What Are You Doing Right Now
-
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@brianlittlejohn said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
I think it was 35C here yesterday.... My server room when I went up there was at 39C
Owch. Our stuff starts shutting down if the rooms get much over 30C
Dell will do that. HPE operates above 40C pretty well.
We are primarily a Dell shop here... so yeah. I don't mind stuff shutting down due to self-preservation, lol.
Yeah, I mostly prefer Dell, but their heat sensitivity sucks compared to HPE. I've had datacenters hit 160F and lost zero HPE servers... lost every Dell and Cisco though, including switches.
Lost as in failed, or lost as in self preservation?
Both. They failed to stay up and running, causing an outage. The HPE kept running and had no need to shut down for self preservation because it wasn't hot enough to damage them. So a heat induced outage.
Interesting - so you're saying that HPE have higher heat tolerances than Dell? or does HPE just not have thermal shutdown, instead opting for thermal meltdown, if over-heated? I am asking this mostly tongue in cheek.
Probably both. Which would you prefer, a machine that shuts down from external heat and causes an outage for sure, or one that does best effort to keep your environment running?
Truth be told? Knowing what I do about electronics, I'd want one that shuts down before damage occurs.
Right, in that case, I personally feel that HPE believes that their equipment has a higher temp before long term damage occurs, and Scott's experience didn't reach these higher temps.
Yeah, they kept running, no data loss, no outages (until the Cisco switches died) and no equipment ruined. So in the most extreme test I've seen, with tens of thousands of servers, we were pretty glad that they did what they did. Shutting down would have been wrong.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@brianlittlejohn said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
I think it was 35C here yesterday.... My server room when I went up there was at 39C
Owch. Our stuff starts shutting down if the rooms get much over 30C
Dell will do that. HPE operates above 40C pretty well.
We are primarily a Dell shop here... so yeah. I don't mind stuff shutting down due to self-preservation, lol.
Yeah, I mostly prefer Dell, but their heat sensitivity sucks compared to HPE. I've had datacenters hit 160F and lost zero HPE servers... lost every Dell and Cisco though, including switches.
Lost as in failed, or lost as in self preservation?
Both. They failed to stay up and running, causing an outage. The HPE kept running and had no need to shut down for self preservation because it wasn't hot enough to damage them. So a heat induced outage.
Interesting - so you're saying that HPE have higher heat tolerances than Dell? or does HPE just not have thermal shutdown, instead opting for thermal meltdown, if over-heated? I am asking this mostly tongue in cheek.
Probably both. Which would you prefer, a machine that shuts down from external heat and causes an outage for sure, or one that does best effort to keep your environment running?
Truth be told? Knowing what I do about electronics, I'd want one that shuts down before damage occurs.
Right, in that case, I personally feel that HPE believes that their equipment has a higher temp before long term damage occurs, and Scott's experience didn't reach these higher temps.
Yeah, they kept running, no data loss, no outages (until the Cisco switches died) and no equipment ruined. So in the most extreme test I've seen, with tens of thousands of servers, we were pretty glad that they did what they did. Shutting down would have been wrong.
I don't agree with Scott's assessment, but it's something that those running the equipment should be fully aware of. Heck, sounds like HPE should be making a marketing push on that fact. "our competition's servers disable themselves at 120 degrees, while we just keep on going until 140 degrees" etc.
-
@Grey said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Minion-Queen said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
Someone who likes cigars please explain something to me. Why would someone spend $1500 on 1 single cigar?
Background: I have a Social Media client that is a high-end cigar shop (I do all their social media stuff for them). I don't get cigars... let alone the cost for some of these.
I need to be able to market these things but can't find good ways to describe them for ads.
Cigars are a wonderful vice for me, though I do not smoke more than 1 a month (usually less). I enjoy them when I can. Think of having a cigar as adding another row of violins to an orchestra when you're sitting in your back yard, working on your motorcycle, or doing anything else you enjoy, complementing the rest of the orchestra that you're already listening to.
