3950 Server, eight x three.50 Ghz, Intel Xeon Processors with Hyper Thread technology, sixty four GB RAMDatabase Server HardwareX445 8670 Server, 8x three.0 Ghz. Intel Xeon Processors with Hyper Thread know-how, 16 GB RAMUltraSCSI 320 Controller , EXP 300 SCSI expansion Unit, 14x 18.2 GB 15K rpm difficult Disk pressure configured as 2 Raid Arrays.One for Logs & One for Database, each and every array is comprised of 7 tough disks in a Raid 0 configuration.The Ethernet community spine The remoted community hardware is constituted of 3x 3Comm SuperStack 4950 switches and one 3 Comm SuperStack 4924 change working at 1 GB.

    The utility and hardware configuration for the friendly financial institution benchmark was akin to the StockTrader one.

    IBM’s whitepaper includes tips concerning the friendly financial institution application, however does not aspect to the source code. It additionally mentions that the application changed into at first designed for .net Framework 1.1 and became simply recompiled on .web three.5 without being up-to-date to do employ of the latest applied sciences.

    Microsoft Response to IBM’s Rebuttal

    Microsoft has responded to IBM’s rebuttal in yet a further whitepaper, Response to IBM’s Whitepaper Entitled Benchmarking and Beating Microsoft .net three.5 with WebSphere 7 (PDF). in this document, Microsoft defends their habitual benchmarking effects and affirms that IBM made some inaccurate claims in their rebuttal document entitled Benchmarking AND BEATING Microsoft’s .internet 3.5 with WebSphere 7!, and IBM did not employ an acceptable benchmarking system.  more has been posted at wholoveswindows.com.

    really, Microsoft observed the following claims are false:

  • IBM declare: The .net StockTrader does not faithfully reproduce the IBM alternate application functionality.Microsoft response: this declare is fake; the .net StockTrader 2.04 faithfully reproduces the IBM WebSphere trade utility (the employ of gauge .net Framework technologies and coding practices), and can live used for reasonable benchmark comparisons between .net three.5 and IBM WebSphere 7.
  • IBM claim: The .web StockTrader uses client-aspect script to shift processing from the server to the customer.Microsoft response: this pretension is fake, there is not any client-aspect scripting in the .internet StockTrader software.
  • IBM claim: The .net StockTrader makes employ of proprietary SQL.Microsoft response: the .web StockTrader makes employ of gauge SQL statements coded for SQL Server and/or Oracle; and provides a data entry layer for both. The IBM WebSphere 7 change application in a similar passage uses JDBC queries coded for DB2 and/or Oracle. Neither implementation uses stored procedures or functions; everyone enterprise pleasant judgment runs within the application server. gauge pre-prepared SQL statements are utilized in both applications.
  • IBM declare: The .net StockTrader is not programmed as a universally available, thin-customer web application. hence it runs most effectual on IE, not in Firefox or different browsers.Microsoft response: definitely, the .web StockTrader net tier is programmed as a universally obtainable, pure thin customer net application. however, a simple difficulty in theuse of HTML remark tags explanations concerns in Firefox; these observation tags are being updated to enable the ASP.web utility to competently render in any trade just browser, together with Firefox.
  • IBM declare: The .net StockTrader has blunders below load.Microsoft response: this is false, and this document includes further benchmark exams and Mercury LoadRunner details proving this IBM declare to live false.
  • additionally, Microsoft complained that IBM had developed pleasant financial institution for .web Framework 1.1 years in the past the usage of obsolete technologies:

    IBM’s pleasant financial institution benchmark makes employ of an obsolete .net Framework 1.1 application that includes technologies corresponding to DCOM which maintain been obsolete for decades. This benchmark should noiseless live thoroughly discounted unless Microsoft has the break to evaluation the code and update it for .web three.5, with newer applied sciences for ASP.web, transactions, and home windows communication groundwork (WCF) TCP/IP binary remoting (which replaced DCOM as the favourite remoting expertise).

    Microsoft regarded IBM failed with the aid of not presenting the supply code for CPO StockTrader and pleasant financial institution applications and reiterated the indisputable fact that everyone the source code for Microsoft’s benchmark functions concerned during this case had been made public.

    Microsoft too observed that IBM had used a modified verify script which “included a heavier emphasis on buys and additionally covered a promote operation”. Microsoft re-carried out their benchmark the employ of IBM’s modified check script flow, one together with the operations purchase and sell beside Login, Portfolio, Logout, on a solitary 4-core utility server asserting that

    these exams are based on IBM’s revised script and are meant to meet some of these IBM rebuttal verify situations as outlined in IBM’s response paper. They should no longer live regarded in any means as a transformation to their orthodox consequences (performed on different hardware, and sunder learn at various script flow); because the common outcomes stay valid.

    The verify was carried on:

    software Server(s) Database(s) 1 HP ProLiant BL460c1 Quad-core Intel Xeon E5450 CPU (three.00 GHz)32 GB RAM2 x 1GB NICsWindows Server 2008 sixty four-bit.net 3.5 (SP1) 64-bitIBM WebSphere 64-bit 1 HP ProLiant DL380 G52 Quad-core Intel Xeon E5355 CPUs (2.sixty seven GHz)sixty four GB RAM2 x 1GB NICsWindows Server 2008 sixty four-bitSQL Server 2008 sixty four-bitDB2 V9.7 sixty four-bit

    The effect of the test indicates identical performance for WebSphere and .web.


    considered one of IBM’s complaints had been that Microsoft inserted an needless HTTP internet server in front of WebSphere cutting back the number of transactions per second. Microsoft admitted that, but introduced:

    the employ of this HTTP Server became utterly discussed in the habitual benchmark paper, and is done in accordance with IBM’s personal most trustworthy observe deployment instructions for WebSphere. In one of these setup, IBM recommends using the IBM HTTP Server (Apache) as the entrance quit internet Server, which then routes requests to the IBM WebSphere utility server. In their exams, they co-located this HTTP on the equal desktop as the utility Server. this is corresponding to the .internet/WCF internet carrier checks, the residence they hosted the WCF net features in IIS 7, with co-found IIS 7 HTTP Server routing requests to the .web application pool processing the WCF carrier operations. So in each exams, they tested an equal setup, the employ of IBM HTTP Server (Apache) as the front quit to WebSphere/JAX-WS services; and Microsoft IIS 7 as the entrance quit to the .web/WCF features. hence, they stand behind everyone their long-established consequences.

    Microsoft performed yet one more learn at various, the WSTest, with out the intermediary HTTP net server on a solitary quad-core server just like the previous one, and acquired the following result:


    each exams carried out by means of Microsoft on a solitary server demonstrate WebSphere holding a mild efficiency abilities over .net but now not as an terrible lot as IBM pretended in their paper. besides that, Microsoft remarked that IBM didn't palpate upon middle-tier suffuse evaluation which significantly favors Microsoft.

    Microsoft continued to problem IBM to

    meet us [Microsoft] in an independent lab to duty additional trying out of the .net StockTrader and WSTest benchmark workloads and pricing analysis of the hub tier utility servers tested in their benchmark report. in addition, they invite the IBM competitive response team to their lab in Redmond, for dialogue and additional checking out in their presence and below their evaluation.

    closing Conclusion

    often, a benchmark consists of

  • a workload
  • a set of guidelines describing how the workload is to live processed – run suggestions -
  • a technique making an attempt to do unavoidable that the run suggestions are respected and effects are interpreted correctly
  • A benchmark is continually meant to compare two or extra techniques to live able to check which one is greater for performing determined projects. Benchmarks are too used through groups to enhance their hardware/software before it goes to their customers via trying out distinctive tuning parameters and measuring the effects or by recognizing some bottlenecks. Benchmarks can even live used for advertising purposes, to prove that a determined gear has improved performance than the competitor’s.

    in the starting, benchmarks had been used to measure the hardware performance of a system, like the CPU processing vigor. Later, benchmarks were created to examine and evaluate purposes like SPEC MAIL2001 and even application servers like SPECjAppServer2004.

    There isn't any best benchmark. The workload can live tweaked to prefer a undeniable platform, or the records can live misinterpreted or incorrectly extrapolated. To live convincing, a benchmark needs to live as transparent as feasible. The workload definition should noiseless live public, and if viable the supply code should noiseless live made attainable for those involved to study. a transparent set of run suggestions are mandatory so other events can repeat the equal tests to peer the consequences for themselves. the style outcomes are interpreted and their sense must live disclosed.

    We are not alert of a response from IBM to Microsoft’s remaining paper. it will live wonderful to espy their response. probably, the most desirable strategy to transparent issues up is for IBM to do the supply code of their assessments public so anyone involved could test and notice for themselves where is the truth. unless then they will best speculate on the correctness and validity of these benchmarks.

    home windows gear Programming: fashion management | killexams.com real Questions and Pass4sure dumps

    This chapter explains the fundamentals of fashion administration and additionally introduces the primary synchronization operations and wait services that can live essential everyone over the leisure of the book.

