You might be confusing database logs with other sorts of logs. DB logs record the data going in an out of the system while transactions are open and for other data integrity requirements. Basically the log grows and shrinks during processing.
In this case, as I recall, they were just sized wrongly for the size of the database because no-one bothered to do a proper analysis.
Just because there are meausred risks doesn't mean it's safe.
There is nothing that is absolutely safe. All things have risks whether you realise it or not. You gamble with your life every day and you don't realise it. But some are risker than others, the question is are the risks worth the rewards? That's what the sharemarket is about, the "gambling" part of it is neither here nor there.
How are you supposed to prepare for the risk that one side of a completed trade will be withdrawn? That's pretty impossible. Think about it: if you're trading in and out of a stock and one purchase or sale is removed, all your attempts to maximise your profits are turned into attempts to minimise your profits.
It's like saying you just have to accept the risk of someone arbitrarily deciding to put a negative sign in front of your profit figure.
I wonder how old you are, because you sound like my father.
The fact is that there is no harder work than taking a risk. Things like the stock market allow people to take measured risks in return for a greater reward. It also provides cheap capital for businesses and liquidity in trading businesses. Without it the economy would be less efficient and your "hard work" would buy you a whole lot less.
I remember watching that episode after trading in an out of News Corp all day. Made me laugh. Shame you can't undo bad trades like on the Simpsons, though.
I don't have to be a sysadmin to understand what they do. And I understand how systems function, are setup and what good policy is.
The fact is that most sysadmins don't don't cut it technically and fall back on "I control the gates to the kingdom, so screw you" to cover up their inadequacies.
Compliance is important, as I suppose so is management's latest and greatest idea about this methodology, this tool or language, this standard or benchmark and this deadline. But at the end of the day it almost all gets loaded onto developers. Everyone can make rules, but developers have to implement them. That's probably why you have constant battles and have to deal with shoddy software.
Since I've never been a sysadmin, I can safely say all SAs morons who have a God complex. They get a couple of passwords and they think they rule the earth.
Now I agree that developers should have their own database, network, servers or whatever - anything else is madness, but quite often SAs don't do their job and are too arrogant to take direction, especially from a developer. Like when the production database running your call-centre stops because it has run out of log space. I tell the SA that we need more disk space immediately. He says he has to look into it, blah blah blah. Or when they get things wrong: the training system has this parameter set wrong. Please fix it I have X students staring at the ceiling. SA: oh well the manual said that this blah blah blah. They can't get through their heads that developers generally know more about the systems they develop on than them.
They're supposed to enable work, not stop it, but they act like little Hitlers: no access for you!
Obviously, but it makes shopping much easier. Working out what the shipping will be can be a pain and comparisons are much easier without it.
One day everyone who sells on the web will work out that shipping should be free and absorbed into the cost of running the business. Do businesses bill you for the electricity they used in preparing your order?
If you have that much friction with your doctor, then change doctors.
Maybe he's just a pain in the arse. It's one thing to take an interest in your treatment and have some healthy skepticism about the doctor, but he sounds pretty combative.
What you pay for when you visit a doctor is neither here nor there. It's the way they run their business. If it costs you too much money, go elsewhere. You have to expect the doctor to try and make a certain amount of money and unless he's blatantly over-servicing in order to essentially defraud, it's really none of your concern.
That little invention really reflects how stupid this guy is. So much for abstraction when all your variables have their name encoded with their concrete representation. God help you if you want to change the type of your var. It global search and replace for you.
Saying software is too complex is stating the bleeding obvious. But the world is complex and it's not that easy building software, wether you're a programmer or user, that can simplify it. A clue to this is how good, user-friendly software is much harder to write.
He keeps on pushing his Intentional Software barrow, but where are the techniques that actually deliver results. Anything most programmers will come up with will be just as impenetrable as C. The problem is programmers are not known for their empathy for users and don't really want to try to find out what it means to not know how to use a computer or its software.
And the service, which officially launched last week, is enjoyable to use, as long as you can keep track of the various rules and restrictions on certain songs, a minor annoyance.
Then later:
It turns out "I Lost It" was only available if I opted for the a la carte feature. I either had to buy the track for 99 cents or be content hearing just 30 seconds of it. What a pain.
But then Wired never has been a hotbed of journalistic talent.
I'd say Rupert didn't mind this one for a few reasons. He obviously likes the Simpsons since he's appeared on the show and done his voice. He and his company (News Corp, the parent of Fox) is constantly getting ribbed by the show and he is (or used to be) Australian and therefore has a sense of humour about himself.
I don't think Moore's law has got anything to do with the possibility of AI. There are much more fundamental questions than performance or capacity. Like:
- What is the nature of intelligence? Can someone give a concrete definition of it, including all aspects such as creativity and inspiration? - Can things like emotions and physiology be separated out from intelligence or are they integral? - If not, how does the brain function, what are the essential components and insofar as it relates to thinking, in a detailed and complete sense?
