papsosouid

12 ms·

61.
by papsosouid 13y ago
>Does TPC require durability? Yes.
62.
by papsosouid 13y ago
I'm not sure what you are trying to say. My entire point was that you can buy a single server that is more powerful than their entire cluster. You appear to agree, but think that is a problem?
63.
by papsosouid 13y ago
Even the low end of single servers goes up to a couple TB of RAM. "Enterprise" hardware has been there for ages.
64.
by papsosouid 13y ago
I'm not sure why you are asking me about this.
65.
by papsosouid 13y ago
>They create big, complex, fragile architectures because they started with simple, off-the-shelf architectures that completely fell over at scale. No, they fell over at "shit we're hitting the limits of our hardware, lets re-ar
66.
by papsosouid 13y ago
The fact that you think "consumer scale web traffic" is some magical thing is exactly what I am talking about. Have you ever heard of TPC? They have done benchmarks of database driven systems for a long time. TPC-C measures per
67.
by papsosouid 13y ago
The "fanout" or "wasteful duplication of a single message 30 million times" is only required because they are using tiny underpowered hardware to begin with. The approach that they claim can't possibly work actuall
68.
by papsosouid 13y ago
They are not serving 150 million concurrent users. They have 150 million active users. As in, people who do in fact use twitter at all, as opposed to the millions of dead accounts nobody touches. They are not all being served at once.
69.
by papsosouid 13y ago
It is a good metric to use precisely for the reason you state. You want your applications to be in RAM. You want your files to be cached in RAM. You have finite RAM. The less RAM your system is using, the more is available for applicati
70.
by papsosouid 13y ago
I really question the current trend of creating big, complex, fragile architectures to "be able to scale". These numbers are a great example of why, the entire thing could run on a single server, in a very straight forward setup.
71.
by papsosouid 13y ago
That's a terrible example, both because it has nothing to do with speed (your complaint is about scalability, not speed) and because it is wrong. Having a pool of workers to handle requests while using event driven interfaces is norma
72.
by papsosouid 13y ago
What sort of reaction would you feel is appropriate when someone builds a bridge incorrectly, and it collapses? "Oh hey, that's too bad, good try though!"? When someone does something horrible wrong and demonstrates that th
73.
by papsosouid 13y ago
>The brothers have this massive, massive blindspot regarding the importance of the UI. No they don't. They keep saying over and over again that they know the UI is bad, and they know it drives away potential players. They said it
74.
by papsosouid 13y ago
>and there's lots of empirical evidence that sign-up rates are drastically higher with social login. Where? I've never seen any evidence at all, just claims from social marketing weasels. The only empirical evidence I've
75.
by papsosouid 13y ago
And what I mean is that is simply not true. Monolithic kernels give us unstable systems like windows, linux, BSDs, etc. Virtually ever highly reliable operating system is built on a microkernel.
76.
by papsosouid 13y ago
What? When and where has any part of linux been proven correct?
77.
by papsosouid 13y ago
You found lots of bugs reading the plan 9 kernel source, and forgot to report them?
78.
by papsosouid 13y ago
>Minix was first released in 87, three years before development on HURD even began. Minix wasn't an attempt at a production kernel in 1987. Minix 1 and Minix 2 were purely for teaching. Minix 3 was a completely new project, and wa
79.
by papsosouid 13y ago
Why? Because in the time HURD has sat around trying to figure out whose code to use and call HURD, other people have actually written useful kernels. Minix for example.
80.
by papsosouid 13y ago
Monolithic kernels don't "focus on correctness". Some people might when writing one, plan 9 for example. But plenty don't, like linux as the most obvious example.
81.
by papsosouid 13y ago
>If you have enough application servers for session sharing to be a problem, you probably already have enough complexity to worry about You definitely have lots of complexity. Which is why adding more is bad. There is no point where th
82.
by papsosouid 13y ago
>Nowadays you can just throw all your sessions in a Redis node and access them in a fraction of a millisecond from a thousand different servers. You seriously believe that? Adding tons of extra complexity, latency, and potential failure
83.
by papsosouid 13y ago
My web development workflow is great actually. Just my browser application development is broken. Trying to conflate the two very different things just confuses the issue.
84.
by papsosouid 13y ago
Which is why a website makes far more sense. You could do it for a couple hundred bucks.
85.
by papsosouid 13y ago
But that is backwards for this case. They are trying for "perfection" by writing a mobile app so it looks just so and the ui is just the way they want it, when "good enough" would be a simple web site that took a couple
86.
by papsosouid 13y ago
I didn't say anything about you or what you claim. Resorting to the logical fallacy fallacy is pretty poor in general, but quite ridiculous when you aren't even using the terms correctly.
87.
by papsosouid 13y ago
What evil was done in my name, or for my benefit? You are deliberately conflating someone incidentally benefiting from something with it being done to benefit them. Your consistent, deliberate dishonesty speaks volumes about your faith in
88.
by papsosouid 13y ago
No, I am not disregarding their opinions. They are perfectly entitled to their opinions. I am saying their opinions are not objectively correct simply because they are taking the active position of complaining, while people who aren'
89.
by papsosouid 13y ago
>Ignoring the fact that the status of women as property was a literal and legal fact for thousands of years No, it wasn't. You are deliberately conflating the life of some women to that of women period. It would be every bit a
90.
by papsosouid 13y ago
Odd you should say so. My wife is a programmer, and distances herself from the online computing world not because of "misogyny", but because of this insane crowd of privileged people who insist on pretending to be victims in her

More ›