    This chapter is from the booklet 

    A system carries its personal impartial digital address region with each code and statistics, included from other tactics. every process, in turn, includes one or extra independently executing threads. A thread running within a manner can execute utility code, create new threads, create new independent procedures, and manipulate communication and synchronization among the threads.

    by using growing and managing methods, functions can maintain dissimilar, concurrent initiatives processing data, performing computations, or speaking with other networked systems. it is even workable to ameliorate application performance via exploiting distinctive CPU processors.

    This chapter explains the basics of system management and additionally introduces the simple synchronization operations and wait features that should live censorious during the comfort of the book.

    each technique consists of one or more threads, and the home windows thread is the fundamental executable unit; espy the subsequent chapter for a threads introduction. Threads are scheduled on the basis of the regular factors: availability of substances equivalent to CPUs and actual reminiscence, precedence, fairness, and so forth. windows has long supported multiprocessor programs, so threads can too live allocated to sunder processors inside a computer.

    From the programmer's point of view, every windows system contains materials such as the following accessories:

  • One or extra threads.
  • A digital ply space it truly is sunder from different techniques' address spaces. observe that shared reminiscence-mapped information participate actual reminiscence, however the sharing strategies will doubtless employ different digital addresses to entry the mapped file.
  • One or more code segments, including code in DLLs.
  • One or greater records segments containing global variables.
  • environment strings with environment variable counsel, such as the present search path.
  • The technique heap.
  • substances comparable to open handles and other lots.
  • each and every thread in a manner shares code, international variables, atmosphere strings, and elements. each thread is independently scheduled, and a thread has right here facets:

  • A stack for procedure calls, interrupts, exception handlers, and automated storage.
  • Thread indigenous Storage (TLS)—An arraylike collection of pointers giving each and every thread the skill to earmark storage to create its own enjoyable data ambiance.
  • An controversy on the stack, from the growing thread, which is continually exciting for each and every thread.
  • A context structure, maintained by the kernel, with laptop register values.
  • figure 6-1 suggests a system with a few threads. This design is schematic and doesn't point out genuine reminiscence addresses, nor is it drawn to scale.

    This chapter suggests a passage to work with approaches consisting of a solitary thread. Chapter 7 suggests the passage to employ distinctive threads.

    Unquestionably it is arduous assignment to pick dependable certification questions/answers assets regarding review, reputation and validity since individuals bag sham because of picking incorrectly benefit. Killexams.com ensure to serve its customers best to its assets concerning exam dumps update and validity. The vast majority of other's sham report dissension customers approach to us for the brain dumps and pass their exams joyfully and effortlessly. They never trade off on their review, reputation and attribute on the grounds that killexams review, killexams reputation and killexams customer conviction is imperative to us. Uniquely they deal with killexams.com review, killexams.com reputation, killexams.com sham report objection, killexams.com trust, killexams.com validity, killexams.com report and killexams.com scam. On the off chance that you espy any inaccurate report posted by their rivals with the title killexams sham report grievance web, killexams.com sham report, killexams.com scam, killexams.com protest or something like this, simply recall there are constantly terrible individuals harming reputation of pleasant administrations because of their advantages. There are a huge number of fulfilled clients that pass their exams utilizing killexams.com brain dumps, killexams PDF questions, killexams hone questions, killexams exam simulator. Visit Killexams.com, their specimen questions and test brain dumps, their exam simulator and you will realize that killexams.com is the best brain dumps site.

    Back to Braindumps Menu

    C2070-580 real questions | 250-401 rehearse test | 1Z0-041 rehearse Test | 70-331 real questions | C9550-413 questions and answers | 190-623 free pdf | E20-005 rehearse questions | 156-215-80 rehearse questions | HP2-B44 test prep | HP3-045 questions answers | MA0-100 braindumps | E20-535 free pdf | E20-526 mock exam | HP0-Y28 exam questions | 1T6-521 rehearse test | 1Z0-605 test prep | 310-110 dump | 650-325 test questions | A00-270 sample test | C9560-510 braindumps |

    Simply retain these 000-103 questions before you glide for test.
    killexams.com offers you glide through its demo version, Test their exam simulator that will enable you to undergo the real test environment. Passing real 000-103 exam will live much easier for you. killexams.com gives you 3 months free updates of 000-103 AIX 6.1 Basic Operations exam questions. Their certification team is continuously reachable at back quit who updates the material as and when required.

    As the main component this is in any competence vital here is passing the 000-103 - AIX 6.1 Basic Operations exam. As everyone which you require is a high score of IBM 000-103 exam. The only a solitary factor you want to accomplish is downloading braindumps of 000-103 exam and memorize. They will not let you downl with their unrestricted guarantee. The professionals in like passage preserve tempo with the maximum best in magnificence exam to tender most of updated materials. Three months free access to maintain the potential to them thru the date of purchase. Every candidate can too undergo the fee of the 000-103 exam dumps through killexams.com requiring limited to no attempt. Habitually there is a markdown for every person all.

    Inside seeing the bona fide exam material of the brain dumps at killexams.com you could without numerous an enlarge develop your pretension to reputation. For the IT professionals, it is fundamental to modify their capacities as showed through their paintings want. They do it simple for their clients to carry certification exam with the assist of killexams.com confirmed and wholehearted to goodness exam material. For a super destiny in its area, their brain dumps are the satisfactory selection.

    killexams.com Huge Discount Coupons and Promo Codes are as under;
    WC2017 : 60% Discount Coupon for everyone exams on internet site
    PROF17 : 10% Discount Coupon for Orders more than $69
    DEAL17 : 15% Discount Coupon for Orders more than $99
    DECSPECIAL : 10% Special Discount Coupon for everyone Orders

    A high-quality dumps creating is a basic angle that makes it honest for you to buy IBM certifications. In any case, 000-103 braindumps PDF offers agreement for candidates. The IT declaration is a vital tough undertaking if one doesnt learn actual route as obvious resource material. Thus, they maintain got actual and updated material for the arranging of certification exam.

    killexams.com helps millions of candidates pass the exams and bag their certifications. They maintain thousands of successful reviews. Their dumps are reliable, affordable, updated and of really best attribute to overcome the difficulties of any IT certifications. killexams.com exam dumps are latest updated in highly outclass manner on regular basis and material is released periodically. Latest killexams.com dumps are available in testing centers with whom they are maintaining their relationship to bag latest material.

    The killexams.com exam questions for 000-103 AIX 6.1 Basic Operations exam is mainly based on two accessible formats, PDF and rehearse questions. PDF file carries everyone the exam questions, answers which makes your preparation easier. While the rehearse questions are the complimentary feature in the exam product. Which helps to self-assess your progress. The evaluation tool too questions your feeble areas, where you requisite to reserve more efforts so that you can ameliorate everyone your concerns.

    killexams.com recommend you to must try its free demo, you will notice the intuitive UI and too you will find it very facile to customize the preparation mode. But do sure that, the real 000-103 product has more features than the ordeal version. If, you are contented with its demo then you can purchase the actual 000-103 exam product. Avail 3 months Free updates upon purchase of 000-103 AIX 6.1 Basic Operations Exam questions. killexams.com offers you three months free update upon acquisition of 000-103 AIX 6.1 Basic Operations exam questions. Their expert team is always available at back quit who updates the content as and when required.

    killexams.com Huge Discount Coupons and Promo Codes are as under;
    WC2017 : 60% Discount Coupon for everyone exams on website
    PROF17 : 10% Discount Coupon for Orders greater than $69
    DEAL17 : 15% Discount Coupon for Orders greater than $99
    DECSPECIAL : 10% Special Discount Coupon for everyone Orders

    000-103 Practice Test | 000-103 examcollection | 000-103 VCE | 000-103 study guide | 000-103 practice exam | 000-103 cram

    Killexams 1Y0-A14 study guide | Killexams HP2-H18 exam prep | Killexams TB0-114 dumps questions | Killexams 9L0-205 free pdf | Killexams 000-184 test prep | Killexams HP0-S41 rehearse questions | Killexams ST0-151 braindumps | Killexams 1T6-323 exam prep | Killexams SPS-200 rehearse test | Killexams 70-768 braindumps | Killexams TB0-123 pdf download | Killexams 1Z0-324 rehearse test | Killexams HPE2-Z38 examcollection | Killexams VCXN610 exam questions | Killexams A00-203 rehearse exam | Killexams 350-026 sample test | Killexams 050-701 cheat sheets | Killexams HP2-H30 brain dumps | Killexams 920-157 cram | Killexams 000-M73 questions and answers |

    killexams.com huge List of Exam Braindumps

    View Complete list of Killexams.com Brain dumps

    Killexams HP2-Z19 rehearse test | Killexams C8 pdf download | Killexams 190-828 rehearse test | Killexams 1Z0-325 questions answers | Killexams EC0-479 free pdf | Killexams 1Z0-498 brain dumps | Killexams 000-234 exam prep | Killexams QQ0-401 study guide | Killexams 000-602 test questions | Killexams 000-050 test prep | Killexams C8010-241 mock exam | Killexams 1Z0-876 real questions | Killexams ST0-057 test prep | Killexams FSMC rehearse test | Killexams C2180-274 braindumps | Killexams C2090-422 exam questions | Killexams 030-333 test prep | Killexams 98-364 study guide | Killexams HP0-A100 real questions | Killexams 000-287 rehearse Test |

    AIX 6.1 Basic Operations

    Pass 4 sure 000-103 dumps | Killexams.com 000-103 real questions | http://www.stargeo.it/new/

    Windows System Programming: Process Management | killexams.com real questions and Pass4sure dumps

    This chapter explains the basics of process management and too introduces the basic synchronization operations and wait functions that will live censorious throughout the comfort of the book.

