...currently hits on the European Council at number 3. This is as a result of the (elected) Council's antidemocratic campaign to force Bill Gates' software patent agenda on the European Union, in direct contravention of the wishes of the the (elected) European Parliament.
I'm confused, why is the pretty-much-unfunny grandparent post modded funny, while this post is modded troll? They seem to be about the same to me, except that one pokes fun at open source while the other pokes fun at proprietary software. Which moderator thinks it's funny to lampoon open source, but it's a troll to lampoon proprietary software?
This isn't some Slashdotter's blog. This isn't even from a technology focused publication. This is Forbes printing this. So obviously this is the view of at least somebody at one of the nations leading business and finance publications.
While I deeply detest Apple's heavyhanded reaction to product leaks, I will also note that Forbes has acted as a mouthpiece for Microsoft on many occasions recently, and to my mind has firmly established itself as a less than credible publication.
If anything remotely looks like a threat to MS, you can bet what you want that they will bodyslam Google. As adequately demonstrated, MS dominance is through bruiser tactics. Don't expect them to stand idly by while someone else takes whet that consider to be their turf. They don't mind losing a lot of money to get power.
Microsoft does mind when the losses start turning into billions, which is how much it would cost them to illegally leverage their desktop OS monopoly.
But I doubt that is what Google wants to do anyway. What would they enter a crowded market and compete with all the Linux distros out there? It doesn't really fit with their portfolio.
There is no chance whatsoever that Google will set out to build its own OS. Linux works perfectly well and Google is well aware that they have more to gain by contributing to the common development pool.
No, Google is setting out to build a web service infrastructure, powered by its 100,000 node (at last count) Linux supercomputer. And after all, this guy's job at Microsoft was to build a web infrastructure.
By the way, it is very doubtful that in California he can be prevented from working in his area of expertise, no matter what his employment contract with Microsoft says.
Somebody wants this law so badly they will bend and break any EU rule they can to get this software patent legistaltion through.
None other than Bill Gates. There is a reason he showed up in Brussels the day before the JURI commission was to decide whether the process should be restarted or not. There is a reason that Charlie McCreevy, former head of the Commission and now self-appointed leader of the committee that decides whether to take such steps as ignore the unanimous direction of the European Parliament to restart the process, dances on the end of Bill's string. What is this reason? As former minister of finance of Ireland, and Microsoft being the largest taxpayer in Ireland, Bill Gates paid McCreevy's paycheck. Bill Gates probably still pays McCreevy's paycheck. There is a reason for everything.
How did you manage to be moderated informative? My mind is boggling so much i'm starting to feel dizzy...
Your post wasn't much better, in fact it is worse because it implies that the bios doesn't control anything important. How about System Management Mode, for one thing.
bet you have an erection, too. I'm typing this in my commercial browser, on a commerical operating system, running on all-types-of-closed Apple hardware, and it feels soooo good!
You are probably using Safari, which is based on Konqueror, an open source project. You are probably running on OS/X, which is based on FreeBSD, an open source project. Granted, your hardware is proprietary. That's one out of three.
As you're probably aware, a system starting up doesn't tell you whether the disk drives are or aren't caching writes. You're probably also aware that some drives and/or controllers and/or drivers have been known to ignore flush requests and cache anyway. Now, it is possible to design a database so that it can handle such failures in the rest of the system. I discussed that with MySQL while we were in the early stages of recovery to ensure that they were aware of this issue. It's not only MySQL who are going to get such an approach from me.
This is very simple. Test the drive or raid controller. See if it lies about cache flushing. If it doesn't, then it was MySQL's fault. I bet you five bucks it was MySQL's fault.
Don't forget that a whole bunch of people who know what they're talking about told you it was MySQL's fault, and why they think so.
Depends on the cause. If the database server software was being lied to by the OS, controller or drives I'm not sure just how much I'm inclined to blame the database server sofware.
The database server software was not being lied to by the OS. If the controller in the machine tested good after coming up and the memory tested good, then the OS was not being lied to by the hardware. Admit it, it was MySQL, just like a dozen experts have already told you.
