I'm not saying your wrong, but don't you think companies take that into account when they choose a target?
Regular people who value their family should be able to involve themselves in issues that are also important to them. If every regular person caves at any lawsuit, regular people will be abused at will by non-human legal entities (like a corporation).
If her statements are true, the legal system should allow her to win the case without paying too much money.
doubtless been able to convince everybody of the truth of their case without recourse to litigation.
I certainly have doubts. It can be very hard to prove a negative, and the company might find it difficult to reach out to all of the people that the website misinformed (if the website's statements are false).
What if her statements are false? Lawsuits exist for a reason, and since we don't have the facts, you have no way to know that a lawsuit was unjustified.
While some people I'm sure have a knee-jerk, enti-business mentality, most people are more reasonable and just care about the truth in this case. Were her statements true or false? If true, then of the business will lose in the court of law and the court of public opinion. If false, they will win in both.
Sadly, in "Oh Canada", the person _accused_ of libel has to _prove_ that it is true. Go read up on Canadian law.
I don't think that's necessarily bad. If the burden of proof is on the plaintiff to prove that a statement is not true, it opens up almost any kind of libel at all. I could say you eat children, and it would be very hard to prove that you don't.
If you're going around saying damaging things about people, don't you think you should have proof?
Large systems need to rely on much more independence of individual units. For example, cells in an organism are somewhat independent; I don't think a mammal would work if the brain tried to micromanage every task a cell performed.
I assume you are referring to the "not always" parenthetical when you say "read the next one".
Your one sentence that I responded to promoted a misconception without any backing whatsoever. While that one sentence sounded benign due to the general "on the fence" type attitude of the post (i.e. "not always"), I think it can be very misleading.
After all, does PostgreSQL provide better write performance, or worse? Does MySQL provide better read performance, or worse? Both statements highly depend on the application. Not only that, it depends on whether you're really operating at the limits of the RDBMS or not, and which limits. In other words, does the performance scale, and how?
First of all, I'm wondering how my post was flamebait. I didn't even single out any one country. The post I responded to was much more like flamebait.
Anyway, I limited my post to GDP because it's measurable, and I assumed that was what my post's parent was referring to when he said "overtake".
Household production is supposed to be taken into account in GDP, and negative externalities are supposed to be subtracted. But those things are very hard to measure. You're right that those aspects of the economy are important. However, it would be a hard case to make that the United States wasn't economically the most powerful nation. Again, that's not necessarily what's most important, but it seemed to be what the poster was referring to.
And money is not necessary for a high GDP, it just makes it easier to measure. A communism could still have a positive GDP.
When you lead, there are no guidelines and the outcome is based on your best effort.
Most policies aren't new, and history can be an excellent guide. However, most politicians like to say that their policy is unique in some way, because they don't want the citizens to examine the results of the same policy happening in the past.
once these countries catch up to the US and overtake it
Change is the only constant, I'll give you that. But the trick is that you don't know which nations are really heading in the right direction to eventually acheive the world's highest per-captia GDP. You seem to think it's going be China, India, or both. But both countries have serious problems, just like the U.S. and every other nation. It could just as well be Japan, Germany, or anyone else. And by the time that happens, the United States and every other country on the planet may be so different that your point is meaningless.
Any large organization has problems maintaining healthy growth. You can't just pick a growth rate and extrapolate it.
Nowadays, MySQL only outperforms Postgres on reads.
That's certainly not true in the general case. There are many situations in which PostgreSQL will outperform MySQL on reads. Particularly if you need one of PostgreSQL's features to achieve reasonable performance.
What makes you think he would have won, or should have won? Trademarks apply to specific trades. While "Windows" may be a general term, in the computer industry, it's a specific term. Even the abbreviation "Win" carries the implication that it relates to Microsoft Windows. It's not overly general in the computer world, it's a valid trademark, that guy was trying to use the trademark to associate himself with Microsoft Windows, and Microsoft wanted to stop him from doing so. That's exactly what trademark law is supposed to be used for.