    This chapter is from the reserve 

    A process contains its own independent virtual address space with both code and data, protected from other processes. Each process, in turn, contains one or more independently executing threads. A thread running within a process can execute application code, create new threads, create new independent processes, and manage communication and synchronization among the threads.

    By creating and managing processes, applications can maintain multiple, concurrent tasks processing files, performing computations, or communicating with other networked systems. It is even workable to ameliorate application performance by exploiting multiple CPU processors.

    This chapter explains the basics of process management and too introduces the basic synchronization operations and wait functions that will live censorious throughout the comfort of the book.

    Every process contains one or more threads, and the Windows thread is the basic executable unit; espy the next chapter for a threads introduction. Threads are scheduled on the basis of the habitual factors: availability of resources such as CPUs and physical memory, priority, fairness, and so on. Windows has long supported multiprocessor systems, so threads can live allocated to sunder processors within a computer.

    From the programmer's perspective, each Windows process includes resources such as the following components:

  • One or more threads.
  • A virtual address space that is sunder from other processes' address spaces. Note that shared memory-mapped files participate physical memory, but the sharing processes will probably employ different virtual addresses to access the mapped file.
  • One or more code segments, including code in DLLs.
  • One or more data segments containing global variables.
  • Environment strings with environment variable information, such as the current search path.
  • The process heap.
  • Resources such as open handles and other heaps.
  • Each thread in a process shares code, global variables, environment strings, and resources. Each thread is independently scheduled, and a thread has the following elements:

  • A stack for procedure calls, interrupts, exception handlers, and automatic storage.
  • Thread Local Storage (TLS)—An arraylike collection of pointers giving each thread the competence to earmark storage to create its own unique data environment.
  • An controversy on the stack, from the creating thread, which is usually unique for each thread.
  • A context structure, maintained by the kernel, with machine register values.
  • Figure 6-1 shows a process with several threads. This design is schematic and does not attest actual reminiscence addresses, nor is it drawn to scale.

    This chapter shows how to work with processes consisting of a solitary thread. Chapter 7 shows how to employ multiple threads.

    LSI Nytro WarpDrive WLP4-200 Enterprise PCIe Review | killexams.com real questions and Pass4sure dumps

    August 17th, 2012 by Kevin OBrien

    The LSI Nytro WarpDrive WLP4-200 represents LSI's second-generation trouble in the enterprise PCIe application acceleration space. LSI builds on an extensive history of enterprise storage products with the newly rebranded line of acceleration products dubbed LSI Nytro. The Nytro family includes the PCIe WarpDrive of course, but too encompasses LSI's Nytro XD caching and Nytro MegaRAID products that leverage brilliant caching with on-board glitter for acceleration, offering customers an entire suite of options as they evaluate high-performance storage. The Nytro WarpDrive comes in a variety of configurations, including both eMLC and SLC versions, with capacities ranging from 200GB up to 1.6TB.

    Like the WarpDrive SLP-300 predecessor, the new Nytro WarpDrives work in much the very passage RAIDing multiple SSDs together. The Nytro WarpDrive uses fewer controllers/SSDs this time around, opting for four instead of six in the original. The controllers maintain too been updated; the Nytro WarpDrive utilizes four latest-generation LSI SandForce SF-2500 controllers that are paired with SLC or eMLC NAND depending on the model. These SSDs are then joined together in RAID0 through an LSI PCIe to SAS bridge to configuration a 200GB to 1600GB logical cache device. The drive is then presented to the operating system, which in this case could carry weight multiple Windows, Linux, UNIX variants, with a well-established LSI driver that in many cases is built into the OS itself.

    In addition to LSI's renowned host compatibility and stability reputation, the other core technology component of the Nytro WarpDrive are the SandFroce controllers. LSI used the prior generation SF-1500 controllers in the SLP-300 first generation PCIe card; this time around they're using the SF-2500 family. While the controller itself has improved, there's too the added engineering profit now that LSI has acquired SandForce. While the results may live more subtle, the benefits are there nonetheless and involve improved advocate for the drive via firmware updates and generally a more tightly integrated unit.

    While stability and consistent performance across operating systems are important, those features just open the door. Performance is key and the Nytro WarpDrive doesn't disappoint. At the top end, the cards deliver sequential 4K IOPS of 238,000 read and 133,000 write, along with sequential 8K IOPS of 189,000 read and 137,000 write. Latency is the other just as censorious performance spec; the Nytro WarpDrive posts latency as low as 50 microseconds.

    In this review they apply their full suite of enterprise benchmarks, across both Windows and Linux, with a robust set of comparables, including the prior generation LSI card and other leading application accelerators. Per their habitual depth everyone of their detailed performance charts and content is delivered on a solitary page to do consumption of these data points as facile as possible.

    LSI Nytro WarpDrive Specifications

  • Single smooth Cell (SLC)
  • 200GB Nytro WarpDrive WLP4-200
  • Sequential IOPS (4K) - 238,000 Read, 133,000 Write
  • Sequential Read and Write IOPS (8K) - 189,000 Read, 137,000 Write
  • Bandwidth (256K) - 2.0GB/s Read, 1.7GB/s Write
  • 400GB Nytro WarpDrive WLP4-400
  • Sequential IOPS (4K) - 238,000 Read, 133,000 Write
  • Sequential Read and Write IOPS (8K) - 189,000 Read, 137,000 Write
  • Bandwidth (256K) - 2.0GB/s Read, 1.7GB/s Write
  • Enterprise Multi smooth Cell (eMLC)
  • 400GB Nytro WarpDrive BLP4-400
  • Sequential IOPS (4K) - 218,000 Read, 75,000 Write
  • Sequential Read and Write IOPS (8K) - 183,000 Read, 118,000 Write
  • Bandwidth (256K) - 2.0GB/s Read, 1.0GB/s Write
  • 800GB Nytro WarpDrive BLP4-800
  • Sequential IOPS (4K) - 218,000 Read, 75,000 Write
  • Sequential Read and Write IOPS (8K) - 183,000 Read, 118,000 Write
  • Bandwidth (256K) - 2.0GB/s Read, 1.0GB/s Write
  • 1600GB Nytro WarpDrive BLP4-1600
  • Sequential IOPS (4K) - 218,000 Read, 75,000 Write
  • Sequential Read and Write IOPS (8K) - 183,000 Read, 118,000 Write
  • Bandwidth (256K) - 2.0GB/s Read, 1.0GB/s Write
  • Average Latency < 50 microseconds
  • Interface - x8 PCI Express 2.0
  • Power Consumption - <25 watts
  • Form Factor - Low Profile (half-length, MD2)
  • Environmentals Operational at 0 to 45C
  • OS Compatiblity
  • Microsoft: Windows XP, Vista, 2003, 7; Windows Server 2003 SP2, 2008 SP2, 2008 R2 SP1
  • Linux: CentOS 6; RHEL 5.4, 5.5, 5.6, 5.7, 6.0, 6.1; SLES: 10SP1, 10SP2, 10SP4, 11SP1; OEL 5.6, 6.0
  • UNIX: FreeBSD 7.2, 7.4, 8.1, 8.2; Solaris 10U10, 11 (x86 & SPARC)
  • Hypervisors: VMware 4.0 U2, 4.1 U1, 5.0
  • End of Life Data Retention >6 months SLC, >3 months eMLC
  • Product Health Monitoring Self-Monitoring, Analysis and Reporting Technology (SMART) commands, plus additional SSD monitoring
  • Build and Design

    The LSI Nytro WarpDrive is a Half-Height Half-Length x8 PCI-Express card comprised of four custom form-factor SSDs connected in RAID0 to a main interface board. Being a half-height card, the Nytro WarpDrive is compatibile with more servers by simply swapping the backplane adapter. Shown below is their Lenovo ThinkServer RD240, used in many of their enterprise tests, which supports full-height cards.

    Similar to the previous-generation WarpDrive, LSI uses SandForce processors at the heart of the new Nytro WarpDrive. While the previous generation model used six SATA 3.0Gb/s SF-1500 controllers, the Nytro uses four SATA 6.0Gb/s SF-2500 controllers. The Nytro houses two of these SSDs in two sandwiched heatsink "banks" which are connected to the main board with a wee ribbon cable. To interface these controllers with the host computer, LSI uses their own SAS2008 PCIe to SAS bridge, which has wide driver advocate across multiple operating systems.

    Unlike the first-generation WarpDrive, these passive heatsinks allow the NAND and SandForce controllers to shed heat into a heatsink first, which then gets passively cooled by airflow in the server chassis. This reduces hot-spots and ensures more stable hardware performance over the life of the product.

    A view from above the card shows the tightly sandwiched aluminum plates below, between, and on top of the custom SSDs that power the Nytro WarpDrive. The Nytro too supports legacy HDD indicator lights, for those who want that smooth of monitoring to live externally visible.