I think it's easy to mimic aspects of what the brain does, but that doesn't equate to intelligence.
You sound like the perennial broken record that plays whenever this topic comes up. No, Apple hardware is not overpriced and is a good value proposition if you can afford it. Just because it's proprietary and not priced at rock bottom doesn't mean it bad. The opposite is true. Commodity hardware and OSes have given us Windows and PCs.
Contrary to what you say, it would be a mistake release OS X for x86. It would lose it's integration and ease of use which constitutes a large part of its value and it would send Apple broke. No-one has been able to make money against the Microsoft homogeny and you're suggesting that Apple dump their hardware and compete against a predatory monopoly. Pure genius, pal.
Wow. You looked up the whois information. Congratulations on your investigative skills. But that information is for the company. And obviously the website isn't active. If you must know, I sell software. Anyway I'm a citizen (or 'resident', in the official sense) of two countries and I also live in others from time to time. You'll need my IP address to figure out which, which is a bit harder to work out.
You know, I've never had a stalker take interest in me before. I quite flattered. Even though you seem rather creepy. But shouldn't you be spending your energy on finding a girlfriend or boyfriend. I know that's a probably a challenge for someone like you, I'm spoken for, unfortunately.
SCO's best strategy is to convince one company that they've got a claim and that the company is in violation of that claim. If they can do that without going to court, then they are golden: if any entity which they sued caves, then SCO can move against companies like Red Hat and SuSE, and against the Australian Competition Commission.
So all SCO has to do is convince IBM to hand over $3Bil with no proof. Gotcha. If SCO manage to do that I'll buy a Linux license. I don't see how one party agreeing to anything effects any other party though. Nothing is proven.
And how are they going to move against the ACCC? They haven't even issued a ruling of any sort, or even said they're in a position to. Even if they did, they couldn't be sued for it. They may be able to take court action to seek a ruling be overturned.
Learn what the term "ad hominem" means before using it.
Sorry, you can't make up your own definitions for words to support your argument. Ad hominem is an attack on the speaker instead of the argument. Literally it means "against the man".
The rest of your reply just reinforces the points I made. You still don't get it. I fear for America's future if you represent its youth.
Slashdot Mirror
You might be confusing database logs with other sorts of logs. DB logs record the data going in an out of the system while transactions are open and for other data integrity requirements. Basically the log grows and shrinks during processing.
In this case, as I recall, they were just sized wrongly for the size of the database because no-one bothered to do a proper analysis.
Just because there are meausred risks doesn't mean it's safe.
There is nothing that is absolutely safe. All things have risks whether you realise it or not. You gamble with your life every day and you don't realise it. But some are risker than others, the question is are the risks worth the rewards? That's what the sharemarket is about, the "gambling" part of it is neither here nor there.
How are you supposed to prepare for the risk that one side of a completed trade will be withdrawn? That's pretty impossible. Think about it: if you're trading in and out of a stock and one purchase or sale is removed, all your attempts to maximise your profits are turned into attempts to minimise your profits.
It's like saying you just have to accept the risk of someone arbitrarily deciding to put a negative sign in front of your profit figure.
There is no easier way than hard work.
I wonder how old you are, because you sound like my father.
The fact is that there is no harder work than taking a risk. Things like the stock market allow people to take measured risks in return for a greater reward. It also provides cheap capital for businesses and liquidity in trading businesses. Without it the economy would be less efficient and your "hard work" would buy you a whole lot less.
I remember watching that episode after trading in an out of News Corp all day. Made me laugh. Shame you can't undo bad trades like on the Simpsons, though.
I don't have to be a sysadmin to understand what they do. And I understand how systems function, are setup and what good policy is.
The fact is that most sysadmins don't don't cut it technically and fall back on "I control the gates to the kingdom, so screw you" to cover up their inadequacies.
Compliance is important, as I suppose so is management's latest and greatest idea about this methodology, this tool or language, this standard or benchmark and this deadline. But at the end of the day it almost all gets loaded onto developers. Everyone can make rules, but developers have to implement them. That's probably why you have constant battles and have to deal with shoddy software.
Since I've never been a sysadmin, I can safely say all SAs morons who have a God complex. They get a couple of passwords and they think they rule the earth.
Now I agree that developers should have their own database, network, servers or whatever - anything else is madness, but quite often SAs don't do their job and are too arrogant to take direction, especially from a developer. Like when the production database running your call-centre stops because it has run out of log space. I tell the SA that we need more disk space immediately. He says he has to look into it, blah blah blah. Or when they get things wrong: the training system has this parameter set wrong. Please fix it I have X students staring at the ceiling. SA: oh well the manual said that this blah blah blah. They can't get through their heads that developers generally know more about the systems they develop on than them.
They're supposed to enable work, not stop it, but they act like little Hitlers: no access for you!
Obviously, but it makes shopping much easier. Working out what the shipping will be can be a pain and comparisons are much easier without it.
