zzzcpan

109 ms·

931.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
It doesn't work that way. A thing you have to experiment with to even know whether it could potentially work for you is just one of many such things that have to be considered and evaluated too, but you simply ignore them in your idea
932.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
> If you start a company and open source your core/clients, your product becomes part of AWS It seems not obvious to everyone, but you don't have to use a license, that allows AWS to run you into the ground. Take a look at API
933.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
> Looking even farther out, at this point does it make sense for any startup looking to create infrastructure software to open source it? Of course it still does, just not under permissive licenses. Hopefully the industry will converge o
934.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
His arguments on siphash are pretty practical, not sure what did you find misinformed there.
935.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
You have to deal with worst case regardless of how likely collisions happen, you can't leave it to a chance. At least if you want a decent hash table implementation.
936.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
No, still not the opposite. If you only have public water systems than only public water systems can fail. Private water companies don't even make sense, as they can only exist as monopolies with the only incentive of squeezing as much
937.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
Luckily for CRDTs, consensus-based strong consistency doesn't work well for most applications in geo-replicated scenarios, so CRDTs are kind of inevitable there. And they are still new and cutting edge, still need time. Look at the his
938.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
It's not that simple. Here's an overview on paxos/raft consensus algorithms: https://vadosware.io/post/paxosmon-gotta-concensus-them-all/ and even that is incomplete and not necessarily describes tr
939.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
> but the whole point is that you sometimes don't need these guarantees for reads. If that was your point, than sure. If you drop consistency, you can drop coordination too. But typically people expect reads to be consistent in cons
940.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
I kind of agree with the article. I think of meritocracy as just another way to promote exploitation of people, hard work, submissive attitudes, acceptance of inequality. Basically every capitalist's dream society. But it's pretty
941.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
Think about it, if you read from a replica that is partitioned from the rest of the system and there is no coordination, how would the replica or the client know that the value replica returns is too old and therefore breaks strong consiste
942.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
But it's all tied to time. So, for example, at any point in time there are latest stable packages that should only depend on other latest stable packages, there is no point doing other combinations, hence no combinatorial explosion. An
943.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
There is no reason not to provide all the stable branches and development/bleeding edge branches for packages and let people choose what they want, except for package management practices still stuck in 20th century.
944.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
Concurrency bugs in Go study is a good place to start on the last one: https://songlh.github.io/paper/go-study.pdf
945.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
I disagree, I think the future still holds separate data layer, but even less math because of how much easier it will be to reason about programs with DSLs built on solid foundations for distributed systems and how much harder it will be to
946.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
> when using a system "with consensus" there is often no need to actually invoke consensus on the read side of the system, in which case you don't have to pay the throughput and latency penalties. Doesn't matter if th
947.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
I didn't infer they are always inappropriate, just that they are not good for latency and performance sensitive systems, i.e. they shouldn't be considered unless absolutely necessary.
948.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
They did it for stable performance, because failures are in fact frequent. Things are much worse once you go out into the public internet, where different hosting providers communicate over all kinds of networks with all kinds of issues.
949.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
Well, networks are not that reliable. But you don't have to believe me, there is enough of public information about real world operations. Take Aurora paper for example, where they can't even do 2/3 quorum, but do 4/6 qu
950.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
In general consensus based systems are not good when latency and performance actually matter and in real world WAN setups, where connectivity issues are pretty much constant. These are fundamental limitations they can't fix.
951.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
So, does it actually have CRDT operations? Doesn't seem like any of the interfaces expose them. Can you use a convergent counter, for example? Also product page [1] has some weird claims. There is no such thing as "Strong Session
952.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
USB cables are supposed to be shielded.
953.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
It wasn't harsh at all. It deserves some harsh criticism though. The quality of the project is so low it's amazing people even bother picking it up.
954.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
Years ago I was trying to use Merkle trees for checksuming and synchronizing database replicas, since everyone was doing it this way. It was immediately obvious how impractical it was. So the first thing that came to mind was to use a fixed
955.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
> Users are more tolerant of __minor__ usability issues Let's be honest, aesthetic-usability effect is too insignificant to ever prioritize aesthetics over usability and pretty much no company in the world can benefit from it. It&#x
956.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
This is pretty good and deserves more attention. Github makes bug studies so much more approachable. Hopefully the study will make people more cautious about Go's concurrency model, which is as error prone as shared memory multithreadi
957.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
It's fine. It's still message passing and it's obvious they refer to Go flavored CSP style message passing whenever they talk about it, not anything else.
958.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
Makes sense. And no one can really be an expert in something without having a broad jack of all trades perspective on everything else.
959.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
> say Django for the backend and Vue for the frontend, maybe Swagger in the middle, and PSQL for the database But this is a typical non-junior web developer, not a full stack developer.
960.
by zzzcpan 8y ago
It cannot be a magnet link. And I think you are confusing client-server with peer-to-peer communications. What can be done without touching git is some software running locally doing peer-to-peer and speaking git's protocol, git can th

More ›