    The LSI Nytro WarpDrive is fully PCIe 2.0 x8 power compliant, and only consumes <25 watts of power during its operation. This allows it to operate without any external power attached and gives it more hardware compatibility over devices such as the Fusion-io "Duo" devices that require external power (or advocate for drawing power over PCIe spec) to operate at full performance.

    Each of the four SSDs powering the 200GB SLC LSI Nytro WarpDrive has one SandForce SF-2500 controller, and eight 8GB Toshiba SLC Toggle NAND pieces. This gives each SSD a total capacity of 64GB, which is then over-provisioned 22% to maintain a usable capacity of 50GB.


    To manage their Nytro WarpDrive products, LSI gives customers the CLI Nytro WarpDrive Management Utility. The management utility allows users to update the firmware, monitor the drive's health, as well as format the WarpDrive to discrepancy capacities by adjusting the smooth of over-provisioning. Multiple versions of the utility are offered depending on the OS that's required, with Windows, Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, and VMware supported.

    The Nytro WarpDrive Management Utility is as basic as they come, giving users just enough information or options to bag the job done. With most of the time spent with these cards in production, you won't find many IT guys loading this utility up on a day to day basis, although the amount of information felt lacking compared to what other vendors offer.

    From a health monitoring aspect, the LSI management utility really only works to Tell you the exact temperature and yes/no response when it comes to figuring out how far into useful life the WarpDrive is. With a percentage reading of Warranty Remaining giving some indication of health, a detailed design of total bytes written or total bytes read would live much better at letting the user know just how much the card has been used and how much life the future holds for it.

    Another feature that the utility offers that wasn't supported by the first-generation WarpDrive, is the competence to change the over-provisioning smooth of the logical cache device. In a stock configuration the their 200GB SLC Nytro WarpDrive had a usable capacity of 186.26GB, while the performance over-provisioning mode dropped that amount to 149.01GB. A third mode of max capacity over-provisioning was too listed, although it wasn't supported on their model.

    Nytro WarpDrive Formatting Modes (for 200GB SLC):

  • Performance over-provisioning - 149.01GB
  • Nominal over-provisioning - 186.26GB
  • Max capacity over provisioning - Not supported on their review model
  • Testing Background and Comparables

    When it comes to testing enterprise hardware, the environment is just as censorious as the testing processes used to evaluate it. At StorageReview they tender the very hardware and infrastructure create in many datacenters where the devices they test would ultimately live destined for. This includes enterprise servers as well as proper infrastructure gear like networking, rack space, power conditioning/monitoring, and same-class comparable hardware to properly evaluate how a device performs. zilch of their reviews are paid for or controlled by the manufacturer of the gear they are testing; with apropos comparables picked at their discretion from products they maintain in their lab.

    StorageReview Enterprise Testing Platform:

    Lenovo ThinkServer RD240

  • 2 x Intel Xeon X5650 (2.66GHz, 12MB Cache)
  • Windows Server 2008 gauge Edition R2 SP1 64-Bit and CentOS 6.2 64-Bit
  • Intel 5500+ ICH10R Chipset
  • Memory - 8GB (2 x 4GB) 1333Mhz DDR3 Registered RDIMMs
  • Review Comparables:

    640GB Fusion-io ioDrive Duo

  • Released: 1H2009
  • NAND Type: MLC
  • Controller: 2 x Proprietary
  • Device Visibility: JBOD, software RAID depending on OS
  • Fusion-io VSL Windows: 3.1.1
  • Fusion-io VSL Linux 3.1.1
  • 200GB LSI Nytro WarpDrive WLP4-200

  • Released: 1H2012
  • NAND Type: SLC
  • Controller: 4 x LSI SandForce SF-2500 through LSI SAS2008 PCIe to SAS Bridge
  • Device Visiblity: Fixed Hardware RAID0
  • LSI Windows:
  • LSI Linux: indigenous CentOS 6.2 driver
  • 300GB LSI WarpDrive SLP-300

  • Released: 1H2010
  • NAND Type: SLC
  • Controller: 6 x LSI SandForce SF-1500 through LSI SAS2008 PCIe to SAS Bridge
  • Device Visiblity: Fixed Hardware RAID0
  • LSI Windows:
  • LSI Linus: indigenous CentOS 6.2 driver
  • 1.6TB OCZ Z-Drive R4

  • Released: 2H2011
  • NAND Type: MLC
  • Controller: 8 x LSI SandForce SF-2200 through custom OCZ VCA PCIe to SAS Bridge
  • Device Visibility: Fixed Hardware RAID0
  • OCZ Windows Driver:
  • OCZ Linux Driver:
  • Enterprise Synthetic Workload Analysis (Stock Settings)

    The passage they learn at PCIe storage solutions dives deeper than just looking at traditional burst or steady-state performance. When looking at averaged performance over a long era of time, you lose sight of the details behind how the device performs over that entire period. Since glitter performance varies greatly as time goes on, their new benchmarking process analyzes the performance in areas including total throughput, just latency, peak latency, and gauge aberration over the entire preconditioning angle of each device. With high-end enterprise products, latency is often more censorious than throughput. For this intuition they glide to powerful lengths to present the full performance characteristics of each device they reserve through their Enterprise Test Lab.

    We maintain too added performance comparisons to present how each device performs under a different driver set across both Windows and Linux operating systems. For Windows, they employ the latest drivers at the time of original review, which each device is then tested under a 64-bit Windows Server 2008 R2 environment. For Linux, they employ 64-bit CentOS 6.2 environment, which each Enterprise PCIe Application Accelerator supports. Their main goal with this testing is to present how OS performance differs, since having an operating system listed as compatible on a product sheet doesn't always carry weight the performance across them is equal.

    All devices tested glide under the very testing policy from start to finish. Currently, for each individual workload, devices are secure erased using the tools supplied by the vendor, preconditioned into steady-state with the identical workload the device will live tested with under cumbersome load of 16 threads with an outstanding queue of 16 per thread, and then tested in set intervals in multiple thread/queue depth profiles to present performance under light and cumbersome usage. For tests with 100% read activity, preconditioning is with the very workload, although flipped to 100% write.

    Preconditioning and Primary Steady-State Tests:

  • Throughput (Read+Write IOPS Aggregate)
  • Average Latency (Read+Write Latency Averaged Together)
  • Max Latency (Peak Read or Write Latency)
  • Latency gauge aberration (Read+Write gauge aberration Averaged Together)
  • At this time Enterprise Synthetic Workload Analysis includes four common profiles, which can attempt to reflect real-world activity. These were picked to maintain some similarity with their past benchmarks, as well as a common ground for comparing against widely published values such as max 4K read and write speed, as well as 8K 70/30 commonly used for enterprise drives. They too included two legacy mixed workloads, including the traditional File Server and Webserver offering a wide fuse of transfer sizes. These eventual two will live phased out with application benchmarks in those categories as those are introduced on their site, and replaced with new synthetic workloads.

  • 4K
  • 100% Read or 100% Write
  • 100% 4K
  • 8K 70/30
  • File Server
  • 80% Read, 20% Write
  • 10% 512b, 5% 1k, 5% 2k, 60% 4k, 2% 8k, 4% 16k, 4% 32k, 10% 64k
  • Webserver
  • 100% Read
  • 22% 512b, 15% 1k, 8% 2k, 23% 4k, 15% 8k, 2% 16k, 6% 32k, 7% 64k, 1% 128k, 1% 512k
  • Looking at 100% 4K write activity under a cumbersome load of 16 threads and 16 queue over a 6 hour period, they create that the LSI Nytro WarpDrive offered slower but very consistent throughput compared to the other PCIe Application Accelerators. The Nytro WarpDrive started at roughly 33,000 IOPS 4K write, and leveled off at 30,000 IOPS at the quit of this preconditioning phase. This compared to the first-generation WarpDrive that peaked at 130,000-180,000 IOPS and leveled off at 35,000 IOPS.

    Average latency during the preconditioning angle quickly settled in at about 8.5ms, whereas the first-generation WarpDrive started around 2ms before tapering off to 7.2ms as it reached steady-state.

    When it comes to max latency there is almost no doubt that SLC is king in terms of spikes that are few and far between. The new Nytro WarpDrive had the lowest consistent max latency in Windows, which increased under its CentOS driver, but noiseless remained very respectable.

    Looking at the latency gauge deviation, under Windows the Nytro WarpDrive offered some of the most consistent latency. matched by only the first-generation WarpDrive. In CentOS though, the gauge aberration was more than double, at over 20ms versus 7.2ms in Windows.

    After the PCIe Application Accelerators went through their 4K write preconditioning process, they sampled their performance over a longer interval. In Windows the LSI Nytro WarpDrive measured 161,170 IOPS read and 29,946 IOPS write, whereas its Linux performance measured 97,333 IOPS read and 29,788 IOPS write. Read performance in Windows and Linux was higher than the previous-generation WarpDrive, although 4K steady-state performance dropped 5,000 IOPS.

