gfody

33 ms·

391.
by gfody 6y ago
DRY should really be DRYUTETNRYDTP - dont repeat yourself unless the effort to not repeat yourself defeats the purpose I also propose LAWYD - look at what you've done, a mandatory moment of honest reflection after drying out some code
392.
by gfody 6y ago
I like to imagine a final analysis of all code ever written by humans, after some ai hypermind from the future has digested it, turning out to be 99.999% dependency injection boilerplate
393.
by gfody 6y ago
the optimizer is constrained, it still has to give you what you asked for. i can't even translate into english what's being asked for in query #2 but it's only a coincidence that it has the same result as the more precise and
394.
by gfody 6y ago
that does make sense but still surprising that it holds up in the sustained benchmark as well - that must be a big cache and I don't see any capacitors on the pcb
395.
by gfody 6y ago
I think the point is rather that a join with a condition (which is the norm) is almost never actually executed as a cartesian product. take for example from tfa select * from customer_order_items the grain is one row per customer ord
396.
by gfody 6y ago
the query is not the only input into the plan generator, the other inputs are the schema (with constraints and indexes) and their statistics - so you can't really say "check the plan for yourself" without all the inputs. and
397.
by gfody 6y ago
> you join tables A to B to C to D -> SQL engine has to create AxBxCxD number rows this isn't really true. not every join is a cross join, and not every join even changes the grain of the result set. it is important to pay attent
398.
by gfody 6y ago
curiously this new drive stomps the optane on random writes - though the optane is still king of random reads.
399.
by gfody 6y ago
this is probably how I'd write it (assuming pg properly pushes the predicates down to the subquery in the lateral join) select mi.*, x.employee_id, x.customer_id from meal_items mi join lateral ( select e.store_id, em.creat
400.
by gfody 6y ago
The author(s?) almost certainly have no idea what they're talking about. Wtf are "diamond schemas" and "multi-branch joins"? This blog is the sole google result for that made up nonsense that's supposedly there
401.
by gfody 6y ago
> Retrieving both employee and customer meal items When you're getting two separate sets of things in one query you should expect to use union. This isn't so much a performance optimization as just expressing the query properly
402.
by gfody 6y ago
what about hit rate and time and space efficiency? i think "cachy" says it all - the cachiest cache
403.
by gfody 6y ago
for this case where the thing is a cache and the description a headline, "more performant" seems perfectly cromulent. it says here's a cache that does all the stuff a cache is expected to do well but better
404.
by gfody 6y ago
"performs better" the dictionary will catch up edit - apparently oxford dictionary has it already as "performs well"
405.
by gfody 6y ago
Roblox is like the AOL of a generation - I was 13 when I first got into programming thanks to AOL and it wasn't because AOL had created a programmable platform and API. AOL incentivized busting into chat rooms, punting other users, exp
406.
by gfody 6y ago
there's something incredibly comfortable about being able to view the instruction set along with affected flags and supported address modes in its entirety on something about the size of an index card
407.
by gfody 6y ago
got it, "reversible computing" has nothing to do with writing code that can run backwards or forwards, nothing at all, I may as well be talking about the weather and here you guys are trying to have a serious conversation about th
408.
by gfody 6y ago
oh nice I couldn't find any details earlier but googling "asicboost" turned up the whole scandal - I had no idea it was all disinformation campaign!
409.
by gfody 6y ago
fair I guess but that's awfully pedantic. today we can write code that runs backwards and forwards but it's because a compiler is generating multiple versions based on context - if we achieve physical reversibility then maybe one
410.
by gfody 6y ago
this reminds me of the drama around when Bitcoin forked into BTC and BCH - I recall there was some optimization that allowed miners to land at digests equivalent to some huge hash rate without actually computing that many hashes and since i
411.
by gfody 6y ago
one of the benefits of expressing business logic in a high level declarative language like SQL is that the order isn't specified and can be reversed depending on the execution context. a perfectly sargable and streamable view definitio
412.
by gfody 6y ago
btw "gaz" is a perfectly harmless way to address a mixed crowd - the men hear "guys" and the women hear "gals" and not even the worst griefer would pick on a speech impediment
413.
by gfody 6y ago
if sql server can't incrementally maintain your view then it doesn't let you index it. that's why there are so many restrictions but on the flip side if you manage to workaround the restrictions then decent update performance
414.
by gfody 6y ago
> basically converges to "block reward is equal to electricity cost equivalent" the electricity cost falls significantly with the difficulty, see: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Difficulty ..and: https:/
415.
by gfody 6y ago
facilitating crass creeping as a service where one monitors spoonbill for removal requests for the really interesting stuff
416.
by gfody 6y ago
if source code takes the form of human language I would no longer call it source code - it still might be excrement but not necessarily so.
417.
by gfody 6y ago
source code is excrement. an unfortunate side effect necessitated by the immaturity of our tools. someday we'll make software without it and life will be much better for the poo tenders.
418.
by gfody 6y ago
this is the essence of Linus Torvald’s doctrine of good taste
419.
by gfody 6y ago
I read this in reader mode because I didn't want to click the accept cookie policy (clicking "decline" boots you). Then I saw all the comments here mentioning Tether and wondered if I just read a totally different article and
420.
by gfody 6y ago
> The file reached a peak size of 150MB is this a typo? 150MB is such a minuscule amount of data that you could do pretty much anything and be OK.

More ›