Personally, I do not spend anything on cigars any more; I have too many (more than 300 in my humidor). There's enough to last me the rest of my life, most likely. Expensive cigars are in my humidor, just like the cheap ones, and they're all different, just like comparing an expensive whiskey with a cheap one. Sure, I'll probably reach for my favorite Nub Maduro cigar every time, but if I've got friends over or someone who really enjoys cigars, I may get out the rarer Oliva V Torpedoes that have a couple years of age on them. Maybe I'm celebrating a new job and want to go with a cigar that's not supposed to be in my humidor - a Cuban Cohiba or Montecristo. In any case, the choice of what you're smoking and when is all very personal and may be as simple as something you really, really like and can enjoy any time.
Couldn't agree more. I used to smoke a lot but got expensive for the things that were happening in my life. I would never pass up an offer to smoke a good one. Cigars are a perfect complement to a after work task you enjoy. Just like a beer or wine is perfect compliment to sitting down and watching TV, but cigars are more social (than watching tv) if people around you do not mind the smell.
-
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@brianlittlejohn said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
I think it was 35C here yesterday.... My server room when I went up there was at 39C
Owch. Our stuff starts shutting down if the rooms get much over 30C
Dell will do that. HPE operates above 40C pretty well.
We are primarily a Dell shop here... so yeah. I don't mind stuff shutting down due to self-preservation, lol.
Yeah, I mostly prefer Dell, but their heat sensitivity sucks compared to HPE. I've had datacenters hit 160F and lost zero HPE servers... lost every Dell and Cisco though, including switches.
Lost as in failed, or lost as in self preservation?
Both. They failed to stay up and running, causing an outage. The HPE kept running and had no need to shut down for self preservation because it wasn't hot enough to damage them. So a heat induced outage.
Interesting - so you're saying that HPE have higher heat tolerances than Dell? or does HPE just not have thermal shutdown, instead opting for thermal meltdown, if over-heated? I am asking this mostly tongue in cheek.
Probably both. Which would you prefer, a machine that shuts down from external heat and causes an outage for sure, or one that does best effort to keep your environment running?
Truth be told? Knowing what I do about electronics, I'd want one that shuts down before damage occurs.
Right, in that case, I personally feel that HPE believes that their equipment has a higher temp before long term damage occurs, and Scott's experience didn't reach these higher temps.
Yeah, they kept running, no data loss, no outages (until the Cisco switches died) and no equipment ruined. So in the most extreme test I've seen, with tens of thousands of servers, we were pretty glad that they did what they did. Shutting down would have been wrong.
I don't agree with Scott's assessment, but it's something that those running the equipment should be fully aware of. Heck, sounds like HPE should be making a marketing push on that fact. "our competition's servers disable themselves at 120 degrees, while we just keep on going until 140 degrees" etc.
The real question is... when do you want an unnecessary outage?
-
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@brianlittlejohn said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
I think it was 35C here yesterday.... My server room when I went up there was at 39C
Owch. Our stuff starts shutting down if the rooms get much over 30C
Dell will do that. HPE operates above 40C pretty well.
We are primarily a Dell shop here... so yeah. I don't mind stuff shutting down due to self-preservation, lol.
Yeah, I mostly prefer Dell, but their heat sensitivity sucks compared to HPE. I've had datacenters hit 160F and lost zero HPE servers... lost every Dell and Cisco though, including switches.
Lost as in failed, or lost as in self preservation?
Both. They failed to stay up and running, causing an outage. The HPE kept running and had no need to shut down for self preservation because it wasn't hot enough to damage them. So a heat induced outage.
Interesting - so you're saying that HPE have higher heat tolerances than Dell? or does HPE just not have thermal shutdown, instead opting for thermal meltdown, if over-heated? I am asking this mostly tongue in cheek.
Probably both. Which would you prefer, a machine that shuts down from external heat and causes an outage for sure, or one that does best effort to keep your environment running?
Truth be told? Knowing what I do about electronics, I'd want one that shuts down before damage occurs.
Why? If damage is going to occur either way, I'd rather limit the overall outage.
That's why I said before the damage occurs.