PostgreSQL-based tools and applications are growing fast. Perhaps I should have said "and applications", because PostgreSQL's toolset is certainly competitive. I think the main gap remaining is application support, because there are still many applications that do not recognize PostgreSQL.
PostgreSQL is rock solid, and very extensible (user-defined aggregates, user-defined procedural languages, user defined functions, triggers, user defined types, table functions, and much more). It probably also performs better in many situations due, in part, to MS SQLs locking vs. PostgreSQL's MVCC.
However, there are more tools available for MS SQL, and there is some form of multi-master replication and probably better table partitioning. MS SQL is not really a bad database, but I think PostgreSQL has it beat except on those two points.
Any real performance analysis is heavily application dependent, however. If that's what you care about, you need to do your own tests.
For real multi-master clustering, I think there are commercial options availabile; but yes, it'll be nice when it's included.
Replication may never be "included", in the sense that it's a part of the core distribution. There's really no reason to have it there, and several reasons not to: (1) New releases of the replication software would have to wait until a new release of PostgreSQL. (2) There are many completely different things that go under the heading "replication" that are used in different situations, depending on how often you expect the connections to be up, whether you're replicating for redundancy or speed, etc. Often, a real situation will require using multiple types of replication. (3) It puts an extra burden on the developers to maintain every line of code in every piece of replication software as well as the rest of the database.
What users really want is to have another well-maintained, BSD licensed project that achieves things not possible with Slony-I, PgPool, etc.
Do you have any evidence to back up your claims? Are all CA employees supposedly wizards with Ingres that can solve any problem at a moment's notice?
Many companies around the world provide very high quality support for PostgreSQL. To say that support for Ingres is better you're going to need to provide some evidence.
Can you tell me a little more about any issues you had when upgrading? I just installed my first production FreeBSD box (using 5.4) a month ago.
So far I've had a great experience with FreeBSD. Before that my only experience was GNU/Linux (mostly on Debian).
Any useful resources you have would be nice too. I'm still relatively new to FreeBSD, and I'm not familiar with everything about it. If it's not in the handbook, I don't know it.
I disagree that "sufficiently" is equivalent to "well".
Most college-age people that I know communicate awkwardly, at best, or ineffectively, at worst, when in any setting outside of casual social conversation. The casual conversation may indeed be simplified, but at the expense of precise and concise language use elsewhere.
Also, this language problem has a huge impact on academic performance. Test taking is always dependent on a clear understanding of the question, often more than understanding the material itself [1]. Sometimes foreign students, in my opinion, place too much emphasis on studying very hard, rather than learning the Engligh language well enough to make studying much easier.
[1] In Physics, I had a quiz every week. Since the class was at 8am, often I would not attend class at all before the next quiz. I would stare at the quiz, wondering "what does that symbol mean?" and then eventually deduce the meaning from the given formulas and the question wording. Not only did I learn a lot from those quizzes, but those were generally my highest quiz grades. Once I even deduced a constant because it was used in several questions, and the questions were multiple choice. I just used my calculator, worked backwards, and found the only value of the constant that would consistently answer all the questions from that available answer options.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm not saying your wrong, but don't you think companies take that into account when they choose a target?
Regular people who value their family should be able to involve themselves in issues that are also important to them. If every regular person caves at any lawsuit, regular people will be abused at will by non-human legal entities (like a corporation).
If her statements are true, the legal system should allow her to win the case without paying too much money.
doubtless been able to convince everybody of the truth of their case without recourse to litigation.
I certainly have doubts. It can be very hard to prove a negative, and the company might find it difficult to reach out to all of the people that the website misinformed (if the website's statements are false).
