Free dumps of E20-562 test questions available at

Simply memorize our E20-562 Questions and Real Exam Questions and guarantee your success in the real E20-562 exam. You will breeze through your E20-562 test at good grades or your cash back. We have arranged a data set of E20-562 PDF Download from real test to prepare you with genuine E20-562 questions and Exam Cram to breeze through E20-562 test at the primary endeavor. Simply download our VCE test system and get ready. You will breeze through the E20-562 test.

Exam Code: E20-562 Practice exam 2022 by team
E20-562 VPLEX Specialist exam for Storage Administrators

Exam Title : Dell EMC Certified Specialist - Systems Administrator - VPLEX (DECS-SA)
Exam ID : E20-562
Exam Duration : 90 mins
Questions in exam : 60
Passing Score : 63%
Official Training : VPLEX Management (MR-1CN-VPLEXMGMT)
Exam Center : Pearson VUE
Real Questions : Dell EMC VPLEX Specialist Real Questions
VCE practice exam : Dell EMC E20-562 Certification VCE Practice Test

VPLEX Concepts 25%
- VPLEX terminology and configurations
- VPLEX product hardware and software architecture
- VPLEX application of VS2 and VS6 technology and upgrading from VS2 to VS6
- VPLEX I/O Operations

VPLEX Storage Provisioning 35%
- Virtual Volume Provisioning
- Integrating VPLEX into an existing environment and encapsulating storage
- Creating VPLEX Distributed Devices
- Device and extent management on VPLEX devices

Volume Management and Protection 25%
- Expanding VPLEX devices
- Performing data migration using VPLEX
- Protecting VPLEX with RecoverPoint

VPLEX Monitoring 15%
- VPLEX events and system reports to an ESRS Gateway
- SNMP data collection
- Setup performance monitors in VPLEX
- Analyze monitoring data in VPLEX

VPLEX Specialist exam for Storage Administrators
EMC Administrators plan
Killexams : EMC Administrators plan - BingNews Search results Killexams : EMC Administrators plan - BingNews Killexams : Jackson EMC accepting bright ideas grant applications

Tue, 02 Aug 2022 03:13:00 -0500 en text/html Killexams : A monumental shame

Model of Gehry's plans for the Eisenhower Memorial.

It’s been pretty much downhill from there. In the intervening fifteen years, Stevens and Inouye’s noble idea has become a classic Washington boondoggle, an object lesson on how not to build a memorial in that city.

The enabling legislation for the Eisenhower Memorial mandated a bipartisan commission composed of four senators, four representatives, and four citizens to be appointed by the president of the United States. I have served as an appointee for just over a year.

The legislation does not limit the members’ terms, so, in theory, they serve until the memorial is finished or they resign. This is unfortunate, because, in this commission at least, new members would bring a much-needed infusion of fresh perspectives and thinking. Except for David Eisenhower, Ike’s grandson who in 2011 resigned over the memorial’s design (I’m his replacement), and Representative Mike Simpson of Idaho, the commissioners have zealously followed, with zero dissent, Rocco Siciliano, the man who serves as permanent chairman, and his loyal staff.

A Rodeo Drive resident who was a junior member in the Eisenhower administration, Siciliano claims he can channel Ike. In a letter written shortly before his death, Senator Inouye expressed concern that the Eisenhower Memorial Commission (EMC) was ignoring the Eisenhower family’s doubts about the design. Siciliano was having none of it: “I am one person,” he wrote, “who feels competent to say that he believes President Eisenhower would be most pleased as to what the present Commissioners have unanimously accepted.” Shades of Shirley MacLaine!

The EMC has a staff of nine full-time employees, several making six-figure salaries, ensconced in a K Street office suite. There’s also a senior advisor, a senior writer, and a crowd of consultants, including those for international affairs and communications, plus an assortment of advisory committees. Until its budget recently was cut in half by Congress, the staff was burning through $2 million of operating expenses a year.

In 2010, more than a decade after its establishment, the EMC unanimously approved and acclaimed a $140 million design by Frank Gehry, the winner of a competition supervised by the General Services Administration’s Design Excellence Program. The Program called for a twenty-first century design, signaling that many architects working in a traditional vernacular need not apply.

Because the GSA first solicited portfolios from architects for the memorial, the largest and most famous firms emerged at the top of the pile. The process disadvantaged small practices with talent but without high profiles. Of the forty-four proposals, only four made it to the short list.

And, of course, the most glittering of all was Frank Gehry’s, perhaps the world’s most famous architect.

Only after the shortlisted firms were chosen were they asked to submit a “design vision,” the most important element of the memorial. Hiring an architect before seeing his or her plan was rather like buying a pig in a poke. In fact, the design jury, composed of independent experts, said that all the designs were “mediocre” and that “none of the visions expressed the whole essence of Eisenhower.” The evaluation board, which included Siciliano and the EMC staff architect, ignored the jury’s sensible recommendation for another round of applications, and Gehry was awarded the commission in 2009. Critics have claimed that Siciliano stacked the deck for the architect. He has a long history and friendship with Gehry, dating back to the early 1980s when Siciliano was on the board of the Los Angeles Museum of Contemporary Art at the time it awarded Gehry one of his first important commissions.