-
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@brianlittlejohn said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
I think it was 35C here yesterday.... My server room when I went up there was at 39C
Owch. Our stuff starts shutting down if the rooms get much over 30C
Dell will do that. HPE operates above 40C pretty well.
We are primarily a Dell shop here... so yeah. I don't mind stuff shutting down due to self-preservation, lol.
Yeah, I mostly prefer Dell, but their heat sensitivity sucks compared to HPE. I've had datacenters hit 160F and lost zero HPE servers... lost every Dell and Cisco though, including switches.
Lost as in failed, or lost as in self preservation?
Both. They failed to stay up and running, causing an outage. The HPE kept running and had no need to shut down for self preservation because it wasn't hot enough to damage them. So a heat induced outage.
Interesting - so you're saying that HPE have higher heat tolerances than Dell? or does HPE just not have thermal shutdown, instead opting for thermal meltdown, if over-heated? I am asking this mostly tongue in cheek.
Probably both. Which would you prefer, a machine that shuts down from external heat and causes an outage for sure, or one that does best effort to keep your environment running?
Truth be told? Knowing what I do about electronics, I'd want one that shuts down before damage occurs.
Why? If damage is going to occur either way, I'd rather limit the overall outage.
That's why I said before the damage occurs.
Which is what the HPEs did. So either the others shut down too early, or weren't able to take the heat.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@brianlittlejohn said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
I think it was 35C here yesterday.... My server room when I went up there was at 39C
Owch. Our stuff starts shutting down if the rooms get much over 30C
Dell will do that. HPE operates above 40C pretty well.
We are primarily a Dell shop here... so yeah. I don't mind stuff shutting down due to self-preservation, lol.
Yeah, I mostly prefer Dell, but their heat sensitivity sucks compared to HPE. I've had datacenters hit 160F and lost zero HPE servers... lost every Dell and Cisco though, including switches.
Lost as in failed, or lost as in self preservation?
Both. They failed to stay up and running, causing an outage. The HPE kept running and had no need to shut down for self preservation because it wasn't hot enough to damage them. So a heat induced outage.
Interesting - so you're saying that HPE have higher heat tolerances than Dell? or does HPE just not have thermal shutdown, instead opting for thermal meltdown, if over-heated? I am asking this mostly tongue in cheek.
Probably both. Which would you prefer, a machine that shuts down from external heat and causes an outage for sure, or one that does best effort to keep your environment running?
Truth be told? Knowing what I do about electronics, I'd want one that shuts down before damage occurs.
Right, in that case, I personally feel that HPE believes that their equipment has a higher temp before long term damage occurs, and Scott's experience didn't reach these higher temps.
Yeah, they kept running, no data loss, no outages (until the Cisco switches died) and no equipment ruined. So in the most extreme test I've seen, with tens of thousands of servers, we were pretty glad that they did what they did. Shutting down would have been wrong.
I don't agree with Scott's assessment, but it's something that those running the equipment should be fully aware of. Heck, sounds like HPE should be making a marketing push on that fact. "our competition's servers disable themselves at 120 degrees, while we just keep on going until 140 degrees" etc.
The real question is... when do you want an unnecessary outage?
When I can save a $5k, $10k, or $30K piece of equipment from damage due to extreme temperatures. In the environment I am in, a single closet over heating and damaging all of the gear could easily be $150k or $200k easy.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@brianlittlejohn said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
I think it was 35C here yesterday.... My server room when I went up there was at 39C
Owch. Our stuff starts shutting down if the rooms get much over 30C
Dell will do that. HPE operates above 40C pretty well.
We are primarily a Dell shop here... so yeah. I don't mind stuff shutting down due to self-preservation, lol.
Yeah, I mostly prefer Dell, but their heat sensitivity sucks compared to HPE. I've had datacenters hit 160F and lost zero HPE servers... lost every Dell and Cisco though, including switches.
Lost as in failed, or lost as in self preservation?
Both. They failed to stay up and running, causing an outage. The HPE kept running and had no need to shut down for self preservation because it wasn't hot enough to damage them. So a heat induced outage.
