zasdffaa

58 ms·

631.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
Rubbish. It depends on what you want to make your opponent do.
632.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
I know someone here in the UK who signed the official secrets act (terminology wrong but you get me) and it was made intimidatingly (I use that word precisely) clear to them that blabbing had bad consequences. I'm sure it's the s
633.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
> Performant long lines which would be a massive winner IMO.
634.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
> Indeed. Emacs actually got a preliminary port to the Boehm generational, incremental, mark-sweep collector many years ago, with a complete lack of interest in pursuing it. Ja have a link? Asking because I've interacted with the de
635.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
Mic-ro-soft - enough said
636.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
I guess the ATMs don't have to be yours to be used by you (although if law does not require sharing I would expect they'd be used for lock-in, though that's irrelevant here I suppose). > Sure, at some point the ATMs may al
637.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
To dispense the folding stuff, which I prefer for privacy reasons. Also one day there will be be a power cut of various size and duration and you digital wallet will become nothing. We're getting too trusting of tech.
638.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
Col-based storage is for usual tables, DW don't need that because all the stuff is pre-joined except for the dimension tables. The dimension tables are tiny IIRC, and there should (?) be only one fact table. You don't join between
639.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
Not sure I understand. For analytics/warehouse stuff you tend to pre-join stuff to get a very non-normalised fact table (which is static so unnormalised is fine). This means very fast, maybe optimal, for what you're doing. It&#x27
640.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
Pretty well all modern commercial DBs do use summary (or sampled?) statistics of the cardinalities. The alternative is rule-based rewriters which were heuristically-driven only, and AFAIK they justifiably went out of use decades ago.
641.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
Quite so. I didn't say it was a good thing; read my parethesised affix.
642.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
Surely others doing it is a perfect reason to do it. They pile in, market surges, you hop in and get lifted, and cash out before they do. Leaving aside the critical timing of that last step, it seems obviously right (for a short-term purely
643.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
I'm a brit, I don't know much about stuff, so, what is implied by 'yankee'? I wasn't aware it was still used - Is it an insult? And something to do with the civil war? Why are you considered a 'damn Yankee&#x27
644.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
Edit: I got this completely wrong, see comment from @Joeri . > Trolls are really cultural memory of Neanderthals Stating this as a fact is wrong, it's conjecture, and very dubious at that. In fact a few seconds research and common
645.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
"Originally this was a young virgin, but after trouble with kidnappings..." Jesus. That's a grim insight into the culture of the time, though perhaps it shouldn't have been given Greek legends.
646.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
Well, it's not ideas, it's language abuse I'm griping over. Is "the alchemy of mind control" a helpful term in any way? Wouldn't "as long as the techniques of narrative control remain the domain of the eli
647.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
I get exactly what you're saying but that misses the point which is it was just a load of tosh. If one[1] have something to say but can't say it clearly, one is wasting everyone's time at best and at worst become part of the
648.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
'narrative' is a fancy word that sounds important. It seems a pretty good rule of thumb that the more someone uses it, the less they have to actually say. You've used it 11 times. Also it comes with a package of other nebulou
649.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
maybe contact him and suggest it.
650.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
"fiendishly tough on both audiences" is this a way of saying it's not very nice without saying it? (Thanks for the YT link to it, nice touch)
651.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
hyperloglog is not an indexing method
652.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
ok > Effective selectivity mechanisms outside the page reduce the need for intra-page selectivity optimization in terms of delivering performance but you still need to preserve memory bandwidth "mechanisms/optimization/del
653.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
Edit: this comes across rude (I suppose it is), and maybe I'm wrong to doubt you but I'm no DB n00b and pretty well everything about your post just doesn't make sense, given my knowledge. What? [deleted] A quick browse then..
654.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
Might be missing something, but using an interpreted language that splashes its objects around in memory with pointers everywhere, using json, and gets a 50% speedup, depending, doesn't look like a convincing test of anything.
655.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
Now that is a bloody great answer! (too little karma to upvote, so my thanks instead).
656.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
Missed compression, thanks!
657.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
I need some ELI5 explaining to: colstores allow you to pick out just the cols of data you need rather than get the full row and discard what you don't need. If that alone explained the 100X speedup that would mean the row is storing 99
658.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
I did some utterly trivial benchmarks of aggregating over a (large) single table, and found PG and MSSQL to be about the same (both using row storage). Where does your 100X slowdown figure come from, and what 'architectural limitations
659.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
Could an EE comment on the safety of this.
660.
by zasdffaa 4y ago
True, and yet isn't it a perfect example of plausible but wrong mental models, just as "but it's ?: so it gets translated to cmov" is plausible but wrong.

More ›