None of the EMC commissioners were chosen for their expertise on memorials, architecture, or aesthetics; they are either politicians or campaign donors. Even so, when they approved Gehry’s postmodern design, they must have realized that it was totally out of sync with the architecture of the National Mall. As Gehry has said, “There are sort of rules about architectural expression which have to fit into a certain channel. Screw that.” Eloquent indeed.

What they unanimously approved was truly dumbfounding: a four-acre site (the Washington Monument and the Jefferson and Lincoln Memorials could occupy the space with room to spare) to be populated with ten pillars, each eight-stories high (Gehry slyly calls them “columns” to link them to the Mall’s classically inspired architecture). Between six of the pillars was to hang a gigantic stainless steel mesh “tapestry” (Gehry wrongly claims that tapestries are a traditional part of memorials) depicting a landscape of leafless trees allegedly portraying Kansas. Four other columns supporting smaller “tapestries” were to be placed at right angles to the major “tapestry,” thus forming a semi-enclosed space. Gehry called this an urban temple or a plaza, and this concept was the very heart of his plan and sales pitch. The pillars and columns were to dwarf a small figure of Ike as a teenager and two truly pedestrian, waxwork–like bas-reliefs that depict scenes from his military and presidential careers. These are the elements of the plan’s feeble core.

There are many other flaws in Gehry’s design, but the most glaring is its failure to fulfill even the most basic function of a memorial. A memorial should be immediately understandable; it should elevate its subject, not diminish it; it should inspire awe and reverence, not create bewilderment; it should embody the character of its subject. Gehry’s self-important plan does just the opposite.

Ike, the son of a hard-working Kansas family of modest means, was a humble, self-effacing soldier and president imbued with a sense of duty, honor, and patriotism. None of this is reflected in Gehry’s pompous harum-scarum design that is really about glorifying one of history’s most gargantuan architectural egos and not about memorializing Ike.

What, it is fair to ask, will rising generations of Americans, who will have no memory of Ike, glean from Gehry’s plan? Will they be stirred and inspired by Ike’s deeds as soldier and president or impressed by his humble character? Will they come away feeling that here was greatness, as they do when they leave the Jefferson or Lincoln Memorials? Unlikely. It’s not surprising, therefore, that the EMC is spending over $2 million for a digital e-memorial, whatever that means, to explain Gehry’s design to visitors because that is something it can’t do for itself. Does it make sense for tourists to come to the site only to have their eyes immediately directed back to a digital device?

The failure to raise money for Gehry’s plan for the Corcoran presaged what has happened with the Eisenhower Memorial. The design can’t command public support. Over $1 million have been spent on a private fundraising consultant, but fewer than $500,000 have been raised; fundraising efforts have netted a loss of approximately $700,000.

A good part of this is because an avalanche of negative criticism in publications as diverse as The New Yorker (which said that the Eisenhower Memorial was a bipartisan issue: everyone hates it) and National Review, as well as reasoned opposition from many quarters, including the Eisenhower family, has made donors wary of contributing.

Because of the lack of private funds, the taxpayers have been footing the bill. A accurate congressional report (see below), finds that, to date, the EMC has spent around $44 million of the nearly $65 million initially appropriated by Congress. Gehry’s firm has already collected over $16 million dollars and $13 million more have gone for administrative support and for managing the design process. Astonishingly, the EMC paid the Gehry team for 95 percent of the construction documents, even before the plan received the first federal approval, a process that usually involves many design changes over a considerable period of time.

Congressional criticism of the EMC has recently risen to a new level. In July 2014, the House Committee on Appropriations called for an “open, public, and transparent redesign process” and mandated the EMC “cease all expenditures relating to the current memorial design” until that process was in place. And a bill (H.R.5203), co-sponsored by Chairman Ken Calvert of the House Subcommittee on Appropriations for Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies, and Congressman Rob Bishop of the House Committee on Natural Resources, seeks to defund the Commission and its staff.

Recently, Bishop’s Committee on Natural Resources issued a well-documented report entitled “A Five-Star Folly” that eviscerates the EMC’s operations and practices. It says that “[the committee] has identified significant questions that undermine the viability of the current design and the Memorial Commission’s ability to see a memorial to completion.”

Moreover, a waiver from the Federal Commemorative Works Act, which would have allowed construction to begin before all the money for the memorial was secured, has been removed. Because of the poor record of private support, this means millions more of federal dollars will have to be in place before the first shovel of earth can be turned—a daunting prospect. In 2014, the EMC asked Congress for $51 million and received just $1 million for operating expenses to keep the lights on. Heedless of this heavy flak and completely tone deaf to mounting criticism, the EMC, driven by its staff and chairman, steadily plods on.

In April 2014, a full decade-and-a-half after it was established, the EMC finally presented the Gehry design for approval to the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC), which is supposed to ensure that proposed structures in the District conform to established guidelines. Much to the EMC’s dismay, the Gehry plan was turned down for a number of reasons, but principally because some of the pillars supporting the “tapestries” blocked the view toward the Capitol.