One day everyone who sells on the web will work out that shipping should be free and absorbed into the cost of running the business. Do businesses bill you for the electricity they used in preparing your order?
If you have that much friction with your doctor, then change doctors.
Maybe he's just a pain in the arse. It's one thing to take an interest in your treatment and have some healthy skepticism about the doctor, but he sounds pretty combative.
What you pay for when you visit a doctor is neither here nor there. It's the way they run their business. If it costs you too much money, go elsewhere. You have to expect the doctor to try and make a certain amount of money and unless he's blatantly over-servicing in order to essentially defraud, it's really none of your concern.
I assume by "dirtbags" you mean the record companies.
Actually, I read Slashot to get these sorts of tips.
Does the old version (6.3?) still work after you install this?
That little invention really reflects how stupid this guy is. So much for abstraction when all your variables have their name encoded with their concrete representation. God help you if you want to change the type of your var. It global search and replace for you.
Saying software is too complex is stating the bleeding obvious. But the world is complex and it's not that easy building software, wether you're a programmer or user, that can simplify it. A clue to this is how good, user-friendly software is much harder to write.
He keeps on pushing his Intentional Software barrow, but where are the techniques that actually deliver results. Anything most programmers will come up with will be just as impenetrable as C. The problem is programmers are not known for their empathy for users and don't really want to try to find out what it means to not know how to use a computer or its software.
Yeah and the way she contradicts herself:
And the service, which officially launched last week, is enjoyable to use, as long as you can keep track of the various rules and restrictions on certain songs, a minor annoyance.
Then later:
It turns out "I Lost It" was only available if I opted for the a la carte feature. I either had to buy the track for 99 cents or be content hearing just 30 seconds of it. What a pain.
But then Wired never has been a hotbed of journalistic talent.
Rupert Murdoch: terrific dancer
I'd say Rupert didn't mind this one for a few reasons. He obviously likes the Simpsons since he's appeared on the show and done his voice. He and his company (News Corp, the parent of Fox) is constantly getting ribbed by the show and he is (or used to be) Australian and therefore has a sense of humour about himself.
I don't think Moore's law has got anything to do with the possibility of AI. There are much more fundamental questions than performance or capacity. Like:
- What is the nature of intelligence? Can someone give a concrete definition of it, including all aspects such as creativity and inspiration?
- Can things like emotions and physiology be separated out from intelligence or are they integral?
- If not, how does the brain function, what are the essential components and insofar as it relates to thinking, in a detailed and complete sense?
I think it's easy to mimic aspects of what the brain does, but that doesn't equate to intelligence.
Possibly. If there was drawing going on that may have taken up the CPU.
That's strange. On my Athalon 1800 running W2K it runs at about 1%. What else are you running?
It's easy to track terrorists by the telltale radar signature of their turbans.
You sound like the perennial broken record that plays whenever this topic comes up. No, Apple hardware is not overpriced and is a good value proposition if you can afford it. Just because it's proprietary and not priced at rock bottom doesn't mean it bad. The opposite is true. Commodity hardware and OSes have given us Windows and PCs.
Contrary to what you say, it would be a mistake release OS X for x86. It would lose it's integration and ease of use which constitutes a large part of its value and it would send Apple broke. No-one has been able to make money against the Microsoft homogeny and you're suggesting that Apple dump their hardware and compete against a predatory monopoly. Pure genius, pal.
Wow. You looked up the whois information. Congratulations on your investigative skills. But that information is for the company. And obviously the website isn't active. If you must know, I sell software. Anyway I'm a citizen (or 'resident', in the official sense) of two countries and I also live in others from time to time. You'll need my IP address to figure out which, which is a bit harder to work out.
You know, I've never had a stalker take interest in me before. I quite flattered. Even though you seem rather creepy. But shouldn't you be spending your energy on finding a girlfriend or boyfriend. I know that's a probably a challenge for someone like you, I'm spoken for, unfortunately.
SCO's best strategy is to convince one company that they've got a claim and that the company is in violation of that claim. If they can do that without going to court, then they are golden: if any entity which they sued caves, then SCO can move against companies like Red Hat and SuSE, and against the Australian Competition Commission.
So all SCO has to do is convince IBM to hand over $3Bil with no proof. Gotcha. If SCO manage to do that I'll buy a Linux license. I don't see how one party agreeing to anything effects any other party though. Nothing is proven.
And how are they going to move against the ACCC? They haven't even issued a ruling of any sort, or even said they're in a position to. Even if they did, they couldn't be sued for it. They may be able to take court action to seek a ruling be overturned.
the challenge is how to convince the wife we really need this for our home
You mean instead of your home. Have you looked at the prices?
...that CmdrTaco posted this story in the hope that the company might send him some product as a thank you?
Learn what the term "ad hominem" means before using it.
Sorry, you can't make up your own definitions for words to support your argument. Ad hominem is an attack on the speaker instead of the argument. Literally it means "against the man".
The rest of your reply just reinforces the points I made. You still don't get it. I fear for America's future if you represent its youth.