    The LSI Nytro WarpDrive offered the second to lowest 4K read latency, coming in behind the OCZ Z-Drive R4 that uses 8 SF-2200 controllers versus the Nytro WarpDrive's four SF-2500 controllers. Write latency was the slowest in the pack measuring 8.54ms in Windows and 8.591ms in Linux (not counting the OCZ Z-Drive R4 that was not even in the very ballpark).

    Looking at the highest peak latency over the duration of their final 4K read and write testing intervals, the LSI Nytro WarpDrive offered the lowest 4K write latency in the pack with 51ms in Windows. Its Linux performance measured 486ms, as well as a high 4K read blip in Windows measuring 1,002ms, but overall it ranked well versus their other comparables.

    While peak latency will only present the solitary response time over an entire test, showing gauge aberration gives the gross picture as to how well the drive behaves over the entire test. The Nytro WarpDrive came in towards the middle of the pack, with read latency gauge aberration roughly twice that of the first-generation WarpDrive. gauge aberration in the write test was only slightly higher in Windows, but fell behind in Linux. In Windows, its write performance noiseless came in towards the top of the pack, above the Fusion ioDrive Duo and OCZ Z-Drive R4.

    The next preconditioning test works with a more realistic read/write workload spread, versus the 100% write activity in their 4K test. Here, they maintain a 70% read and 30% write fuse of 8K transfers. Looking at their 8K 70/30 mixed workload under a cumbersome load of 16 threads and 16 queue over a 6 hour era the Nytro WarpDrive quickly leveled off at 87,000 IOPS, finishing as the fastest drive in the group in Windows. The Nytro WarpDrive levled off at around 70,000 IOPS in Linux, although that was noiseless the fastest Linux performance in the group as well.

    In their 8K 70/30 16T/16Q workload, the LSI Nytro WarpDrive offered by far the most consistent just latency, staying smooth at 2.9ms throughout their Windows test, and 3.6ms in Linux.

    Similar to the deportment they measured in their 4K write preconditioning test, the SLC-based Nytro WarpDrive too offered extremely low peak latency over the duration of the 8K 70/30 preconditioning process. Its performance in Windows hovered around 25ms, while its Linux performance floated higher around 200ms.

    While peak latency over wee intervals gives you an view of how a device is performing in a test, looking at its gauge aberration shows you closely those peaks were grouped. The Nytro WarpDrive in Windows offered the lowest gauge aberration in the group, measuring almost half of the first-generation WarpDrive. In Linux the gauge aberration was much higher, by almost a factor of four, although that noiseless ranked middle/top of the pack.

    Compared to the fixed 16 thread, 16 queue max workload they performed in the 100% 4K write test, their mixed workload profiles scale the performance across a wide purview of thread/queue combinations. In these tests they span their workload intensity from 2 threads and 2 queue up to 16 threads and 16 queue. The LSI Nytro WarpDrive was able to tender substantially higher performance at lower thread count workloads with a queue depth between 4 to 16. This handicap played out largely over the entire test looking at its Windows performance, although in Linux that handicap was capped to roughly 70,000 IOPS where the R4 (in Windows) was able to beat it in some areas.

    On the other half of through throughput equation, the LSI Nytro WarpDrive consistently offered some of the lowest latency in their 8K 70/30 tests. In Windows, the Nytro WarpDrive came in at the top of the pack, while the Z-Drive R4 in Windows beat the Nytro's performance in Linux.

    In their 8K 70/30 test the SLC-based LSI Nytro WarpDrive in Windows had more 1,000ms+ peak latency spikes, whereas the Linux driver kept that suppressed until the higher 16-thread workloads. While this deportment didn't differ from the Fusion ioDrive Duo or Z-Drive R4, it had more high latency spikes than the first-generation WarpDrive in Windows, especially when under more demanding loads.

    While the occasional high spikes might learn discouraging, the full latency picture can live seen when looking at the latency gauge deviation. In their 8K 70/30 workload, the LSI Nytro WarpDrive offered the lowest gauge aberration throughout the bulk of their 8K tests,

    The File Server workload represents a larger transfer-size spectrum hitting each particular device, so instead of settling in for a static 4k or 8k workload, the drive must cope with requests ranging from 512b to 64K. In their File Server throughput test, the OCZ Z-Drive R4 had a commanding lead in both burst and as it neared steady-state. The LSI Nytro WarpDrive started off towards the bottom of the pack between 39-46,000 IOPS, but remained their over the duration of the test, while the Fusion ioDrive Duo and first-generation WarpDrive slipped below it.

    Latency in their File Server workload followed a similar path on the LSI Nytro WarpDrive as it did in the throughput section, where it started off relatively high in terms of its burst capabilities, but stayed there over the duration of the test. This uniform as a rock performance allowed it to approach in towards the top of the pack, while the others eventually slowed down over the endurance section of the preconditioning phase.

    With its SLC NAND configuration, their 200GB Nytro WarpDrive remained rather noiseless over the duration of their File Server preconditioning test, offering some of the lowest latency spikes out of the bunch. In this section the first-generation WarpDrive offered similar performance, as did the Fusion ioDrive Duo, although the later had many spikes into the 1,000ms range.

    The LSI Nytro WarpDrive easily came out on top when looking at the latency gauge aberration in the File Server preconditioning test. With a solitary spike, it was nearly flat at 2ms for the duration of this 6 hour process, and proved to live more consistent than the first-generation WarpDrive.

    Once their preconditioning process finished under a high 16T/16Q load, they looked at File Server performance across a wide purview of activity levels. Similar to the Nytro's performance in their 8K 70/30 workload, it was able to tender the highest performance at low thread and queue depth levels. This lead was taken over by the OCZ Z-Drive R4 in the File Server workload at levels above 4T/8Q, where the R4's eight controller count helped it stretch its legs further. Over the remaining portion of their throughput test, the Nytro WarpDrive came in second under the Z-Drive R4 in Windows.

    With high throughput too comes low just latency, where the LSI Nytro WarpDrive was able to very pleasant response times at lower queue depths, measuring as low as 0.366ms at 2T/2Q. It wasn't the quickest though, as the ioDrive Duo held the top spot, measuring 0.248ms in the very portion of the test. As the loads increased though, the Nytro WarpDrive came in just under the OCZ Z-Drive R4, utilizing half the controllers.

    Comparing the File Server workload max latency between the OCZ Z-Drive R4 and the LSI Nytro WarpDrive, it's facile to espy what the handicap of SLC NAND is. Over the duration of the different test loads, the SLC-based Nytro WarpDrive and first-generation WarpDrive both offered some of the lowest peak response times and fewest overall peaks.

    Our latency gauge aberration analysis reiterated that the Nytro WarpDrive was able to approach in with class-leading performance over the duration of their File Server workload. The one region where responsiveness started to slip was under at 16T/16Q workload, where the Nytro WarpDrive in Linux had more variation in its latency.

    Our eventual workload is rather unique in the passage they resolve the preconditioning angle of the test compared to the main output. As a workload designed with 100% read activity, it's difficult to present each device's righteous read performance without a proper preconditioning step. To preserve the conditioning workload the very as the testing workload, they inverted the pattern to live 100% write. For this intuition the preconditioning charts are much more stagy than the final workload numbers.

    While it didn't swirl into an illustration of dilatory and uniform wins the race, the Nytro WarpDrive had the lowest burst throughput (not counting the R4's problematic Linux driver's performance), but as the other devices slowed towards the quit of the preconditioning process, the Nytro WarpDrive came in second residence under the R4 in Windows. This reserve it ahead of both the ioDrive Duo and first-generation WarpDrive under their cumbersome 16T/16Q inverted Web Server workload.

    Average latency of the Nytro WarpDrive in their Web Server preconditioning test stayed flat at 20.9ms over the duration of the test. This compared to 31ms from the first-generation WarpDrive towards the second half of the test.

    In terms of most responsive PCIe Application Accelerator, the LSI Nytro WarpDrive came in on top with its performance in Windows during their Web Server Preconditioning test. It kept its peak response times under 120ms in Windows, and right above 500ms in Linux.

    With barely a spike in their Web Server preconditioning test, the LSI Nytro WarpDrive impressed again with its incredibly low latency gauge deviation. In Windows, it offered the most consistent performance, coming out on top of the first-generation WarpDrive. Its performance in Linux didn't fare as well, but noiseless came in towards the middle of the pack.

    Switching back to a 100% read Web Server workload after the preconditioning process, the OCZ Z-Drive R4 offered the highest performance in Windows, but only after an effectual queue depth of 32. Before that the Nytro WarpDrive was able to approach out on top with lower thread counts over a queue depth of 4. The leader in the low thread/low queue depth arena was noiseless the Fusion ioDrive Duo.

    The LSI Nytro WarpDrive was able to tender impressive low-latency in their Web Server workload, measuring as low as 0.267ms in Linux with a 2T/2Q load. Its highest just response time was 4.5ms in Linux with a 16T/16Q load. Overall it performed very well, bested by only the OCZ Z-Drive R4 in Windows under higher effectual queue depths.

    All of the PCIe Application Accelerators suffered from some high latency spikes in their Web Server test, with minimal differences between OS, controller or NAND type. Overall Linux was LSI's stout suit for both the Nytro WarpDrive and first-generation WarpDrive, having fewer latency spikes versus the performance in Windows.