There are two issues at play here: the NCPC’s spinelessness and Gehry’s frantic zeal to get his Eisenhower Memorial built in the nation’s capital. So desperate was Gehry that he sacrificed his elaborate plan for a temple or plaza, the design’s raison d’être, simply to meet the narrow technical guidelines of the NCPC. So much for artistic integrity.

Moreover, by approving the Gehry design merely because it allegedly satisfied its technical guidelines, the NCPC ignored the larger issue: the clash of Gehry’s Eisenhower Memorial plan with the National Mall. This bad precedent will encourage further actions of this sort where expedience trumps good architecture and good sense.

Energized, the EMC sped on to the U.S. Commission of Fine Arts (CFA), an agency charged with reviewing the design and aesthetic merits of projects to be built in Washington. The Gehry design had already received preliminary approval from the CFA, but not without harsh criticism from some of the commissioners, one even claiming that Gehry’s plan would fail as “a traditional first-semester architecture exercise.” Distressingly, Earl A. Powell III, the long-time director of the National Gallery and Chairman of the CFA, was Gehry’s cheerleader. With Powell’s continuing support, the revised Gehry design sailed though the CFA at its October meeting.

Now the EMC is doing a premature victory dance as they rush to get final approvals from the NCPC and CFA. They’ve even declared in a accurate press release that they intend to break ground in 2015, making one wonder if the EMC and its aggressive staff have lost touch with reality.

To begin construction, the EMC needs north of $80 million in additional funds, but Gehry is notorious for his massive cost overruns, so the final price tag will probably be much higher. As John Silber wrote in Architecture of the Absurd, “When Gehry is hired, the partnership of client and architect is virtual except when it comes to paying the bill.” These overruns have to be paid by Gehry’s clients, but in the case of the Eisenhower Memorial, the EMC commissioners need not open their wallets because the American taxpayers will have to foot that bill.

Given the massive public opposition to the memorial, including that of the Eisenhower family, and the lack of appropriations from Congress, it is far-fetched to believe that Gehry’s plan will ever be fully funded. Yet, as long as the EMC continues to get a modicum of operating expenses and remains under Gehry’s thrall, it will survive, proving President Reagan’s maxim that a “government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life.” If the EMC is not stopped, it will spend down its remaining money, about $25 million, chasing Gehry’s bill of goods. And, when it’s spent its last cent, there will be no Eisenhower Memorial or the resolve to start again.

With sustained efforts by the public and Congress, the EMC can be stopped, and something good can be built with the money the EMC still has in the bank. Ike’s son, General John Eisenhower, who knew his father a little bit better than Siciliano did, put it well when he wrote that instead of Gehry’s plan, “taxpayers and donors alike will be better served with an Eisenhower Square that is a green, open space with a simple statue.”

If this happens, a great American will be fittingly honored and the National Mall will escape disfigurement by Frank Gehry.

Wed, 26 Nov 2014 03:08:00 -0600 en text/html
Killexams : The audacious PR plot that seeded doubt about climate change

Thirty years ago, a bold plan was cooked up to spread doubt and persuade the public that climate change was not a problem. The little-known meeting - between some of America's biggest industrial players and a PR genius - forged a devastatingly successful strategy that endured for years, and the consequences of which are all around us.

On an early autumn day in 1992, E Bruce Harrison, a man widely acknowledged as the father of environmental PR, stood up in a room full of business leaders and delivered a pitch like no other.

At stake was a contract worth half a million dollars a year - about £850,000 in today's money. The prospective client, the Global Climate Coalition (GCC) - which represented the oil, coal, auto, utilities, steel, and rail industries - was looking for a communications partner to change the narrative on climate change.

Don Rheem and Terry Yosie, two of Harrison's team present that day, are sharing their stories for the first time.

"Everybody wanted to get the Global Climate Coalition account," says Rheem, "and there I was, smack in the middle of it."

The GCC had been conceived only three years earlier, as a forum for members to exchange information and lobby policy makers against action to limit fossil fuel emissions.

Though scientists were making rapid progress in understanding climate change, and it was growing in salience as a political issue, in its first years the Coalition saw little cause for alarm. President George HW Bush was a former oilman, and as a senior lobbyist told the BBC in 1990, his message on climate was the GCC's message.

There would be no mandatory fossil fuel reductions.

But all that changed in 1992. In June, the international community created a framework for climate action, and November's presidential election brought committed environmentalist Al Gore into the White House as vice-president. It was clear the new administration would try to regulate fossil fuels.

The Coalition recognised that it needed strategic communications help and put out a bid for a public relations contractor.

Image source, E Bruce Harrison
Image caption,

E Bruce Harrison was known as the “Dean of green PR”

Though few outside the PR industry might have heard of E Bruce Harrison or the eponymous company he had run since 1973, he had a string of campaigns for some of the US's biggest polluters under his belt.

He had worked for the chemical industry discrediting research on the toxicity of pesticides; for the tobacco industry, and had recently run a campaign against tougher emissions standards for the big car makers. Harrison had built a firm that was considered one of the very best.

Media historian Melissa Aronczyk, who interviewed Harrison before he died in 2021, says he was a strategic linchpin for his clients, ensuring everyone was on the same page.

"He was a master at what he did," she says.