Interesting - so you're saying that HPE have higher heat tolerances than Dell? or does HPE just not have thermal shutdown, instead opting for thermal meltdown, if over-heated? I am asking this mostly tongue in cheek.
Probably both. Which would you prefer, a machine that shuts down from external heat and causes an outage for sure, or one that does best effort to keep your environment running?
Truth be told? Knowing what I do about electronics, I'd want one that shuts down before damage occurs.
Why? If damage is going to occur either way, I'd rather limit the overall outage.
That's why I said before the damage occurs.
Which is what the HPEs did. So either the others shut down too early, or weren't able to take the heat.
Most likely not able to take the heat. Every time it happened at least one or two servers would burn out a drive.
-
Just finished restoring an HPE server by replacing motherboard, power supply and RAID card since it was affected by a power outage and the new customer did not have battery backup!! 3 days waiting for parts
-
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@brianlittlejohn said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
I think it was 35C here yesterday.... My server room when I went up there was at 39C
Owch. Our stuff starts shutting down if the rooms get much over 30C
Dell will do that. HPE operates above 40C pretty well.
We are primarily a Dell shop here... so yeah. I don't mind stuff shutting down due to self-preservation, lol.
Yeah, I mostly prefer Dell, but their heat sensitivity sucks compared to HPE. I've had datacenters hit 160F and lost zero HPE servers... lost every Dell and Cisco though, including switches.
Lost as in failed, or lost as in self preservation?
Both. They failed to stay up and running, causing an outage. The HPE kept running and had no need to shut down for self preservation because it wasn't hot enough to damage them. So a heat induced outage.
Interesting - so you're saying that HPE have higher heat tolerances than Dell? or does HPE just not have thermal shutdown, instead opting for thermal meltdown, if over-heated? I am asking this mostly tongue in cheek.
Probably both. Which would you prefer, a machine that shuts down from external heat and causes an outage for sure, or one that does best effort to keep your environment running?
Truth be told? Knowing what I do about electronics, I'd want one that shuts down before damage occurs.
Right, in that case, I personally feel that HPE believes that their equipment has a higher temp before long term damage occurs, and Scott's experience didn't reach these higher temps.
Yeah, they kept running, no data loss, no outages (until the Cisco switches died) and no equipment ruined. So in the most extreme test I've seen, with tens of thousands of servers, we were pretty glad that they did what they did. Shutting down would have been wrong.
I don't agree with Scott's assessment, but it's something that those running the equipment should be fully aware of. Heck, sounds like HPE should be making a marketing push on that fact. "our competition's servers disable themselves at 120 degrees, while we just keep on going until 140 degrees" etc.
The real question is... when do you want an unnecessary outage?
When I can save a $5k, $10k, or $30K piece of equipment from damage due to extreme temperatures. In the environment I am in, a single closet over heating and damaging all of the gear could easily be $150k or $200k easy.
You are assuming that shutting down cools it down.
-
Hyper-V is a cruel mistress... Or maybe @Grey was right about the P2V. When I tried to spin up the 1 VM that would be on that new host, she wouldn't boot. Tried every fix I could find, no love. So I'll be starting over, server 2012r2 on bare metal, then restoring the data from the vhdx. Sigh. So many successful P2V tests in the past, I just can't figure it out, but this system has to be ready for testing by this weekend. Square one, I have returned.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Dashrender said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@brianlittlejohn said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
I think it was 35C here yesterday.... My server room when I went up there was at 39C
Owch. Our stuff starts shutting down if the rooms get much over 30C
Dell will do that. HPE operates above 40C pretty well.
We are primarily a Dell shop here... so yeah. I don't mind stuff shutting down due to self-preservation, lol.
Yeah, I mostly prefer Dell, but their heat sensitivity sucks compared to HPE. I've had datacenters hit 160F and lost zero HPE servers... lost every Dell and Cisco though, including switches.
Lost as in failed, or lost as in self preservation?
Both. They failed to stay up and running, causing an outage. The HPE kept running and had no need to shut down for self preservation because it wasn't hot enough to damage them. So a heat induced outage.