    While the peak latency performance may seem problematic, what really matters is how the device performs over the entire duration of the test. This is where latency gauge aberration comes in to play, measuring how consistent the latency was overall. While the LSI Nytro WarpDrive in Windows had more frequent spikes compared to its Linux performance, it had a lower gauge aberration in Windows under higher effectual queue depths.


    The LSI Nytro WarpDrive WLP4-200 represents a solid step forward for LSI's application acceleration line. It's generally quicker in most areas than the prior generation SLP-300, thanks to the updated SandForce SF-2500 controller and improved firmware used this time around. Structurally it's simpler as well, dropping from six drives in RAID0 to four. LSI has too added a bunch of capacity and NAND options for the Nytro WarpDrive line, giving buyers a purview of options from 200GB in SLC up to 1.6TB in eMLC. Overall the offering is more complete and well-rounded, offering flexibillty which should increase the market adoption for the Nytro WarpDrive family at large. 

    A huge selling point for LSI is the compatibility of their products on a hardware and OS level. They renowned stout performance from the Nytro WarpDrive in both their Windows and Linux tests. The Windows driverset was definitely more polished, offering much higher performance in some areas. While the ioDrive Duo too showed very pleasant multi-OS support, the very can not live said about OCZ's Z-Drive R4, which had a gigantic gap in performance between their Windows and Linux drivers.

    When it comes to management, LSI offers software tools to check the health and ply basic commands for most major operating systems. Their CLI WarpDrive Management Utility is basic, but noiseless gets the job done when it comes to formatting or over-provisioning the drive. The software suite is certainly a bit spartan, but even these tools are appreciated as some in the PCIe storage space don't tender much of anything when it comes to drive management. 

    The most surprising aspect of the LSI Nytro WarpDrive is its deportment in their enterprise workloads. Compared to other PCIe Application Accelerators we've tested, its burst performance wasn't the most impressive, but the fact that it remained rock solid over the duration of their tests was. What it lacked in precipitate off the line, it more than made up for in consistent latency with incredibly low gauge aberration under load. For enterprise applications that demand a narrow window of acceptable response times under load, low max latency and gauge aberration seperate the men from the boys. It's too censorious to recall that SandForce-based drives maintain compression benefits that aren't highlighted in this nature of workload testing. For this intuition and to present an even more complete profile of enterprise drive performance, StorageReview is currently edifice out a robust set of application-level benchmarks that may present further differences between enterprise storage products. 


  • Increased performance while reducing controller count
  • Industry leading host system compatibility
  • More NAND and capacity options than previous-generation WarpDrive
  • Incredibly consistent latency under stress
  • Cons

  • Limited software tools for drive management
  • Weaker burst performance (excellent steady-state performance)
  • Bottom Line

    The LSI Nytro WarpDrive WLP4-200 is a solid PCIe application accelerator and will win over enterprise customers for its excellent uniform situation performance, consistent performance over a variety of uses, and class-leading compatibility with host systems. LSI did a pleasant job with the Nytro WarpDrive from hardware design to smooth operation, with their main complaints being around drive management tools. While it doesn't burst out of the gate as swiftly as others, that's usually not terribly censorious to the enterprise and there's something to live said for a drive that works well out of the box, and continues to operate well, in just about any operating system. 

    LSI Application Acceleration Products

    Discuss This Review

    Tricida Inc (TCDA) Q4 2018 Earnings Conference convoke Transcript | killexams.com real questions and Pass4sure dumps

    Tricida Inc  (NASDAQ:TCDA)Q4 2018 Earnings Conference CallMarch 28, 2019, 8:00 a.m. ET

  • Prepared Remarks
  • Questions and Answers
  • Call Participants
  • Prepared Remarks: Logo of jester cap with thought bubble.

    Image source: The Motley Fool.


    Good day, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to the Tricida TRCA-301E Clinical ordeal Results and financial Results Conference call. At this time, everyone participants are in a listen-only mode. Later, they will conduct a question-and-answer session and instructions will live given at that time. (Operator Instructions) As a reminder, this conference convoke maybe recorded.

    I would now like to insert your host for today's conference, Ms. Jackie Cossmon. Ma'am, you may begin.

    Jackie Cossmon -- Vice President of Investor Relations and Communications

    Thank you. pleasant morning, and thank you for joining the Tricida Conference Call. In today's call, Gerrit Klaerner, their CEO, President and Founder will debate the TRCA-301E Clinical ordeal Results that they announced this morning as well as their traffic progress. Geoff Parker, their CFO, will then debate their upside debt facility with Hercules, their financial results for the quarter and full year 2018 and provide an overview of their financial outlook.

    Please note that in today's call, they will live making various statements that involve forward-looking statements as defined under applicable securities laws. Forward-looking statements involve statements regarding their future progress plans, recruitment milestones, planned NDA submission, financial guidance and other statements that are not historical facts.

    Management's assumptions, expectations, and opinions reflected in these forward-looking statements are matter to risks and uncertainties that may intuition actual results to differ materially from any future results, performance or achievements discussed in or applied by such forward-looking statements.

    Tricida can give no assurance that these statements will prove to live correct, and they accomplish not intend and undertake no duty to update these statements. They too exhort you to read the risks and uncertainties associated with their traffic that are described in their filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. For a copy of their press releases that were issued prior to this call, please glide to tricida.com and supervene the link to their Investor Relations page.

    At this time, I would like to swirl the convoke over to Gerrit.

    Gerrit Klaerner -- Chief Executive Officer, President and Founder

    Thank you, Jackie, and thank you everyone for joining us today. They previously reported that the expected results of their 301E extension ordeal in the first half of 2019. I am pleased to report that they now maintain the results of the ordeal and that it met its primary and everyone secondary endpoints.

    Earlier today, they issued a press release that provides greater detail concerning the design of and the data generated in the trial. Before I walk you through the results, I want to highlight the fact that they saw a surprising upside, beyond the expected pleasant safety profile, and long-term durability of effect of TRC101 on the surrogate blood bicarbonate endpoint.

    Following 52 weeks of treatment, they maintain observed evidence of clinical profit in TRC101 treated subjects, including reduced all-cause mortality, slowing of CKD progression and improved physical function. These observations are in line with the underlying pathophysiology of metabolic acidosis and its repercussion on bone, muscle and kidney health.

    The 301E ordeal was a blinded 40-week extension of the 12-week 301 trial, which randomized 217 patients with non-dialysis dependent CKD and metabolic acidosis. 196 subjects containing of -- consisting of 114 subjects in the TRC101 group and 82 subjects in the placebo group elected and were qualified to continue in the extension track.

    Let me start with the fact that they observed the immaculate safety profile for TRC101. The primary endpoint of the 301E ordeal was the assessment of the long-term safety profile of TRC101 versus placebo. They observed fewer discontinuations, fewer sedate adverse events and a comparable rate of GI adverse events on TRC101 versus placebo.

    Specifically, 2.6% of TRC101 versus 9.8% of placebo treated subjects discontinued prematurely. The incidence of sedate adverse events was 1.8% in the dynamic group versus 4.9% in the placebo group, and no sedate adverse events were assessed to live related study drug.

    Gastrointestinal adverse events occurred in 21.4% of patients in the TRC101 group and in 25.9% of patients on placebo group. They observed a sustained increase in blood bicarbonate in TRC101 treated patients. Two of the four secondary endpoints assessed the durability of effect of TRC101 by comparing the changes in blood bicarbonate between dynamic and placebo treated subjects who completed the 52-week treatment period.

    63% of the dynamic subjects exhibited an increase in blood bicarbonate smooth of at least four milliequivalents per liter or achieved a blood bicarbonate smooth in the orthodox purview compared with 38% of placebo subjects. This represented a P value of 0.0015. The carry weight change in blood bicarbonate from baseline to quit of treatment in the TRC101 group was 4.7 mEq/L compared with 2.7 mEq/L in the placebo group, representing a P value of 0.0002.

    The final two secondary endpoints evaluated how treatment with TRC101 might affect how patients feel and function. If you recall the basic physiology behind metabolic acidosis, a buildup of acid can contribute to reduce muscle mass and impaired physical function. Physical duty were assessed indirectly through the self-reported responses to the KDQOL Physical Functioning Survey and measured directly through a repeated chair stand test.

    Let me return, the placebo-adjusted improvement in favor of TRC101-treated subjects in the two measures of physical duty at Week 52 were both highly statistically significant for the P value of less than 0.0001 and approximately doubled compared to the observed results at Week 12.

    We believe the results from the KDQOL Physical Functioning Survey and the repeated chair stand test both provide evidence of improvement in physical duty and these placebo-adjusted effects exceed the minimally clinically censorious different thresholds reported in the scientific literature.

    As you can Tell I can't wait to bag to this next allotment that really deals, but one of the most unexpected and exciting results of this trial. They included a prespecified comparison of the TRC101 and placebo groups for the time to the composite clinical endpoint of all-cause mortality, dialysis or a greater equal 50% decline in eGFR.