Drawing on thousands of newly discovered documents, this three-part film charts how the oil industry mounted a campaign to sow doubt about the science of climate change, the consequences of which we are living through today.

Before the pitch, Harrison had assembled a team of both seasoned PR professionals and almost total novices. Among them was Don Rheem, who had no industry credentials. He had studied ecology before becoming an environmental journalist. A chance meeting with Harrison, who must have seen the strategic value of adding Rheem's environmental and media connections to the team, led to a job offer on the GCC pitch.

"I thought, 'Wow, this is an opportunity to get a front row seat at probably one of the most pressing science policy and public policy issues that we were facing.'

"It just felt enormously important," Rheem says.

Image source, Don Rheem
Image caption,

Don Rheem as a younger man

Terry Yosie - who had recently been recruited from the American Petroleum Institute, becoming a senior vice-president at the firm - remembers that Harrison began the pitch by reminding his audience that he was instrumental in fighting the auto reforms. He had done so, in part, by reframing the issue.

The same tactics would now help beat climate regulation. They would persuade people that the scientific facts weren't settled, and that alongside the environment, policy makers needed to consider how action on climate change would - in the GCC's view - negatively affect American jobs, trade and prices.

The strategy would be implemented through an extensive media campaign, everything from placing quotes and pitching opinion pieces (so-called op-eds), to direct contacts with journalists.

Image caption,

An extract from a GCC business card for reporters, shared by former journalist Nicky Sundt

"A lot of reporters were assigned to write stories," Rheem says, "and they were struggling with the complexity of the issue. So I would write backgrounders so reporters could read them and get up to speed."

Uncertainty ran through the full gamut of the GCC's publications, a creative array of letters, glossy brochures, and monthly newsletters.

Rheem and the team were prolific - within a year, Harrison's firm claimed to have secured more than 500 specific mentions in the media.

Image caption,

An extract from a 1994/5 GCC booklet made by E Bruce Harrison's team, from the collection of Nicky Sundt

In August 1993, Harrison took stock of progress in another meeting with the GCC.

"The rising awareness of the scientific uncertainty has caused some in Congress to pause on advocating new initiatives," declared an updated internal strategy pitch, shared with the BBC by Terry Yosie.

"Activists sounding the alarm over 'global warming' have publicly conceded that they lost ground in the communications arena over the past year."

Now, Harrison counselled, they needed to expand the external voices making their case.

"Scientists, economists, academics and other noted experts carry greater credibility with the media and general public than industry representatives."

Image caption,

Harrison was "a master at what he did," says historian Melissa Aronczyk, who shared this undated advert with the BBC

While most climate scientists agreed that human-caused climate change was a real issue that would require action, a small group argued there was no cause for alarm. The plan was to pay these sceptics to give speeches or write op-eds - about $1,500 (£1,250) per article - and to arrange media tours so they could appear on local TV and radio stations.

"My role was to identify the voices that were not in the mainstream and to give those voices a stage," Rheem says. "There was a lot we didn't know at the time. And part of my role was to highlight what we didn't know."

He says the media was hungry for these perspectives.

"Journalists were actually actively looking for the contrarians. It was really feeding an appetite that was already there."

John Passacantando


If you say something enough times, people will begin to believe it

John Passacantando
Executive director, Ozone Action 1992-2000

Many of these sceptics or deniers have rejected the idea that funding from the GCC and other industry groups had any impact on their views. But the scientists and environmentalists tasked with repudiating them - arguing the reality of climate change - encountered a well-organised and effective campaign they found hard to match.

"The Global Climate Coalition is seeding doubt everywhere, fogging the air… And environmentalists really don't know what's hitting them," environmental campaigner John Passacantando remembers.

"What the geniuses of the PR firms who work for these big fossil fuel companies know is that truth has nothing to do with who wins the argument. If you say something enough times, people will begin to believe it."

Image caption,

Harrison's company paid experts to argue that mainstream climate scientists were overstating the problem

In a document dating from around 1995, shared with the BBC by Melissa Aronczyk, Harrison wrote that the "GCC has successfully turned the tide on press coverage of global climate change science, effectively countering the eco-catastrophe message and asserting the lack of scientific consensus on global warming."

The groundwork had been laid for the industry's biggest campaign to date - opposing international efforts to negotiate emissions reductions at Kyoto, in Japan, in December 1997. By then, a consensus had emerged among scientists that human-caused warming was now detectable. But the US public was still showing signs of doubt. As many as 44% of respondents to a Gallup poll believed scientists were divided. Public antipathy made it harder for politicians to fight for action, and America never implemented the agreement reached in Kyoto. It was a major victory for the industry coalition.

"I think E Bruce Harrison was proud of the work he did. He knew how central he had been to moving the needle on how companies intervened in the conversation about global warming," says Aronczyk.

Al Gore


I think it's the moral equivalent of a war crime

Al Gore
Former Vice President and environmentalist

The same year as the Kyoto negotiation, Harrison sold his firm. Rheem decided that public relations wasn't the right career, while Yosie had long since moved on to other environmental projects for the firm. Meanwhile, the GCC began to disintegrate, as some members grew uncomfortable with its hard line. But the tactics, the playbook, and the message of doubt were now embedded and would outlive their creators. Three decades on, the consequences are all around us.