What if her statements are false? Lawsuits exist for a reason, and since we don't have the facts, you have no way to know that a lawsuit was unjustified.
found guilty in the court of public opinion
While some people I'm sure have a knee-jerk, enti-business mentality, most people are more reasonable and just care about the truth in this case. Were her statements true or false? If true, then of the business will lose in the court of law and the court of public opinion. If false, they will win in both.
If she is a misinformed nutjob, she can't be sued for libel, from what I understand.
Sadly, in "Oh Canada", the person _accused_ of libel has to _prove_ that it is true. Go read up on Canadian law.
I don't think that's necessarily bad. If the burden of proof is on the plaintiff to prove that a statement is not true, it opens up almost any kind of libel at all. I could say you eat children, and it would be very hard to prove that you don't.
If you're going around saying damaging things about people, don't you think you should have proof?
We [Canada] have more natural resources [than the U.S.]
Are you sure about that? Do you have a source? The U.S. has lots of Coal, and I always thought it had more oil than Canada also.
Which country consumes + exports more natural resources?
The problem is that communism doesn't scale.
...just like any other hierarchy.
Large systems need to rely on much more independence of individual units. For example, cells in an organism are somewhat independent; I don't think a mammal would work if the brain tried to micromanage every task a cell performed.
I assume you are referring to the "not always" parenthetical when you say "read the next one".
Your one sentence that I responded to promoted a misconception without any backing whatsoever. While that one sentence sounded benign due to the general "on the fence" type attitude of the post (i.e. "not always"), I think it can be very misleading.
After all, does PostgreSQL provide better write performance, or worse? Does MySQL provide better read performance, or worse? Both statements highly depend on the application. Not only that, it depends on whether you're really operating at the limits of the RDBMS or not, and which limits. In other words, does the performance scale, and how?
Your generalization provided no information.
First of all, I'm wondering how my post was flamebait. I didn't even single out any one country. The post I responded to was much more like flamebait.
Anyway, I limited my post to GDP because it's measurable, and I assumed that was what my post's parent was referring to when he said "overtake".
Household production is supposed to be taken into account in GDP, and negative externalities are supposed to be subtracted. But those things are very hard to measure. You're right that those aspects of the economy are important. However, it would be a hard case to make that the United States wasn't economically the most powerful nation. Again, that's not necessarily what's most important, but it seemed to be what the poster was referring to.
And money is not necessary for a high GDP, it just makes it easier to measure. A communism could still have a positive GDP.
When you lead, there are no guidelines and the outcome is based on your best effort.
Most policies aren't new, and history can be an excellent guide. However, most politicians like to say that their policy is unique in some way, because they don't want the citizens to examine the results of the same policy happening in the past.
once these countries catch up to the US and overtake it
Change is the only constant, I'll give you that. But the trick is that you don't know which nations are really heading in the right direction to eventually acheive the world's highest per-captia GDP. You seem to think it's going be China, India, or both. But both countries have serious problems, just like the U.S. and every other nation. It could just as well be Japan, Germany, or anyone else. And by the time that happens, the United States and every other country on the planet may be so different that your point is meaningless.
Any large organization has problems maintaining healthy growth. You can't just pick a growth rate and extrapolate it.
Nowadays, MySQL only outperforms Postgres on reads.
That's certainly not true in the general case. There are many situations in which PostgreSQL will outperform MySQL on reads. Particularly if you need one of PostgreSQL's features to achieve reasonable performance.
What makes you think he would have won, or should have won? Trademarks apply to specific trades. While "Windows" may be a general term, in the computer industry, it's a specific term. Even the abbreviation "Win" carries the implication that it relates to Microsoft Windows. It's not overly general in the computer world, it's a valid trademark, that guy was trying to use the trademark to associate himself with Microsoft Windows, and Microsoft wanted to stop him from doing so. That's exactly what trademark law is supposed to be used for.
Not only that, if you really wanted to you could use Slony-I to do a fast switchover after the data has already caught up on the slave.
