justinsb

89 ms·

781.
by justinsb 17y ago
There's a lot we need to do... we just put up the page with the DEMO video today, everything else isn't yet updated to reflect the announcement. This is why we're pursuing both products: if you have a hair-on-fire problem, and are willing
782.
by justinsb 17y ago
We need to work on our messaging! We're offering two different technologies: a fully managed MySQL as-a-service, and the new scalable database technology. But they're both relational databases in the service model. With the MySQL-as-a-ser
783.
by justinsb 17y ago
I think you mean Partition Tolerance. I would ask you whether you've actually read the proof, but that question seems redundant.
784.
by justinsb 17y ago
If any DB is taking 50ms to reply (SQL, NoSQL, even MS Access!), something is seriously wrong. If you're using Rails, I'd fire up NewRelic or something like that and check out what on earth is going on. Of course, 300ms is also way too lon
785.
by justinsb 17y ago
Sorry - it's difficult to be totally clear in 6 minutes! We have two offerings ... a fully-managed MySQL database-as-a-service which lets you grow up to the biggest server on the cloud, and a new database which we've built ourselves, which
786.
by justinsb 17y ago
The new technology isn't based on MySQL. It's a fully distributed, no single-point-of-failure, scalable relational database. You can choose fully managed hosted traditional MySQL, or we'll be hand-picking early customers for the scalable
787.
by justinsb 17y ago
I am reminded of the Judean People's Front from Life of Brian. Henceforth we shall call you AltDB, and we shall add geographical replication to your list of demands :-) More seriously, we'll see what we can do meet that list with our tech!
788.
by justinsb 17y ago
Cool answer - thanks. I guess some of this is about better ORMs, some of this is the schemaless idea, and probably the real answer is a combination of both. I worry that object databases were the last attempt to solve the impedance mismatc
789.
by justinsb 17y ago
Care to define the goals? Apparently it's not about scaling. It's not about SQL, because there's no reason you can't support a SQL-style query language. So I do seriously want to know what's left... We're always on the lookout for the ne
790.
by justinsb 17y ago
Not sure whether it's the end of NoSQL, but we're certainly working to deliver the promises of NoSQL while retaining the power of SQL. To borrow from a much better man than I... This is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end.
791.
by justinsb 17y ago
The biggest differences normally arise with multiple queries running concurrently. For example, InnoDB & PostgreSQL use MVCC whereas MyISAM uses locking, and PostgreSQL normally wins most benchmarks with high concurrency on multi-core
792.
by justinsb 17y ago
I presume you used B-Tree indexing in PostgreSQL vs hash-indexing in BDB & your own code? PostgreSQL does support hash-indexing, but the documentation suggests it's not faster than B-trees anyway (probably because it would involve a se
793.
by justinsb 17y ago
A read-only database isn't a database in my book. I agree that built-in replication can be difficult to administer even today, but you're being completely revisionist here. Replication wasn't introduced into MySQL until 2000. In 1997, you
794.
by justinsb 17y ago
I somehow doubt an employer knowingly paid for an engineer to spend time writing an ORM.
795.
by justinsb 17y ago
If you'd had viable open source SQL databases in 1997, would you have spent the engineering time on BerkeleyDB, or would you simply have replicated the master database onto each server? In 1997, you weren't choosing NoSQL vs SQL, you were
796.
by justinsb 17y ago
OK - I have to bite. Who writes 2 ORMs? What was wrong with the first one?
797.
by justinsb 17y ago
Interesting. What was the scenario? Which NoSQL DB did you end up using?
798.
by justinsb 17y ago
NoSQL is the duck-billed platypus in the evolution of databases. Absolutely fascinating, provides great material for PhD students, but a total dead end. Might survive in some isolated corners of the world; not one to bet on to be the next
799.
by justinsb 17y ago
90 seconds * 200 passengers = 300 minutes.
800.
by justinsb 17y ago
We at FathomDB do support replication - you can set it up yourself - we just can't yet set it up for you or monitor it. But - as you say - we're working on it.
801.
by justinsb 17y ago
Thanks for providing a possible explanation. A recall is also an admission that the problem is widespread, so I think that horse has bolted, but it's possibly the reason Toyota are behaving so oddly (at least in my world view). If it is a
802.
by justinsb 17y ago
Except then you're talking about the damage your product does. Suppose you're selling guns (kills a comparable number of people to cars), and you have a PR problem because kids are shooting their toes off. Your gun has a lock, and you sus
803.
by justinsb 17y ago
I totally don't understand Toyota now. Why are they complaining about this, drawing attention to the problem? ABC comes back and says "yes, we had to fake the shot, because when the accelerator is jammed down the car starts to shake drama
804.
What is Toyota doing?(justinsb.posterous.com)
1 points by justinsb 17y ago|0 comments
805.
by justinsb 17y ago
Or, far more likely, that ATI or NVIDIA license the IP, or buy the company to get the IP. That doesn't happen without a patent, and that's what patents are for... To ensure that the big players can't simply steal the game-changing idea you
806.
by justinsb 17y ago
Are you serious? Figuring out the algorithm is absolutely the hard bit here. When was the last time you had trouble implementing an algorithm? I feel like I'm feeding a troll here - I had to check your profile to be sure I wasn't. I thin
807.
by justinsb 17y ago
Given we're on a collective patent kick at the moment, this is surely the perfect example of why we have software patents. If we assume this to be real, who here would like to have spent years working on this, only for ATI and NVIDIA to re
808.
by justinsb 17y ago
Yet another 'software patents are bad' piece without a single fact. Many disagreed to the point of retaliative downvoting with my blog post the other day ( http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1167926 ), but it was trying to make a fact-b
809.
by justinsb 17y ago
It might be hard to optimize a more general language, but it's impossible to optimize something that can't be expressed in a simple language.
810.
by justinsb 17y ago
Nice theory, but consider that the N+1 problem is so widespread that it actually has a name, and I think you'll realize that people are a much harder problem than you think. And this isn't even a place where SQL is at all problematic! Per

More ›