"I think it's the moral equivalent of a war crime," says former US Vice-President Al Gore of the big oil companies' efforts to block action.

"I think it is, in many ways, the most serious crime of the post-World War Two era, anywhere in the world. The consequences of what they've done are just almost unimaginable."

Image caption,

Don Rheem is now a workplace and leadership consultant

"Would I do anything differently? It's a hard question to answer," reflects Don Rheem, who says he was "way down the totem pole" of the GCC's operation. "There's some sadness that not much has happened."

He maintains that climate science was too uncertain in the 1990s to warrant "drastic actions", and that developing countries - particularly China and Russia - have ultimately been responsible for the decades of climate inaction, rather than American industry.

"I think it's really easy to create a conspiracy theory about really pernicious intent of industry to completely halt any progress," Rheem says. "Personally, I didn't see that.

"I was very young. I was very curious... Knowing what I know today, would I have done some things differently then?

Fri, 22 Jul 2022 11:23:00 -0500 en-GB text/html
Killexams : Vodafone – The Journey From ‘Telco To TechCo’ With Help From Oracle Cloud

Vodafone is on a quest to pivot from being “just a Telco” to a “TechCo." The strategy includes revamping operations to reduce costs; digitally transforming the customer experience and service development processes; and developing a differentiated value proposition that leverages 5G, IoT, and edge investments and capabilities.

The company recently split the network infrastructure from digital functions with two closely aligned leaders. The reorganization sees Scott Petty step up to the group level to lead digital and IT operations, making him the critical leader in executing the plan to transform Vodafone into a cloud-first, data-driven 'TechCo”.

Before you stop reading and move on to the following article because you are not in the telecommunications business – let me say that the Vodafone challenge is not unique. I would say that this story applies to any company with discerning customers who have a choice. Please read on if you must continuously evolve customer-facing applications and content to retain customer loyalty.

The front-end and back-end – mind the gap!

We know the front-end is what the users can see while the back-end is the infrastructure that supports it - both need to be in perfect harmony. In the Telco world, the back-end is the “crown jewels," namely the operations support system (OSS), which maintains network operations, and the business support system (BSS), which covers order capture, and customer relationship management (CRM) and billing.

Both front-end and back-end functions are strongly intertwined. When consumer applications change every week, and the back-end is updated every quarter, the "gap" will eventually impact the ability to execute.

As Vodafone built more complex e-commerce applications on the front-end, the need increased for the same cloud capability from the core transactional systems (high-transaction BSS/OSS apps). Vodafone considered several options, including upgrading technology in-situ, building a private cloud platform, or using other third-party clouds.

But, moving transactional systems wholesale to the public cloud is costly and complex, with the risk of performance and latency issues associated with maintaining those systems, which need to remain on-premises for legal or compliance reasons.

Oracle was unique because it offered to build a complete public cloud capability in the Vodafone data centers. Vodafone was able to take a more flexible approach to modernize and migrate the mission-critical systems— the most data-intensive/demanding or too costly/risky to move wholesale to the public cloud.

Way too many databases!

How many databases are too many? Vodafone has fifteen thousand (not a typo) and eight thousand associated applications. Vodafone will be deploying Oracle Dedicated Region Cloud@Customer to modernize those thousands of Oracle databases that support its mission-critical transactional OSS and BSS systems—including core functions like order management and CRM. This task could take several years to complete.

Oracle Dedicated Region Cloud@Customer is a complete OCI cloud deployed in the data center, providing a secure cloud platform to modernize existing infrastructure while retaining full control of data governance, meeting demanding data residency and security regulations.

Vodafone envisages a world in which half of the applications run in Amazon Web Services or Google Cloud and the other half run on the Oracle Cloud. The mix is likely to change over time. The work to modernize the “crown jewel” applications onto the Oracle Cloud might cause application ecosystems to move from AWS onto Oracle Cloud because it would be a more natural fit.

Pivot from running technology to building new services

Vodafone has embraced Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) in a big way, consolidating forty data centers that run core services for its entire European operations (13 countries) into three locations (Ireland, Italy, and Germany) running on OCI.

The Oracle implementation is a critical pillar in the pivot from ‘Telco to TechCo,’ providing the foundation for a common platform across the Vodafone Group. It will allow rationalization and consolidation of the IT estate while leveraging the cloud as a more efficient way of delivering and scaling new communications services.

Vodafone expects to significantly cut costs across operations and accelerate the development and time to market for new services. The Oracle platform will also bring automation to IT operations, enabling more IT staff to focus on the digital experience and the use of data to drive better customer experiences.

Ultimately, the end game is to redirect the IT organization away from building, integrating, and running technology to provide customers with new services and a better digital experience.

As an example, Oracle Autonomous Database is now a feature of OCI. Oracle Autonomous Database is a cloud database that uses artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) to automate database tuning, security, backups, updates, and other routine management tasks without human intervention. Database administrators (DBAs) can now focus on more critical tasks, such as data aggregation, modeling, processing, governance strategies, and supporting developers.