Interesting - so you're saying that HPE have higher heat tolerances than Dell? or does HPE just not have thermal shutdown, instead opting for thermal meltdown, if over-heated? I am asking this mostly tongue in cheek.
Probably both. Which would you prefer, a machine that shuts down from external heat and causes an outage for sure, or one that does best effort to keep your environment running?
Truth be told? Knowing what I do about electronics, I'd want one that shuts down before damage occurs.
Right, in that case, I personally feel that HPE believes that their equipment has a higher temp before long term damage occurs, and Scott's experience didn't reach these higher temps.
Yeah, they kept running, no data loss, no outages (until the Cisco switches died) and no equipment ruined. So in the most extreme test I've seen, with tens of thousands of servers, we were pretty glad that they did what they did. Shutting down would have been wrong.
I don't agree with Scott's assessment, but it's something that those running the equipment should be fully aware of. Heck, sounds like HPE should be making a marketing push on that fact. "our competition's servers disable themselves at 120 degrees, while we just keep on going until 140 degrees" etc.
The real question is... when do you want an unnecessary outage?
When I can save a $5k, $10k, or $30K piece of equipment from damage due to extreme temperatures. In the environment I am in, a single closet over heating and damaging all of the gear could easily be $150k or $200k easy.
You are assuming that shutting down cools it down.
Unless the building is on fire, it is no longer getting hotter (I've never seen a server room breach 115F). The heat doesn't dissipate as fast as it would if it had fans running. The air temperature outside of the rack is cooler than what is inside the server. Systems at the top of a rack take longer to cool down than what is at the bottom of a rack.
So unless the room is at a higher temperature than the inside of the server, how is it not cooling down?
-
@dafyre said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
So unless the room is at a higher temperature than the inside of the server, how is it not cooling down?
Oh it was getting hotter
Room doors were so hot that no one could touch them! -
165 wasn't the server temps, that was the AIR TEMP.
-
@Grey said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Minion-Queen said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
Someone who likes cigars please explain something to me. Why would someone spend $1500 on 1 single cigar?
Background: I have a Social Media client that is a high-end cigar shop (I do all their social media stuff for them). I don't get cigars... let alone the cost for some of these.
I need to be able to market these things but can't find good ways to describe them for ads.
Cigars are a wonderful vice for me, though I do not smoke more than 1 a month (usually less). I enjoy them when I can. Think of having a cigar as adding another row of violins to an orchestra when you're sitting in your back yard, working on your motorcycle, or doing anything else you enjoy, complementing the rest of the orchestra that you're already listening to.
Personally, I do not spend anything on cigars any more; I have too many (more than 300 in my humidor). There's enough to last me the rest of my life, most likely. Expensive cigars are in my humidor, just like the cheap ones, and they're all different, just like comparing an expensive whiskey with a cheap one. Sure, I'll probably reach for my favorite Nub Maduro cigar every time, but if I've got friends over or someone who really enjoys cigars, I may get out the rarer Oliva V Torpedoes that have a couple years of age on them. Maybe I'm celebrating a new job and want to go with a cigar that's not supposed to be in my humidor - a Cuban Cohiba or Montecristo. In any case, the choice of what you're smoking and when is all very personal and may be as simple as something you really, really like and can enjoy any time.
Thank you! that helps guys!
-
I've found that up to a certain point the more expensive the cigar the "smoother" the flavor. Cheap cigars generally have a bit of a bite to them that you don't get with the more expensive variety.
-
@coliver said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
I've found that up to a certain point the more expensive the cigar the "smoother" the flavor. Cheap cigars generally have a bit of a bite to them that you don't get with the more expensive variety.
Good to know.... So hard for me to learn to describe something when I am NOT testing it out
-
Out for a walk.
-
@Minion-Queen said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@coliver said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
I've found that up to a certain point the more expensive the cigar the "smoother" the flavor. Cheap cigars generally have a bit of a bite to them that you don't get with the more expensive variety.
Good to know.... So hard for me to learn to describe something when I am NOT testing it out
Not a connoisseur by any stretch or means that's just been my limited experience.
-
My morning walk...
