jaekash

8 ms·

31.
by jaekash 6y ago
> Many things are easier in LXD, like building a highly available, fault tolerant cluster of container and vm-instances. What features of LXD enable fault tolerance and high availability? > It's more secure by default than an equ
32.
by jaekash 6y ago
> I assume this is hyperbole, but for anyone who is unfamiliar with either system this statement isn't right And for people who don't know what they are talking about general reactivity "isn't right" ... not sure
33.
by jaekash 6y ago
> LXD is the "kubernetes" part No, LXD is not 'the "kubernetes" part'. There is no ' the "kubernetes" part' in the steaming pile of shit that LXD is. EDIT: Also, please cite the claim tha
34.
by jaekash 6y ago
> LXD is actually a cool technology. It is a pretty nifty idea but like all things made by Canonical it is basically digitized garbage. I tried to get LXC running on fedora some months, wondering why there are no official packages and th
35.
by jaekash 6y ago
> I imagine they take their SLAs very seriously. What are the liabilities on them for failing to meet their SLA? Taking thing seriously is not a liability. Specifically in this case, what are their liability to you?
36.
by jaekash 6y ago
I guess if you don't want to run vi sudo ... well, I mean there is really only one solution, don't run it. I never run it and I am still breathing.
37.
by jaekash 6y ago
> In the presentation they literally list the TCP stack as a technical advantage. At the timestamp I shared up to the next slide no comparison is made between Linux and FreeBSD. And the thread we were in is about someone claiming the rea
38.
by jaekash 6y ago
https://youtu.be/vcyQBup-Gto?t=2739 Jonathan Looney, Engineering Manager at Netflix, claiming their primary reason for choosing FreeBSD was GPL avoidance and that subsequent performance testing (which was not the basis for
39.
by jaekash 6y ago
> There are plenty of talks, papers, etc from both Juniper, Netflix, etc on why they made their choices, but your response is merely "could also be they did not understand how to configure Linux" without any evidence. Here are
40.
by jaekash 6y ago
More flexibility in proxy configuration will make this easier to overcome, and there are already some plugins for Firefox which allows specifying specific proxies for specific sites.
41.
by jaekash 6y ago
Both of these things suggest they had many other reasons to chose FreeBSD, and neither suggests FreeBSD was faster than Linux: - https://people.freebsd.org/~scottl/Netflix-BSDCan-20130515.p... - https://yout
42.
by jaekash 6y ago
> The burden of proof is on you, since you're the one clearly advocating for Linux here. Ehh... if you want proof for a specific claim then ask for it. I am asking you for proof of the specific positive claim you made, which is: &gt
43.
by jaekash 6y ago
This presentation also makes no indication that FreeBSD was chosen because it had better performance than Linux: https://youtu.be/KP_bKvXkoC4?t=732 Seems GPL already ruled Linux out.
44.
by jaekash 6y ago
Maybe, still no evidence to back the speculation up.
45.
by jaekash 6y ago
I would like to see some evidence to back this claim.
46.
by jaekash 6y ago
> I think that the engineers at Netflix "could figure it out". And I would still like to see some evidence. > Whenever I have to do anything other than set an IP address I throw up in my mouth a little bit. Very compelling c
47.
by jaekash 6y ago
ZFS integration was worse in Solaris 10 than in FreeBSD. In Solaris the page cache and ARC was not properly integrated and when using mmap data would be cached twice in both page cache and arc cache and there was weird issues with these con
48.
by jaekash 6y ago
> There’s also kqueues which are a much better interface to high throughput I/O than epoll. Can you clarify why you say this? One area where kqueue will be more performance is in that it supports multiple updates on interest set in
49.
by jaekash 6y ago
7 years or more after choosing FreeBSD. This in no way vouches for their expertise in 2012.
50.
by jaekash 6y ago
> Even if that’s true then it remains a failing of the Linux ecosystem that they were unable to understand how to configure it correctly or that the defaults did not work as well as the FreeBSD ones. Or alternatively they just did not pu
51.
by jaekash 6y ago
AFAIK Netflix has used FreeBSD since 2012[1] and Brendan Gregg only started working at FreeBSD in 2014[2]. So not sure what the point of your statement is. [1]: https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable/20
52.
by jaekash 6y ago
Could be, could also be they did not understand how to configure Linux, would like to see something more concrete to back such a claim up. Personally I'm skeptical that it is the case.
53.
by jaekash 6y ago
Why?
54.
by jaekash 6y ago
> just the fact that the user has to open a terminal might be a problem. I mean why stop there, the fact that someone has to lift a finger might be a problem. Why do we even require people to be able to comprehend language? Heck, why do
55.
by jaekash 6y ago
They can, by changing their editor.
56.
by jaekash 6y ago
Gentoo had nano as default editor for some years, maybe still does. Nano is kinda garbage IMO but this in no way means the loss of vi to me.
57.
by jaekash 6y ago
> Look at HN as an AI Look as a Human as an AGI, oh wait sorry, words have meanings and neither a Human or multiple humans satisfy the definition of AGI. > 4chan can send humans out to do its real world physical bidding. It can litera
58.
by jaekash 6y ago
I prefer my option which is to just not use MS products but to each their own.
59.
by jaekash 6y ago
> I don't need two CI/CD pipelines. Maybe my question was unclear, but I was not asking why are no not using two services, I was asking why are you not using an alternative, and I meant instead of GitHub, not in addition to Git
60.
by jaekash 6y ago
> On-premise or own-cloud hosting is quite import for some customers. Yes it is, and GitLab and Gitea both offer that, which brings us back to the question I asked, what does GitHub Enterprise offer that you can't get from GitLab a

More ›