One unique, differentiated example is that the Autonomous Database is serverless and elastic. When an application is not running on the Oracle Cloud, there are no CPUs dedicated hence no charges. Additionally, it is instantaneously elastic, increasing or decreasing servers and cores as needed while the database is still running.

Quickly monetizing IoT services

The long-awaited convergence of the network with the cloud, IoT, and MEC will become the foundation for new service offerings. With expertise in IoT, MEC, and 5g, Vodafone is well-positioned to offer new scalable next-generation digital services.

OCI offers integrated applications for Sales, Service, Marketing, Human Resources, Finance, Supply Chain, and Manufacturing, plus Automated and Secure Generation 2 Infrastructure featuring the Oracle Autonomous Database.

Vodafone is already monetizing IoT services using Oracle Communications Billing and Revenue Management (BRM) which runs on OCI. For example, sensors in connected vehicles can enable services such as GPS map updates or infotainment, charged on a subscription or consumption basis. The solution runs on the high-performance OCI Container Engine for Kubernetes and is automated with OCI Resource Manager and Terraform across multiple Oracle Cloud Regions. Today it is no longer about connecting IoT devices but providing complete solutions for customers.

The 5G wireless broadband expansion promises an exciting future.

For example, virtual reality applications will power high-tech glasses that give instructions to workers in complex fields such as airplane maintenance.

As Vodafone takes advantage of 5G, architectural agility will be essential to monetize next-generation services quickly and efficiently. Oracle's Billing and Revenue Management solution is well-positioned to support emerging 5G-enabled use cases with its cloud-native compliant, microservices-based architecture framework.

Wrapping up

Regular readers will know I have become impressed with Oracle's Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) and have written several articles. That was not always the case. I was critical of Oracle Cloud V1.0, but Oracle’s Generation 2 Cloud is an entirely new infrastructure developed from the ground up with no resemblance to its predecessor. The design goals were better performance, pricing, and—above all else—security. Oracle Cloud V2 is a significant improvement and more competitive.

As a long-time Oracle observer, I think it is incredible how the story around OCI is starting to resonate with customers. OCI as a single platform offering IaaS, PaaS, SaaS, and data as a service (DaaS) capabilities is not that sexy. But, combined with technologies such as Oracle Autonomous Database, Oracle Autonomous Data Warehouse, and Oracle Autonomous Transaction Processing, the result is a platform capable of handling large, data-intensive workloads with better security. For organizations like Vodafone transitioning from on-premises data centers to the cloud, OCI is an ideal solution.

Note: Moor Insights & Strategy writers and editors may have contributed to this article.

Moor Insights & Strategy, like all research and tech industry analyst firms, provides or has provided paid services to technology companies. These services include research, analysis, advising, consulting, benchmarking, acquisition matchmaking, and speaking sponsorships. The company has had or currently has paid business relationships with 8×8, Accenture, A10 Networks, Advanced Micro Devices, Amazon, Amazon Web Services, Ambient Scientific, Anuta Networks, Applied Brain Research, Applied Micro, Apstra, Arm, Aruba Networks (now HPE), Atom Computing, AT&T, Aura, Automation Anywhere, AWS, A-10 Strategies, Bitfusion, Blaize, Box, Broadcom, C3.AI, Calix, Campfire, Cisco Systems, Clear Software, Cloudera, Clumio, Cognitive Systems, CompuCom, Cradlepoint, CyberArk, Dell, Dell EMC, Dell Technologies, Diablo Technologies, Dialogue Group, Digital Optics, Dreamium Labs, D-Wave, Echelon, Ericsson, Extreme Networks, Five9, Flex,, Foxconn, Frame (now VMware), Fujitsu, Gen Z Consortium, Glue Networks, GlobalFoundries, Revolve (now Google), Google Cloud, Graphcore, Groq, Hiregenics, Hotwire Global, HP Inc., Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Honeywell, Huawei Technologies, IBM, Infinidat, Infosys, Inseego, IonQ, IonVR, Inseego, Infosys, Infiot, Intel, Interdigital, Jabil Circuit, Keysight, Konica Minolta, Lattice Semiconductor, Lenovo, Linux Foundation, Lightbits Labs, LogicMonitor, Luminar, MapBox, Marvell Technology, Mavenir, Marseille Inc, Mayfair Equity, Meraki (Cisco), Merck KGaA, Mesophere, Micron Technology, Microsoft, MiTEL, Mojo Networks, MongoDB, MulteFire Alliance, National Instruments, Neat, NetApp, Nightwatch, NOKIA (Alcatel-Lucent), Nortek, Novumind, NVIDIA, Nutanix, Nuvia (now Qualcomm), onsemi, ONUG, OpenStack Foundation, Oracle, Palo Alto Networks, Panasas, Peraso, Pexip, Pixelworks, Plume Design, PlusAI, Poly (formerly Plantronics), Portworx, Pure Storage, Qualcomm, Quantinuum, Rackspace, Rambus, Rayvolt E-Bikes, Red Hat, Renesas, Residio, Samsung Electronics, Samsung Semi, SAP, SAS, Scale Computing, Schneider Electric, SiFive, Silver Peak (now Aruba-HPE), SkyWorks, SONY Optical Storage, Splunk, Springpath (now Cisco), Spirent, Splunk, Sprint (now T-Mobile), Stratus Technologies, Symantec, Synaptics, Syniverse, Synopsys, Tanium, Telesign,TE Connectivity, TensTorrent, Tobii Technology, Teradata,T-Mobile, Treasure Data, Twitter, Unity Technologies, UiPath, Verizon Communications, VAST Data, Ventana Micro Systems, Vidyo, VMware, Wave Computing, Wellsmith, Xilinx, Zayo, Zebra, Zededa, Zendesk, Zoho, Zoom, and Zscaler. Moor Insights & Strategy founder, CEO, and Chief Analyst Patrick Moorhead is an investor in dMY Technology Group Inc. VI, Dreamium Labs, Groq, Luminar Technologies, MemryX, and Movandi.