The chance that it was anything else is vanishingly small. By the way, I develop fault-tolerant systems for a living. I'm sure many of the others who have offered their opinions are similarly qualified. Particularly, read the post of the AC who responded to you, it's an accurate summary of the situation.
Please, let's not entrust all the world's knowledge to a toy database.
Were you drunk when you posted this? Were you on some kind of medication? Are you mentally ill in some way? I'm just wondering what possible excuse you could have for writing something so mind-blowingly rude.
There is no such thing as being too rude to a troll.
I wouldn't characterize only choosing to do business with inferior tools when superior tools are widely available because the inferior tools conform to some arbitrary standard of ideological acceptability "ethics."
There is nothing whatsoever inferior about PostgreSQL or Ingres. Go away, troll.
Oracle, DB2 and Sybase of course all pass the test. I'm unclear on why you would omit those.
Because there is no point in listing any databases that are not open source, for an open source project. Those you mention are very respectable of course, in their own world.
Since at least one of our MySQL database servers has so far restarted successfully with all InnoDB data intact, perhaps you'd care to reconsider your assessment that MySQL is incapable of doing what it just did?
But one didn't. That's a much more informative data point.
A COMPLETE log of all the SQL statements that were applied to it IN the order they were used. This is obtained by the application logging the SQL statements to the SQL log file AFTER the SQL statement is succesfully executed.
When a data base failure occurs, stop everything, 'replay' the backed up SQL logfile (thats on a separate backup system) on a copy of the empty DB there. TADA! you are back in business back to the point of failure!
Read the Wikipedia page. That's exactly what they've done, but because the MySQL database got corrupted, instead of just falling back a few minutes, they may have to go right back to a full backup and replay the log since then, which takes a lot more time than replaying a few transactions.
The solution is to switch to a database that actually implements ACID (the second letter stands for "Consistency" and the last letter stands for "Durability" which is what failed here).
At about 14:15 PST some circuit breakers were tripped in the colocation facility where our servers are housed. Although the facility has a well-stocked generator, this took out power to places inside the facility, including the switch that connects us to the network and all our servers. (Yes, even the machines with dual power supplies -- both circuits got shut off.)
After some minutes, the switch and most of our machines had rebooted. Some of our servers required additional work to get up, and a few may still be sitting there dead but can be worked around.
The sticky point is the database servers, where all the important stuff is. Although we use MySQL's transactional InnoDB tables, they can still sometimes be left in an unrecoverable state.
(Bolding mine.) This proves that MySQL is not ACID, there is no way that a power outage is supposed to cause corruption in a database. This is not a troll, this is a simple conclusion. I really think that Wikipedia should switch to PostgreSQL, which is considerably more mature in terms of ACID compliance.
At about 14:15 PST some circuit breakers were tripped in the colocation facility where our servers are housed. Although the facility has a well-stocked generator, this took out power to places inside the facility, including the switch that connects us to the network and all our servers. (Yes, even the machines with dual power supplies -- both circuits got shut off.)
After some minutes, the switch and most of our machines had rebooted. Some of our servers required additional work to get up, and a few may still be sitting there dead but can be worked around.
The sticky point is the database servers, where all the important stuff is. Although we use MySQL's transactional InnoDB tables, they can still sometimes be left in an unrecoverable state.
(Bolding mine.) This proves that MySQL is not ACID, there is no way that a power outage is supposed to cause corruption in a database. This is not a troll, this is a simple conclusion. I really think that Wikipedia should switch to PostgreSQL, which is considerably more mature in terms of ACID compliance.
Slashdot Mirror
Ms no longer cares about java now that they have their own version of it.
MS hates Java because it is flourishing in spite of all their attempts to prevent that.
...currently hits on the European Council at number 3. This is as a result of the (elected) Council's antidemocratic campaign to force Bill Gates' software patent agenda on the European Union, in direct contravention of the wishes of the the (elected) European Parliament.
I'm confused, why is the pretty-much-unfunny grandparent post modded funny, while this post is modded troll? They seem to be about the same to me, except that one pokes fun at open source while the other pokes fun at proprietary software. Which moderator thinks it's funny to lampoon open source, but it's a troll to lampoon proprietary software?
