5 ms·

They're not running a dependency-ridden NodeJS backend with MongoDB and random cloud services? How are they even able to get to space?

by sgt 5y ago

chinathrow 5y ago
Well... https://twitter.com/tobi/status/1266867215325974528 https://twitter.com/tobi/status/1266867215325974528
- awestroke 5y ago
  That's the frontend. It's fed data by the main computer, but if it crashes nothing else is affected.
  - chinathrow 5y ago
    If it crashes and Dragon is in manual mode, then what?
    - awestroke 5y ago
      How would I know? However, if you could think of that scenario, you can be 100% sure spacex thought of it over a decade ago and have measures to handle that situation
    - jve 5y ago
      How about a response from SpaceX software guy that works on Dragon software, including these displays: > Dragon is a fully autonomous vehicle, so it is capable of completing the trip to and from the ISS without any interaction from the crew. But the displays and button panel do provide the crew with capabilities should they need to take action due an unexpected scenario or emergency. As for the tablets and displays, the tablets themselves act as a sort of backup, and include copies of important data such as procedures. The displays themselves are designed to be fully redundant, so if a single display failed, the other 2 could fully take its place. Even if we were to experience a failure of all 3 displays, the crew has a button panel that can be used to initiate emergency responses, and ground commanding is also possible. > -Jarrett https://old.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/ncj4vz/we_are_the_spacex_software_team_ask_us_anything/gy8wlkv/ https://old.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/ncj4vz/we_are_the_s...
      - numpad0 5y ago
        [flagged]
      - justin66 5y ago
        "Spam in a can."
    - extropy 5y ago
      The manual controls are a separate system and would still work. And you can peer out of the window for navigation, Apollo style.
horstmeyer 5y ago
MongoDB is web scale, not universe scale.
- Stevvo 5y ago
  You turn it on and it scales right up. Right up to space.
- freemint 5y ago
  Would have been so more funny if you wrote "cloud scale".
- api 5y ago
  It's interesting how much contempt people have around here for one of the most successful open source oriented companies in recent memory. Most of the bad things about MongoDB are actually bad things about the NoSQL fad, and that fad was huge around here a few years ago.
  - freemint 5y ago
    I used NoSQL databases that are ACID.
    - indymike 5y ago
      I used acid and selected a nosql.
  - andrewxdiamond 5y ago
    Mongo’s “return before write” behavior is what earned it this title. It makes it look better on benchmarks, convincing unwitting devs that it is a better choice.
  - 908B64B197 5y ago
    Mongo and NoSQL, to me, are really symptoms of the Bootcamp craze that happened a few years ago. It's way easier to understand than relational databases, can be simply browsed and retrieved as json (usefull when your only language is JS) and had good adapters for the cookie cutter frameworks used at the time. And you don't need to bother with a schema or joins. There are use-cases for NoSQL but it's not a once size fits all solution.
qwertyuiop_ 5y ago
No Kubernetes and Blockchain ?
magwa101 5y ago
ironmagma 5y ago
They're only using C++ which has 1,853 pages worth of complexity[1] along with all the toolchains that go on top of it. [1] https://www.iso.org/standard/79358.html https://www.iso.org/standard/79358.html
- yellow_lead 5y ago
  I'm sure they're using a strict subset of C++ but it is still complex. I wonder if they'll move to Rust some day.
- jcelerier 5y ago
  Most of the standard is taken by the description of the standard library ; the language specs ends at page 457 in C++20 (last draft). How long would be your language spec if every single function's documentation was part of it ? To give a reference with other languages: - This is a bit less than C# (whose standard language spec ends at page 462 in ECMA-364 2nd ed.). - The python spec for 3.9.9 is 151 pages. Okay, but let's compare equivalent things in the C++ spec and Python spec: awaiting a coroutine. * In Python (the whole "await" spec): Suspend the execution of coroutine on an awaitable object. Can only be used inside a coroutine function. await_expr ::= "await" primary New in version 3.5. * In C++ (5% of the "co_await" spec): The co_await expression is used to suspend evaluation of a coroutine (9.5.4) while awaiting completion of the computation represented by the operand expression. await-expression : co_await cast-expression But, for C++ this is only the first sentence (which is not written in an abbreviated style but as a proper sentence). Then a whole page explains the semantics in detail, and gives a complete example of how to use it. The python spec is just insufficient in comparison.
  - ironmagma 5y ago
    I'm sure it would be long. The point was more that pretty much every (productive) development environment is complex.