Mon, 11 Jul 2022 12:01:00 -0500 Patrick Moorhead en text/html
Killexams : Emerging Markets Report: Win/Win

An Emerging Markets Sponsored Commentary

ORLANDO, Fla., July 13, 2022 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Over past issues of the Emerging Market Report we’ve been attentive to the fact that geopolitical events could be impactful for Laramide Resources Ltd. (TSX: LAM) (ASX: LAM) (OTCQX: LMRXF) which holds diversified uranium assets in the exploration stage that are strategically positioned in the United States and Australia.

We knew that the conflict in Ukraine was very likely to affect the spot price for Uranium, and more importantly, change the supply chain. Since Laramide’s operations are located in the United States and Australia, two stable tier one jurisdictions.

We believe a major change may be imminent and it could be more important for American producers and exploration companies than imagined. Investors in U.S.-based Uranium exploration companies like Laramide – which has three prospective American Uranium mines – may be interested in monitoring the news to see how a new bill from the Biden administration could change the landscape for U.S.-based Uranium production.

O.K. let’s break down some of the reporting.

First, Bloomberg is reporting that “The Biden administration is pushing lawmakers to support a $4.3 billion plan to buy enriched uranium directly from domestic producers to wean the U.S. off Russian imports of the nuclear-reactor fuel, according to a person familiar with the matter.”

That’s huge for U.S. uranium if it happens. And while we’re not sure that Laramide will benefit directly from this $4.3 billion plan that Bloomberg is reporting, they would seem to be in a very good place with regard to the line “wean the U.S. of Russian imports” which sounds very much like a long term move, and not a temporary action.

It’s a compelling perspective. And if this bill passes it could be a win/win for domestic uranium producers and exploration companies. For the record, the status of each of Laramide assets in the exploration stages varies so please visit the linked-to page to see where they are on the path to production.

About The Emerging Markets Report:
The Emerging Markets Report is owned and operated by Emerging Markets Consulting (EMC), a syndicate of investor relations consultants representing years of experience. Our network consists of stockbrokers, investment bankers, fund managers, and institutions that actively seek opportunities in the micro and small-cap equity markets.

For more informative reports such as this, please sign up at

Must Read OTC Markets/SEC policy on stock promotion and investor protection

Section 17(b) of the Securities Act of 1933 requires that any person that uses the mails to publish, give publicity to, or circulate any publication or communication that describes a security in return for consideration received or to be received directly or indirectly from an issuer, underwriter, or dealer, must fully disclose the type of consideration (i.e. cash, free trading stock, restricted stock, stock options, stock warrants) and the specific amount of the consideration. In connection therewith, EMC has received the following compensation and/or has an agreement to receive in the future certain compensation, as described below.

EMC has been paid $100,000 by Laramide Resources Ltd. for various marketing services including this report. EMC does not independently verify any of the content linked-to from this editorial.

Emerging Markets Consulting, LLC
Florida Office
390 North Orange Ave STE 2300
Orlando, FL 32801

Primary Logo

Tue, 12 Jul 2022 23:32:00 -0500 en-US text/html
Killexams : The verdict is Pure as Scottish prosecutor upgrades high-end storage

Scotland’s Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) has switched from ageing EMC storage hardware to Pure Storage flash-based arrays in a move that boosted I/O performance, overcame a capacity bottleneck and massively simplified management.

COPFS has dealt with more than 90,000 cases since 2016 and holds huge amounts of data in formats that range from everyday standard Word, PDF and Excel documents, where versioning for legal reasons may see 30 instances of the same file created.

Also, since the pandemic, digital media has been centralised whereas formerly it was held on CDs, USBs, etc, so that CCTV and mobile phone data is now accessible from anywhere.

COPFS’s core work also centres on case management applications that lean heavily on Oracle database environments.

The organisation runs two datacentres – in Glasgow and Edinburgh – with a largely Windows environment and up to 400 VMware virtual servers.

COPFS had been running two EMC VMAX – the storage giant’s former flagship arrays – at each datacentre and each with 72TB of capacity for most of its storage, with a much smaller amount of capacity on Dell EMC Xtremio all-flash arrays for virtual desktops.

Apart from anything else, they were very big, said Adam Biggs, head of IT services at COPFS.

“Each array occupied two full cabinets, so were two metres high and about the same across,” he said. “And they didn’t have dedupe or compression. To add more capacity would have needed an entire extra cabinet.”