    We refer to this as a DD50 event over the combined 52-week treatment period, the annualized DD50 incidence rate was 4.2% in the TRC101 group versus 12% in the placebo group. This represents a statistically significant P value of 0.0224. There were no deaths in the TRC101 group and four placebo patients died.

    Each group had one matter initiated dialysis. Although the 301, 301E clinical trials were not designed or powered to assess all-cause mortality or the progression of CKD outcomes, they nevertheless observed a 65% reduction in the annualized DD50 event rate for TRC101-treated subjects versus the placebo group.

    So, let me sum up where they are based on their topline analysis of the extension trial. The combined 52-week results far exceeded their expectations. They did not anticipate that they would observe any evidence of clinical profit beyond the increase in blood bicarbonate in patients treated with TRC101 until the read out of their VALOR-CKD postmarketing ordeal somewhere in the '22 to '23 timeframe.

    We remain committed to submitting their NDA under the accelerated approval program in the second half of 2019 and learn forward to the results of their VALOR-CKD confirmatory postmarketing trial. While they accomplish not anticipate any change to the size or design of the VALOR-CKD trial. They feel pleasant about what we've learned in the 301E study regarding safety and efficacy, increasing their self-confidence for successful VALOR-CKD trial.

    Just as a reminder, the ongoing VALOR-CKD ordeal is a time-to-event study. Subjects will live followed until they maintain approved the target number of primary endpoint events, which they appraise will live approximately four years following full enrollment.

    Our sample size of 1,600 subjects is based on the assumption of a 30% to 35% reduction in renal event. Furthermore, the protocol specifies an interim analysis, when at least half the planned number of primary endpoint event maintain been approved, which they appraise will live approximately two to three years after full enrollment.

    At such time, the ordeal maybe stopped early for efficacy, the sample size maybe increased or the ordeal may continue without changes. They maintain now successfully completed everyone the clinical trials that they design to complete prior to submission of their NDA through the FDA's accelerated approval program. They are on track for this submission in the second half of 2019.

    Next, I would like to highlight the publication of their angle 3 TRC101 clinical ordeal results in The Lancet, a leading independent generic medical journal. This is an censorious milestone for Tricida and shows that interest in metabolic acidosis extends beyond the nephrology community. I would like to thank their Tricida authors and their key sentiment leaders Drs. Wesson, Bushinsky, Tangri and Mathur.

    Now, I would like to provide an update on their DDI studies. Their drug-drug interaction studies were guided by the underlying mechanism of action of TRC101, their in vitro studies and FDA interactions, and they determined it was preempt to evaluate aspirin, dabigatran, furosemide and warfarin in angle 1 clinical trials for potential DDI effects.

    Based on the results of their DDI studies, they accomplish not believe they requisite to recommend dosing separation for any drugs co-administered with TRC101.

    Before I swirl the convoke over to Geoff, let me say, how pleased I am to welcome Susannah Cantrell to Tricida as their Chief Commercial Officer. Susannah comes to us with over 20 years of commercial industry undergo across sales, operations, marketing and global commercial strategy, including executive and senior smooth roles at Gilead, Genentech/Roche and GSK.

    Susannah has launched multiple successful therapeutic products at Gilead and Genentech and she brings the breadth and depth of strategic and operational undergo to Tricida and has already hit the ground running. Their pre-launch activities on the passage including operational logistics, managed market activities, physician surveys, patient journey analysis, refined healthcare economic analysis and much more. They are truly delighted to maintain Susannah joined the team. And now I'll request Geoff to debate the new Hercules amendment, which they were too pleased to promulgate this morning as well as to provide you with a financial update and their cash guidance for 2019.

    Geoffrey Parker -- Chief financial Officer and Senior Vice President

    Thank you, Gerrit. Before I swirl to the financial results, I would like to reecho Gerrit's excitement regarding the positive 301E results. They recognized that these compelling results could maintain warranted an independent call, but they wanted to update you at the earliest workable time, which happened to coincide with their financial results call.

    Let me now swirl to their financial highlights. I am pleased to report that they maintain completed an amendment to their Hercules debt facility. This amendment increases the total amount available under their current debt facility to upto $200 million and significantly extends the maturity of the facility.

    The key strategic handicap to this new facility is that it extends their financial runway such that they are now able to fund their operations into 2021, which would cover the initial commercial launch era of TRC101. Under the terms of this amendment, the $40 million currently drawn under the existing debt facility with Hercules remains outstanding.

    Additional tranches of $20 million and $15 million are available for draw-down prior to December 15, 2019 and December 15, 2020 respectively. An additional tranche of $75 million will live available for draw-down prior to December 15, 2020 matter to FDA approval of TRC101. A final tranche of $50 million will live available for draw-down prior to December 15, 2021 matter to approval by Hercules.

    The final maturity date of the amended debt facility is initially four years from closing and can live extended to five years matter to the FDA approval of TRC101 and the -- when the final tranche is drawn. Let me now swirl to their financial results for 2018 that they reported today.

    Research and progress expense was $22.7 million and $17.8 million for the three months ended December 31, 2018 and 2017 respectively and $85.6 million and $35.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017 respectively.

    The increases in research and progress expense in the three month and full year era of 2018 compared to the prior year were primarily due to increased activities in connection with their TRC101 clinical progress program, including increased drug substance manufacturing as well as increased personnel and related costs.

    General and administrative expense was $6.1 million and $2.9 million for the three months ended December 31, 2018 and 2017 respectively, and $18 million and $11.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017 respectively.

    The increases in generic and administrative expense in the three months and full year periods of 2018 compared to the prior year were primarily due to increased administrative costs supporting the increased activities in connection with their TRC101 clinical progress program, including increased personnel and related costs and other G&A expenses.

    Net loss was $27.8 million and $20.6 million for the three months ended December 31, 2018 and 2017 respectively, and $102.8 million and $41.3 million for the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017 respectively. As of the quit of 2018, cash, cash equivalents and investments were $243.4 million.

    Let me now swirl to their financial outlook. With regards to financial guidance for 2019, they appraise that cash expense will live between $135 million and $145 million. As I previously stated, they await that their cash and investments as of the quit of 2018 together with their borrowing capacity under their amended Hercules debt facility will enable us to fund their anticipated operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements into 2021, which would cover the initial commercial launch era for TRC101.

    Operator, they are now ready to open the convoke to questions.

    Questions and Answers:


    Thank you. (Operator Instructions) And their first question comes from Jessica Fye from JPMorgan. Your line is open.

    Jessica Fye -- JPMorgan -- Analyst

    Hi, there. pleasant morning. Thanks for taking my questions. I wanted to request about the placebo arm and the ordeal in the extension phase. It looks like they sort of did a limited bit better than in the original portion of the study. Can you talk about why that might live the sort of effectual at being a completers group of placebo patients?

    Gerrit Klaerner -- Chief Executive Officer, President and Founder

    Thanks, Jessica. Yeah, it's exactly. You only learn at the ones that actually complete 52-weeks. And, of course, they did not accomplish really well because four of them died and many more actually progressed in terms of dialysis. But the serum bicarb result is basically impacted because they only learn at the ones that complete 52-weeks and when one group hardly anybody drops out and a lot accomplish drop out in the other that's where the imbalance comes from.

    Jessica Fye -- JPMorgan -- Analyst

    Okay, great. And can you too assist us deem about the fuse of components of the endpoint in the outcomes trial. You know here they had some deaths, some dialysis and dialysis initiation et cetera. Can you talk about how you await that kindhearted of fuse of endpoints to play out longer term?

    Gerrit Klaerner -- Chief Executive Officer, President and Founder

    Yes, I think, they -- obviously, as you know, they did, you know, a multicenter blinded extension ordeal with the placebo group where they wanted to verify their surrogate effect in terms of efficacy and safety.

    So, the events that they looked at were pretty arduous clinical outcomes. All-cause mortality, dialysis and losing 50% of the kidney functions. And that's really sort of, you know, from the safety considerations and then they saw the surprising discrepancy in just one year.

    In their VALOR-CKD trial, they obviously maintain a traditional time-to-event analysis, where they are looking at not all-cause mortality, but renal death, dialysis and a 40% eGFR reduction that occurs more frequently than 50% really.

    So, really what they are reporting here out of their safety observations in the prespecified analysis, those are quite frankly even harder endpoint than VALOR-CKD, but they do us feel pretty pleasant that, I think, you know, metabolic acidosis causes death and renal progression.

    Jessica Fye -- JPMorgan -- Analyst

    Okay, got it. And did you resolve this data based on the 40% alone?

    Gerrit Klaerner -- Chief Executive Officer, President and Founder


    Jessica Fye -- JPMorgan -- Analyst

    Okay. And just one eventual one, the causes of the deaths here. accomplish they loom to live kidney disease related?

    Gerrit Klaerner -- Chief Executive Officer, President and Founder

    Yes, one was actually renal death and that defined as, you know, a patient who basically refuses dialysis. And another one had significant eGFR reduction, before the patient died. But under the VALOR-CKD definition, one of the four was renal death.

    Jessica Fye -- JPMorgan -- Analyst

    Okay. Got it. Thank you.


    Thank you. (Operator Instructions) And their next question comes from Laura Christianson from Cowen. Your line is open.