They're not running a dependency-ridden NodeJS backend with MongoDB and random cloud services? How are they even able to get to space?

by sgt 5y ago

They're not running a dependency-ridden NodeJS backend with MongoDB and random cloud services? How are they even able to get to space?

chinathrow 5y ago

Well... https://twitter.com/tobi/status/1266867215325974528 https://twitter.com/tobi/status/1266867215325974528

awestroke 5y ago
That's the frontend. It's fed data by the main computer, but if it crashes nothing else is affected.
- chinathrow 5y ago
  If it crashes and Dragon is in manual mode, then what?
  - awestroke 5y ago
    How would I know? However, if you could think of that scenario, you can be 100% sure spacex thought of it over a decade ago and have measures to handle that situation
  - jve 5y ago
    How about a response from SpaceX software guy that works on Dragon software, including these displays: > Dragon is a fully autonomous vehicle, so it is capable of completing the trip to and from the ISS without any interaction from the crew. But the displays and button panel do provide the crew with capabilities should they need to take action due an unexpected scenario or emergency. As for the tablets and displays, the tablets themselves act as a sort of backup, and include copies of important data such as procedures. The displays themselves are designed to be fully redundant, so if a single display failed, the other 2 could fully take its place. Even if we were to experience a failure of all 3 displays, the crew has a button panel that can be used to initiate emergency responses, and ground commanding is also possible. > -Jarrett https://old.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/ncj4vz/we_are_the_spacex_software_team_ask_us_anything/gy8wlkv/ https://old.reddit.com/r/spacex/comments/ncj4vz/we_are_the_s...
    - numpad0 5y ago
      [flagged]
    - justin66 5y ago
      "Spam in a can."
  - extropy 5y ago
    The manual controls are a separate system and would still work. And you can peer out of the window for navigation, Apollo style.

horstmeyer 5y ago

MongoDB is web scale, not universe scale.

Stevvo 5y ago
You turn it on and it scales right up. Right up to space.
freemint 5y ago
Would have been so more funny if you wrote "cloud scale".
api 5y ago
It's interesting how much contempt people have around here for one of the most successful open source oriented companies in recent memory. Most of the bad things about MongoDB are actually bad things about the NoSQL fad, and that fad was huge around here a few years ago.
- freemint 5y ago
  I used NoSQL databases that are ACID.
  - indymike 5y ago
    I used acid and selected a nosql.
- andrewxdiamond 5y ago
  Mongo’s “return before write” behavior is what earned it this title. It makes it look better on benchmarks, convincing unwitting devs that it is a better choice.
- 908B64B197 5y ago
  Mongo and NoSQL, to me, are really symptoms of the Bootcamp craze that happened a few years ago. It's way easier to understand than relational databases, can be simply browsed and retrieved as json (usefull when your only language is JS) and had good adapters for the cookie cutter frameworks used at the time. And you don't need to bother with a schema or joins. There are use-cases for NoSQL but it's not a once size fits all solution.

qwertyuiop_ 5y ago

No Kubernetes and Blockchain ?

magwa101 5y ago

ironmagma 5y ago

They're only using C++ which has 1,853 pages worth of complexity[1] along with all the toolchains that go on top of it. [1] https://www.iso.org/standard/79358.html https://www.iso.org/standard/79358.html

yellow_lead 5y ago
I'm sure they're using a strict subset of C++ but it is still complex. I wonder if they'll move to Rust some day.
jcelerier 5y ago
Most of the standard is taken by the description of the standard library ; the language specs ends at page 457 in C++20 (last draft). How long would be your language spec if every single function's documentation was part of it ? To give a reference with other languages: - This is a bit less than C# (whose standard language spec ends at page 462 in ECMA-364 2nd ed.). - The python spec for 3.9.9 is 151 pages. Okay, but let's compare equivalent things in the C++ spec and Python spec: awaiting a coroutine. * In Python (the whole "await" spec): Suspend the execution of coroutine on an awaitable object. Can only be used inside a coroutine function. await_expr ::= "await" primary New in version 3.5. * In C++ (5% of the "co_await" spec): The co_await expression is used to suspend evaluation of a coroutine (9.5.4) while awaiting completion of the computation represented by the operand expression. await-expression : co_await cast-expression But, for C++ this is only the first sentence (which is not written in an abbreviated style but as a proper sentence). Then a whole page explains the semantics in detail, and gives a complete example of how to use it. The python spec is just insufficient in comparison.
- ironmagma 5y ago
  I'm sure it would be long. The point was more that pretty much every (productive) development environment is complex.