PostgreSQL-based tools and applications are growing fast. Perhaps I should have said "and applications", because PostgreSQL's toolset is certainly competitive. I think the main gap remaining is application support, because there are still many applications that do not recognize PostgreSQL.
All indicators seem to point to MySQL having more installed systems.
However, if you look at the traffic on the PostgreSQL mailing lists and #postgresql on irc, I'm sure you'll find plenty of community members.
I would say that both databases are well beyond the "critical mass" of informed users to sufficiently support other users.
PostgreSQL is rock solid, and very extensible (user-defined aggregates, user-defined procedural languages, user defined functions, triggers, user defined types, table functions, and much more). It probably also performs better in many situations due, in part, to MS SQLs locking vs. PostgreSQL's MVCC.
However, there are more tools available for MS SQL, and there is some form of multi-master replication and probably better table partitioning. MS SQL is not really a bad database, but I think PostgreSQL has it beat except on those two points.
Any real performance analysis is heavily application dependent, however. If that's what you care about, you need to do your own tests.
For real multi-master clustering, I think there are commercial options availabile; but yes, it'll be nice when it's included.
Replication may never be "included", in the sense that it's a part of the core distribution. There's really no reason to have it there, and several reasons not to:
(1) New releases of the replication software would have to wait until a new release of PostgreSQL.
(2) There are many completely different things that go under the heading "replication" that are used in different situations, depending on how often you expect the connections to be up, whether you're replicating for redundancy or speed, etc. Often, a real situation will require using multiple types of replication.
(3) It puts an extra burden on the developers to maintain every line of code in every piece of replication software as well as the rest of the database.
What users really want is to have another well-maintained, BSD licensed project that achieves things not possible with Slony-I, PgPool, etc.
Do you have any evidence to back up your claims? Are all CA employees supposedly wizards with Ingres that can solve any problem at a moment's notice?
Many companies around the world provide very high quality support for PostgreSQL. To say that support for Ingres is better you're going to need to provide some evidence.
If you didn't have stored procedures or functions, you couldn't do any of the following:
-user defined type
-functional index
-user defined aggregate
-trigger
-complex constraint
If it's code that maintains your data integrity, and is fundamental to the meaning of the data, put it in the database. Else put in application.
So what are you removing from /sbin, /bin, etc? I think I'm misunderstanding.
I'm fairly new to FreeBSD; just installed my first production box (single proc).
What is the status of SMP support? Should I run FreeBSD on a multi-proc system?
What about threading? What about Java?
I'm also a little curious about virtualization (like with Xen), but that's not my top priority right now.
aren't all port files usually in /usr/local?
Can you tell me a little more about any issues you had when upgrading? I just installed my first production FreeBSD box (using 5.4) a month ago.
So far I've had a great experience with FreeBSD. Before that my only experience was GNU/Linux (mostly on Debian).
Any useful resources you have would be nice too. I'm still relatively new to FreeBSD, and I'm not familiar with everything about it. If it's not in the handbook, I don't know it.
I disagree that "sufficiently" is equivalent to "well".
Most college-age people that I know communicate awkwardly, at best, or ineffectively, at worst, when in any setting outside of casual social conversation. The casual conversation may indeed be simplified, but at the expense of precise and concise language use elsewhere.
Also, this language problem has a huge impact on academic performance. Test taking is always dependent on a clear understanding of the question, often more than understanding the material itself [1]. Sometimes foreign students, in my opinion, place too much emphasis on studying very hard, rather than learning the Engligh language well enough to make studying much easier.
[1] In Physics, I had a quiz every week. Since the class was at 8am, often I would not attend class at all before the next quiz. I would stare at the quiz, wondering "what does that symbol mean?" and then eventually deduce the meaning from the given formulas and the question wording. Not only did I learn a lot from those quizzes, but those were generally my highest quiz grades. Once I even deduced a constant because it was used in several questions, and the questions were multiple choice. I just used my calculator, worked backwards, and found the only value of the constant that would consistently answer all the questions from that available answer options.