The criticisms seem valid in both cases.
As far as I'm concerned, if a game doesn't run on Linux, it doesn't exist.
No, it wasn't a troll. A Microsoft employee with mod points, perhaps?
I'm a gamer first and foremost, and in this day and age that means Microsoft.
As far as I'm concerned, if a game doesn't run on Linux, it doesn't exist.
This isn't some Slashdotter's blog. This isn't even from a technology focused publication. This is Forbes printing this. So obviously this is the view of at least somebody at one of the nations leading business and finance publications.
While I deeply detest Apple's heavyhanded reaction to product leaks, I will also note that Forbes has acted as a mouthpiece for Microsoft on many occasions recently, and to my mind has firmly established itself as a less than credible publication.
I think the limit is the fact that Microsoft OS is installed on over 90% of world's desktops
Remember when Microsoft was installed on over 95% of the world's desktops?
If anything remotely looks like a threat to MS, you can bet what you want that they will bodyslam Google. As adequately demonstrated, MS dominance is through bruiser tactics. Don't expect them to stand idly by while someone else takes whet that consider to be their turf. They don't mind losing a lot of money to get power.
Microsoft does mind when the losses start turning into billions, which is how much it would cost them to illegally leverage their desktop OS monopoly.
But I doubt that is what Google wants to do anyway. What would they enter a crowded market and compete with all the Linux distros out there? It doesn't really fit with their portfolio.
There is no chance whatsoever that Google will set out to build its own OS. Linux works perfectly well and Google is well aware that they have more to gain by contributing to the common development pool.
No, Google is setting out to build a web service infrastructure, powered by its 100,000 node (at last count) Linux supercomputer. And after all, this guy's job at Microsoft was to build a web infrastructure.
By the way, it is very doubtful that in California he can be prevented from working in his area of expertise, no matter what his employment contract with Microsoft says.
Microsoft provides full indemnification against Kid Eating events, up to a maximum of $5.
Somebody wants this law so badly they will bend and break any EU rule they can to get this software patent legistaltion through.
None other than Bill Gates. There is a reason he showed up in Brussels the day before the JURI commission was to decide whether the process should be restarted or not. There is a reason that Charlie McCreevy, former head of the Commission and now self-appointed leader of the committee that decides whether to take such steps as ignore the unanimous direction of the European Parliament to restart the process, dances on the end of Bill's string. What is this reason? As former minister of finance of Ireland, and Microsoft being the largest taxpayer in Ireland, Bill Gates paid McCreevy's paycheck. Bill Gates probably still pays McCreevy's paycheck. There is a reason for everything.
How did you manage to be moderated informative? My mind is boggling so much i'm starting to feel dizzy...
Your post wasn't much better, in fact it is worse because it implies that the bios doesn't control anything important. How about System Management Mode, for one thing.
bet you have an erection, too. I'm typing this in my commercial browser, on a commerical operating system, running on all-types-of-closed Apple hardware, and it feels soooo good!
You are probably using Safari, which is based on Konqueror, an open source project. You are probably running on OS/X, which is based on FreeBSD, an open source project. Granted, your hardware is proprietary. That's one out of three.
As you're probably aware, a system starting up doesn't tell you whether the disk drives are or aren't caching writes. You're probably also aware that some drives and/or controllers and/or drivers have been known to ignore flush requests and cache anyway. Now, it is possible to design a database so that it can handle such failures in the rest of the system. I discussed that with MySQL while we were in the early stages of recovery to ensure that they were aware of this issue. It's not only MySQL who are going to get such an approach from me.
This is very simple. Test the drive or raid controller. See if it lies about cache flushing. If it doesn't, then it was MySQL's fault. I bet you five bucks it was MySQL's fault.
Don't forget that a whole bunch of people who know what they're talking about told you it was MySQL's fault, and why they think so.
Depends on the cause. If the database server software was being lied to by the OS, controller or drives I'm not sure just how much I'm inclined to blame the database server sofware.
The database server software was not being lied to by the OS. If the controller in the machine tested good after coming up and the memory tested good, then the OS was not being lied to by the hardware. Admit it, it was MySQL, just like a dozen experts have already told you.
