3 ms·

One competent person probably, 'some' possibly, 'plenty' defiantly not. The general advice for tech people in Australia is to move to the US ASAP - the more com

One competent person probably, 'some' possibly, 'plenty' defiantly not. The general advice for tech people in Australia is to move to the US ASAP - the more competent the tech person the stronger the advice. The insidious effect of brain drain is the effect is self reinforcing, i.e. the more it happens the stronger the pull. In tech it's important to work with other competent people. Historically Australians are unusually good programmers, so I am not saying Australians are unskilled, but I am saying their best and brightest leave Australia ASAP. Plus I would submit the reddit thread 'Biggest CPU for the Bad System' as evidence to my point. How could this person possibly think that 100s of CPU cores are the bottleneck and the solution is more CPU cores - how could the dozens of DBAs not figure it out - the amount of work that can be done in 100s of CPU cores is utterly insane and the fact that they didn't rule out obvious IOWait bottlenecks in their initial posts suggest that none of them know what they're doing. I guess they figured that Azure would take care of all of that. The initial step would be to bring that computer in house and design that computer around the problem - Azure is not going to be open and honest about their bottlenecks. Last I checked Azure was big on their Network Attached Storage and Managed Disks which add quite a lot of latency and throughput bottlenecks compared to a PCIe 5.0 Enterprise SSD.

rbanffy 2y ago
I’d say the telltale sign is picking SQL Server in the first place. If you think there is a risk your database will grow to be enormous, it’s likely it’ll be the worst possible choice, with the possible exception of Oracle and DB2 on AIX (but, on the last two, at least you have fewer limits to scaling up). Could also be a B-player hires C-players situation, with borderline incompetence trickling down from the C-level.
- cjbgkagh 2y ago
  Certainly, if you're planning on outgrowing a SQL Server you should probably DIY tailor made indexes and query languages/engines. LLVM makes DIY languages much easier to make than they used to be and very with fast interpreters and AOT it's very performant. The reason for my brain drain statement is that people don't understand how pernicious the brain drain is in Australia. The Australian government believes that there isn't a net brain drain because more people with degrees immigrate than those emigrating. But people are not substitutable cogs and the very smart are very rare and it is the loss of those few very smart Australians to the US which is so devastating.

rbanffy 2y ago

I’d say the telltale sign is picking SQL Server in the first place. If you think there is a risk your database will grow to be enormous, it’s likely it’ll be the worst possible choice, with the possible exception of Oracle and DB2 on AIX (but, on the last two, at least you have fewer limits to scaling up). Could also be a B-player hires C-players situation, with borderline incompetence trickling down from the C-level.

cjbgkagh 2y ago
Certainly, if you're planning on outgrowing a SQL Server you should probably DIY tailor made indexes and query languages/engines. LLVM makes DIY languages much easier to make than they used to be and very with fast interpreters and AOT it's very performant. The reason for my brain drain statement is that people don't understand how pernicious the brain drain is in Australia. The Australian government believes that there isn't a net brain drain because more people with degrees immigrate than those emigrating. But people are not substitutable cogs and the very smart are very rare and it is the loss of those few very smart Australians to the US which is so devastating.