    Laura Christianson -- Cowen and Company -- Analyst

    Hi, guys. Thanks for taking my question and congrats on the data. I just want to hone in a limited bit on what you mentioned briefly about the drug-drug interaction studies. You mentioned no requisite for dose separation for any drugs co-administered. Is that what you will maintain in the protocol for VALOR-CKD as well and how accomplish you await that to influence the tolerability of the drug if at all?

    Gerrit Klaerner -- Chief Executive Officer, President and Founder

    Yes, the VALOR-CKD study started before they had completed everyone of their DDI studies. So, that's a different cup of tea, but I deem from an NDA submission perspective that's a conclusion that they will just basically submit in their NDA.

    Laura Christianson -- Cowen and Company -- Analyst

    Got it. Okay. And when I know you've already kindhearted of rehashed the estimated pricing based on conversations with payors. accomplish you anticipate that changing at everyone with the results that you've released today with the composite endpoint?

    Gerrit Klaerner -- Chief Executive Officer, President and Founder

    Yes, I think, you know, there is a huge discrepancy between time, people to extrapolate their results to outcomes and having outcome results. It's as simple as that.

    And they deem that the data that they maintain in the wee study is really a paradigm shift in terms of the understanding of metabolic acidosis and potential treatment with TRC101. So, they are obviously, you know, they are very data driven and we'll maintain discussions with payors.

    But, as you know, there are not many cardio renal trials that maintain shown multiple positive outcomes ranging from reduced all-cause mortality to reduced progression of kidney disease and the patients feel and duty better. So, yeah, they deem that, that's going to glide the needle.

    Laura Christianson -- Cowen and Company -- Analyst

    Great. That's helpful. Thanks.


    Thank you. And I am showing no further questions from their phone line. And I would like to swirl the conference back over to Gerrit Klaerner for any closing remarks.

    Gerrit Klaerner -- Chief Executive Officer, President and Founder

    Thank you, operator, and thank you everyone for joining us today. They are very pleased to live able to participate real time the 301E data with you on today's call. We'll live reviewing this further with their key experts. They too design to submit these results for publication in a major medical journals. They maintain significant work ahead of us to submit their NDA, expand their disease awareness thrust and initiate their commercialization plan. Given these results, they are more keen than ever to maintain physicians, patients and payors understand the value of treating metabolic acidosis. They learn forward to updating you on their progress and as always if you maintain questions, please don't vacillate to convoke Jackie. Thank you and goodbye.


    Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for participating in today's conference. This does conclude the program. You may everyone disconnect. Everyone maintain a wonderful day.

    Duration: 24 minutes

    Call participants:

    Jackie Cossmon -- Vice President of Investor Relations and Communications

    Gerrit Klaerner -- Chief Executive Officer, President and Founder

    Geoffrey Parker -- Chief financial Officer and Senior Vice President

    Jessica Fye -- JPMorgan -- Analyst

    Laura Christianson -- Cowen and Company -- Analyst

    More TCDA analysis

    Transcript powered by AlphaStreet

    This article is a transcript of this conference convoke produced for The Motley Fool. While they strive for their absurd Best, there may live errors, omissions, or inaccuracies in this transcript. As with everyone their articles, The Motley Fool does not assume any responsibility for your employ of this content, and they strongly cheer you to accomplish your own research, including listening to the convoke yourself and reading the company's SEC filings. please espy their Terms and Conditions for additional details, including their Obligatory Capitalized Disclaimers of Liability.

    Direct Download of over 5500 Certification Exams

    3COM [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AccessData [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ACFE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ACI [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Acme-Packet [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ACSM [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ACT [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Admission-Tests [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ADOBE [93 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AFP [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AICPA [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AIIM [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Alcatel-Lucent [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Alfresco [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Altiris [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Amazon [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    American-College [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Android [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    APA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    APC [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    APICS [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Apple [69 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AppSense [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    APTUSC [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Arizona-Education [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ARM [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Aruba [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ASIS [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ASQ [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ASTQB [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Autodesk [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Avaya [101 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AXELOS [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Axis [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Banking [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    BEA [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
    BICSI [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    BlackBerry [17 Certification Exam(s) ]
    BlueCoat [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Brocade [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Business-Objects [11 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Business-Tests [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CA-Technologies [21 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Certification-Board [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Certiport [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CheckPoint [43 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CIDQ [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CIPS [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Cisco [318 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Citrix [48 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CIW [18 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Cloudera [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Cognos [19 Certification Exam(s) ]
    College-Board [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CompTIA [76 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ComputerAssociates [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Consultant [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Counselor [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CPP-Institue [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CPP-Institute [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CSP [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CWNA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CWNP [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CyberArk [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Dassault [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    DELL [11 Certification Exam(s) ]
    DMI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    DRI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ECCouncil [21 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ECDL [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    EMC [129 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Enterasys [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Ericsson [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ESPA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Esri [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ExamExpress [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Exin [40 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ExtremeNetworks [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    F5-Networks [20 Certification Exam(s) ]
    FCTC [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Filemaker [9 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Financial [36 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Food [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Fortinet [14 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Foundry [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    FSMTB [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Fujitsu [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    GAQM [9 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Genesys [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    GIAC [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Google [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    GuidanceSoftware [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    H3C [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    HDI [9 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Healthcare [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    HIPAA [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Hitachi [30 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Hortonworks [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Hospitality [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    HP [752 Certification Exam(s) ]
    HR [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    HRCI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Huawei [21 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Hyperion [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IAAP [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IAHCSMM [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IBM [1533 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IBQH [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ICAI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ICDL [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IEEE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IELTS [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IFPUG [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IIA [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IIBA [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IISFA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Intel [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IQN [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IRS [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ISA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ISACA [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ISC2 [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ISEB [24 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Isilon [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ISM [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    iSQI [7 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ITEC [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Juniper [65 Certification Exam(s) ]
    LEED [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Legato [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Liferay [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Logical-Operations [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Lotus [66 Certification Exam(s) ]
    LPI [24 Certification Exam(s) ]
    LSI [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Magento [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Maintenance [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    McAfee [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    McData [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Medical [69 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Microsoft [375 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Mile2 [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Military [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Misc [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Motorola [7 Certification Exam(s) ]
    mySQL [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NBSTSA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NCEES [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NCIDQ [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NCLEX [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Network-General [12 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NetworkAppliance [39 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NIELIT [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Nokia [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Nortel [130 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Novell [37 Certification Exam(s) ]
    OMG [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Oracle [282 Certification Exam(s) ]
    P&C [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Palo-Alto [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PARCC [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PayPal [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Pegasystems [12 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PEOPLECERT [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PMI [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Polycom [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PostgreSQL-CE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Prince2 [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PRMIA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PsychCorp [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PTCB [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    QAI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    QlikView [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Quality-Assurance [7 Certification Exam(s) ]
    RACC [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Real-Estate [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    RedHat [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    RES [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Riverbed [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    RSA [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Sair [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Salesforce [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SANS [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SAP [98 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SASInstitute [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SAT [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SCO [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SCP [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SDI [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    See-Beyond [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Siemens [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Snia [7 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SOA [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Social-Work-Board [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SpringSource [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SUN [63 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SUSE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Sybase [17 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Symantec [135 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Teacher-Certification [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    The-Open-Group [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    TIA [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Tibco [18 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Trainers [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Trend [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    TruSecure [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    USMLE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    VCE [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Veeam [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Veritas [33 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Vmware [58 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Wonderlic [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Worldatwork [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    XML-Master [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Zend [6 Certification Exam(s) ]

    References :

    Dropmark : http://killexams.dropmark.com/367904/11885638
    Wordpress : http://wp.me/p7SJ6L-1XJ
    Dropmark-Text : http://killexams.dropmark.com/367904/12850958
    Blogspot : http://killexamsbraindump.blogspot.com/2017/12/ibm-000-103-dumps-and-practice-tests.html
    RSS Feed : http://feeds.feedburner.com/Ibm000-103DumpsAndPracticeTestsWithRealQuestions
    Box.net : https://app.box.com/s/4yz96xebvlkgt89zxowmdkcs64ps7igq

    Killexams exams | Killexams certification | Pass4Sure questions and answers | Pass4sure | pass-guaratee | best test preparation | best training guides | examcollection | killexams | killexams review | killexams legit | kill example | kill example journalism | kill exams reviews | kill exam ripoff report | review | review quizlet | review login | review archives | review sheet | legitimate | legit | legitimacy | legitimation | legit check | legitimate program | legitimize | legitimate business | legitimate definition | legit site | legit online banking | legit website | legitimacy definition | pass 4 sure | pass for sure | p4s | pass4sure certification | pass4sure exam | IT certification | IT Exam | certification material provider | pass4sure login | pass4sure exams | pass4sure reviews | pass4sure aws | pass4sure security | pass4sure cisco | pass4sure coupon | pass4sure dumps | pass4sure cissp | pass4sure braindumps | pass4sure test | pass4sure torrent | pass4sure download | pass4surekey | pass4sure cap | pass4sure free | examsoft | examsoft login | exams | exams free | examsolutions | exams4pilots | examsoft download | exams questions | examslocal | exams practice |


    Gli Eventi