The chance that it was anything else is vanishingly small. By the way, I develop fault-tolerant systems for a living. I'm sure many of the others who have offered their opinions are similarly qualified. Particularly, read the post of the AC who responded to you, it's an accurate summary of the situation.
Please, let's not entrust all the world's knowledge to a toy database.
Were you drunk when you posted this? Were you on some kind of medication? Are you mentally ill in some way? I'm just wondering what possible excuse you could have for writing something so mind-blowingly rude.
There is no such thing as being too rude to a troll.
I wouldn't characterize only choosing to do business with inferior tools when superior tools are widely available because the inferior tools conform to some arbitrary standard of ideological acceptability "ethics."
There is nothing whatsoever inferior about PostgreSQL or Ingres. Go away, troll.
Oracle, DB2 and Sybase of course all pass the test. I'm unclear on why you would omit those.
Because there is no point in listing any databases that are not open source, for an open source project. Those you mention are very respectable of course, in their own world.
Which RDBMSes that you know are 100% ACID compliant? Please name any you know.
PostgreSQL and Ingres. I'll stop there, because I don't want to include any non-open source databases in my list. There are some I am not sure about.
Since at least one of our MySQL database servers has so far restarted successfully with all InnoDB data intact, perhaps you'd care to reconsider your assessment that MySQL is incapable of doing what it just did?
But one didn't. That's a much more informative data point.
The main issue is that we are dealing with north of 1GB of data here
Nice post. I'd just like to add that Wikipedia deals with north of 170 GB, not counting images.
A completely designed, 100% empty database.
A COMPLETE log of all the SQL statements that were applied to it IN the order they were used. This is obtained by the application logging the SQL statements to the SQL log file AFTER the SQL statement is succesfully executed.
When a data base failure occurs, stop everything, 'replay' the backed up SQL logfile (thats on a separate backup system) on a copy of the empty DB there. TADA! you are back in business back to the point of failure!
Read the Wikipedia page. That's exactly what they've done, but because the MySQL database got corrupted, instead of just falling back a few minutes, they may have to go right back to a full backup and replay the log since then, which takes a lot more time than replaying a few transactions.
The solution is to switch to a database that actually implements ACID (the second letter stands for "Consistency" and the last letter stands for "Durability" which is what failed here).
From the wikipedia page:
At about 14:15 PST some circuit breakers were tripped in the colocation facility where our servers are housed. Although the facility has a well-stocked generator, this took out power to places inside the facility, including the switch that connects us to the network and all our servers. (Yes, even the machines with dual power supplies -- both circuits got shut off.)
After some minutes, the switch and most of our machines had rebooted. Some of our servers required additional work to get up, and a few may still be sitting there dead but can be worked around.
The sticky point is the database servers, where all the important stuff is. Although we use MySQL's transactional InnoDB tables, they can still sometimes be left in an unrecoverable state.
(Bolding mine.) This proves that MySQL is not ACID, there is no way that a power outage is supposed to cause corruption in a database. This is not a troll, this is a simple conclusion. I really think that Wikipedia should switch to PostgreSQL, which is considerably more mature in terms of ACID compliance.
From the wikipedia page:
At about 14:15 PST some circuit breakers were tripped in the colocation facility where our servers are housed. Although the facility has a well-stocked generator, this took out power to places inside the facility, including the switch that connects us to the network and all our servers. (Yes, even the machines with dual power supplies -- both circuits got shut off.)
After some minutes, the switch and most of our machines had rebooted. Some of our servers required additional work to get up, and a few may still be sitting there dead but can be worked around.
The sticky point is the database servers, where all the important stuff is. Although we use MySQL's transactional InnoDB tables, they can still sometimes be left in an unrecoverable state.
(Bolding mine.) This proves that MySQL is not ACID, there is no way that a power outage is supposed to cause corruption in a database. This is not a troll, this is a simple conclusion. I really think that Wikipedia should switch to PostgreSQL, which is considerably more mature in terms of ACID compliance.
proof here
That page proves nothing, Mr. Anonymous Coward, it doesn't even mention Linux.