Biggs added: “It was spinning disk and it was old, so we were replacing a drive every week. Also, any work on it was a bit of a dark art and we had to get contractors in to do simple things like extend a volume.”

COPFS eventually replaced the EMC hardware with two Pure Storage FlashArray//X50 arrays, each with 120TB of raw capacity that ran to 580TB with data reduction applied.

Pure’s FlashArray//X range is its NVMe flash-equipped storage aimed at high-performance use cases, and which scales potentially to petabytes.

The organisation opted for Pure’s Evergreen programme, in which the customer buys the hardware but can replace components on an agreed upgrade cycle. Pure offers a range of procurement options that extend to as-a-service purchasing, but in this case, COPFS decided it would manage the arrays in-house but get a controller hardware upgrade after four years. COPFS also uses Pure’s SafeMode immutable snapshot provision to protect against ransomware.

Did COPFS consider any options towards as-a-service provision? “It’s a case of capex vs opex and for us as public sector, it suits us to capitalise the investment and operationalise the support and maintenance,” said Biggs.

So, what are the key benefits?

“It’s storage, so if it doesn’t break, no one cares, but it’s good to have the confidence that it will do what the organisation expects,” said Biggs. “Also, being able to manage it simply is good. And support. We’ve had one or two disks die – which is normal – but it’s been fantastic and upgrades have happened without disruption.”

In terms of measurables, the database team has reported I/O improvements of about 15%, he added.

Thu, 28 Jul 2022 00:16:00 -0500 en text/html
Killexams : Australia news live: tranche of files relating to John Barilaro to be released on Monday; claims AFL player racially abused at Adelaide Oval No result found, try new keyword!But he warned that not all Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders supported the voice plan. I want something ... Hundreds of school administration, leadership and support staff will be hired ... Sat, 30 Jul 2022 18:00:00 -0500 en-gb text/html Killexams : Emobility, Electric, Propane and Natural Gas Vehicles Highlighted at Annual Georgia Clean Energy Roadshow

FAYETTEVILLE, Ga., Aug. 3, 2022 /PRNewswire/ -- The 12th annual Clean Energy Roadshow educational series, hosted by PSC Vice Chairman Tim Echols, and produced by Event Energy Partners together with Clean Cities Georgia, kicks off this August with four tour-stops in Marietta, Fayetteville, Valdosta and Savannah. The series opens at  Cobb EMC in Marietta on August 17th, followed by stops in Fayetteville at Trilith on August 18th, and onto Rainwater Conference Center in Valdosta on September 13th and concluding at HBCU, Savannah State University September 14th.

Four, half-day, events open to commercial and municipal fleet professionals and planning organizations will feature a showcase of the latest technology CNG, Electric and Propane Vehicles. Seminar speakers will include Clean Cities Georgia, Georgia DOT Commissioner Russell McMurry, EPA Region 4, OEMs, Utilities and fuel providers. Events are free, but registration is required at

Cobb EMC and Gas South (1000 EMC Parkway NE, Marietta) host the series opening event on August 17 at 8:30AM with headline sponsors Blue Bird, KIA, Georgia Power Electric Transportation, Atlanta Gas Light,Gas Authority, Peachstate Truck Centers and Propane Education and Research Council . Immediately following the event at 1PM, guests will tour the campus microgrid, including the striking Solar Flower Garden and solar array which features 1.85MW DC of solar and 1MW/4 MWh of battery storage that enables Cobb EMC to operate at almost zero-carbon energy and share storage back to the grid.

The Roadshow event at Town at Trilith (290 Heatherden Ave, Fayetteville) presented by Coweta-Fayette EMC on August 18 at 8:30AM will be held in the Shipyard Building, constructed entirely from shipping containers. It also includes an electric shuttle tour of the new smart community, built around the nearly 1,000 acres of sound stages, workshops, offices and backlots that comprise Trilith Studios where some of the world's best talent in filmmaking and content producing, live and work, side by side.

The Blue-Bird EV School bus the Blue Bird Vision™ Propane bus and the Thomas Built Jouley™ EV School bus will also be on site for Georgia school superintendents and pupil transportation directors.  Other vehicles on display include the 2022 KIA EV6 All-Electric Crossover with up to 232 miles of range, Ford F150 with Ingevity Adsorbed Natural Gas System, Westport Wing Power CNG F150 & Chevy 2500, 2022 Ford F-150® Lightning™   Electric, Ford F350 Super Duty Propane, Ford MachE and the DANNAR Mobile Power Station .

With the accurate passage of the bipartisan, Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, millions in federal dollars are heading  to Georgia through the EPA Clean School Bus Program and new fueling and charging station grant opportunities administered by GDOT and the EPA  for rural and underserved communities, workplaces and businesses. The Roadshow is the longest running mobile educational series and best opportunity to launch Make Ready Fleet and Resiliency planning. For more information visit

Contact: Joy Kramer, 678-390-2737


View original content to obtain multimedia:

SOURCE Event Energy Partners

Wed, 03 Aug 2022 00:32:00 -0500 en-US text/html
E20-562 exam dump and training guide direct download
Training Exams List