cassandravoiton

7 ms·

31.
by cassandravoiton 15y ago
You have not been looking at scientific computing. Matlab is more something people used for comp-sci of math. If it was not FORTRAN then it was not scientific computing.
32.
by cassandravoiton 15y ago
You shoot down our own argument. The video suggest C# and Java as alternatives to interpreted languages. By picking C you are deliberately trying to make your argument sound stronger than it is. The video also mentions the economic cost. Fr
33.
by cassandravoiton 15y ago
If code runs faster then the user time is wasted less as well. That seems in alignment with the ideas behind the video.
34.
by cassandravoiton 15y ago
Yes - HTML5 would be much much better - it will come soon I expect.
35.
by cassandravoiton 15y ago
The page below shows the media peformance of Python (the fastest in these of PHP/Ruby/Python) as 49.73 times slower than the fastest compiled language. The seems pretty much between 10 and 100 to me. http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/u64q/
36.
by cassandravoiton 15y ago
There are plenty of bench marks showing 10 to 100 times is in the ball part. Computers use masses of power because there are so many of them. As they get more efficient, their numbers increase. The benefit of using faster languages is const
37.
by cassandravoiton 15y ago
But is that not the point of the post - that all the 'easy and cheep' comes at a huge cost to be planet and eventually to the company. Are C# and Java really that much harder to learn and use?
38.
by cassandravoiton 15y ago
Can you fail to deliver something if there is no time in which the failure can occur? Not sure...
39.
by cassandravoiton 15y ago
Actaully - they don't. I spent some time working with Oracle at a major installation where they could not come up with a good enough transactional fail secarios because a single mainframe was being replaced by a multiple DB node distributed
40.
by cassandravoiton 15y ago
I see your point. However, if information transfer is actually infinitely fast then the to physical points become one point in information space and the two generals become one general.
41.
by cassandravoiton 15y ago
Language gets in the here. But all 'distributed transaction' systems rely on the idea that once every party has agree to commit, it CAN commit. That might not be the case (I have seen it no be so often).
42.
by cassandravoiton 15y ago
Yes, I did read it... " In practice, it is not di±cult to construct an algorithm that, except dur- ing rare periods of network instability, selects a suitable unique leader among a majority of nonfaulty acceptors. Transient failure of the l
43.
by cassandravoiton 15y ago
If it is so obvious, why do so may people no get it?
44.
by cassandravoiton 15y ago
You, sorry to say, utterly incorrect. The Paxos algorithm offers a clever way to making the choise of a single transactional arbitrator dynamic. For each transaction, it might be different, but for a single transcation, Paxos is only stable
45.
by cassandravoiton 15y ago
So the single server is the transactional arbitrator. Nice :)
46.
by cassandravoiton 15y ago
Which is why I wrote the post. I go fed up with repeating myself as people demanded the same of me!
47.
by cassandravoiton 15y ago
The two generals problem has the assumption of finite communication speed as its foundation. So, to fails if one does have infinite communication speed. This post shows how the assumption is indead correct.
48.
by cassandravoiton 15y ago
You are way off the mark here. How do you propose to use a resource lock to solve the distribution problem?
49.
Databases: The Einstein Hypothesis - Distributed Transactions Cannot Exist(nerds-central.blogspot.com)
28 points by cassandravoiton 15y ago|29 comments
50.
by cassandravoiton 15y ago
Hiya, I went and looked this up for you: " Intel segmented memory This usage should not be confused with that of the x86 memory segmentation used by early Intel processors such as the Intel 8086 and Intel 8088, as they did not provide any p
51.
by cassandravoiton 15y ago
I am glad you have now learned something then :) SEGV has nothing what so ever todo with Intel 8088 address management. The name 'segment' just got used twice.
52.
by cassandravoiton 15y ago
I think it is a philosophy thing was well. Latency and network speed are key Unix heratige features which carry over to Linux. Windows has always considered this as something we should do, but not core.
53.
Linux Uptake Is Getting Serious; Windows Struggles To Keep Up(nerds-central.blogspot.com)
14 points by cassandravoiton 15y ago|6 comments
54.
Java, JVM, JNI and Signal Handling Explained In Simple Terms(nerds-central.blogspot.com)
26 points by cassandravoiton 15y ago|3 comments
55.
by cassandravoiton 15y ago
So that is how they work. What else can se find out by looking at the byte output of javac?