PITR is not a requirement of "durability". ACID, as far as I'm aware, does not include what happens if your data center goes up in a ball of flames, only what happens if your computer crashes.
In that case, PG is perfectly durable, using write-ahead logging. You can shut off your computer at any time and the result will be a sane dataset, with all committed transactions intact.
"Once you calm back down and bother to look at the cars in traffic around you, notice how most of these SUVs are single persons driving and are not being used to haul or tow vehicles."
That's usually me, too. however, although 40% of the time I'm not, 60% of the time I am.
I think the biggest problem in the whole scenario that everyone is missing out on is the fast pace of life that has become standard in America. The reason that we even need cars (instead of public transportation) is often because we need to do everything RIGHT NOW instead of when we happen to get there. Having things scheduled every hour of the day necessitates and individual means of transporting yourself there. If we scheduled breaks a few hours in-between each activity, we might not need a car for every individual in the family.
Unfortunately, most of American culture (including work, school, play, events, etc.) is centered on the fast-paced lifestyle. So we each need an overly-equipped car to keep up.
We're looking into getting minivan when we have the money to do it. I get 18-20mpg on my Isuzu Rodeo in-town, though. It only cost $12,000 when it was 1-year-old. I bought it 8 years ago. I've only had to have it serviced once in that entire time (costing only $400), which is one of the reasons I'm wary about purchasing a minivan (they tend to need to be replaced or heavily serviced after about 5 years).
You're probably right about most people being better off with a van. I think conversion vans are the greatest thing since sliced bread. However, I'm weary of how lasting the newer minivans are.
"People who drive SUV's, IMO, greatly suffer from the heard mentality anyways. So, any logical argument is more than likely going to be completely lost. IMO, owning a SUV is about status and keeping up with the neighbors."
This is complete crap. I have an SUV, and I know both rich and poor people who have SUVs. The reason they get SUVs is usually because they have to cart crap around. Before SUV's it was the station wagon - again a big car that you can load a bunch of stuff in.
I need my SUV for many things, not the least of which is carting around my older son's wheelchair and my younger son's stroller, my older son's emergency medical bag, his specialized formula and feeding supplies, and regular kid stuff.
I often use my car to help neighbors move stuff. My Dad used his in his business when he had to move stuff to and from his warehouse.
Basically, people get SUV's for two reasons: (1) kids, and (2) to prevent from having to rent U-Hauls for small transport jobs.
"Worse, both parents are driving SUVs. How many times do they need to haul two SUV full of kids around."
It's not that. Do you have kids? I'm guessing no. Both parents need to be equipped to take the kids anywhere, or else you wind up playing the constant car switcharoo game. For example, if your wife is dropping off the kids, and you are picking them up, and you have to cart their baseball/basketball/whatever equipment with them, maybe friends, and maybe you have a passenger, too, you need an SUV. If only one of you ever took care of the kids, and the other one didn't need the car for transport purposes, sure, you only need one. And, in fact, most people like that only have one.
Actually, if you want to give false data to the true spammers, just stick false email addresses on you website, or, better yet, email addresses of known spammers. That way you aren't doing anything unethical yourself, and someone else would have to be doing something unethical to get those addresses..
The only problem with this is that it encourages people to include images already attached - meaning spammers will send images WITH their emails, causing even more bandwidth to be lost even if you don't open it. With remote images, you get the advantage of only sending the images to people who care.
"lack of best practices in the Open Source community."
The ONLY organization who follows best practices as I can tell, proprietary or open-source, is GNU.
I mean, honestly, in how many businesses do you think lawyers review code written by internal employees to verify that the code they include is original. How might one validate that, anyway? If someone is copying from a private archive, it would be impossible to tell, because it's private.
Anyway, open-source in general is the best about this, because the source code is available for third-party examination. So, if you feel someone might be infringeing on you, no need for lawyers or subpeonas, just check the code from the website!
With proprietary software, if someone is infringing, you have to subpoena the source code just to verify it, and you wind up with significant amounts of egg on your face if you are wrong.
I've heard a lot about SMTP auth, but I don't know anyone who actually uses it. Is it very widespread? All of the postfix servers I manage use IP-based authentication.
"Note that you would usually connect to your own SMTP server to send that message since you don't have credentials to use company X's mail server and we can assume that it's not an open relay."
Not really. They are usually IP-based, and the salesperson would be on their network.
How does SPF handle roaming users? For example, if I'm a salesman and am in company X's building (not my own), how do I send mail as myself to a technician? Won't my SMTP be coming from the wrong SMTP server?
* Windows - 1 CD
* MS Office - 2 CDs
* VS.net - 3 CDs if I remember (and you only get 1 interface and 3 languages!)
* Photoshop - 1 CD
* Quicken - 1 CD
* Exchange (? never used it)
* SQL Server 2 CDs (I think - it's been a while)
* WinZIpp - download only
And this is only a small subset of what's available on most Linux distributions.
It's not bloat because (a) you can not load it, (b) even if you load it, it doesn't slow you down unless you run it, and (c) you have the freedom to build your own distribution without it.
That's actually a very interesting idea. The only drawback is that installing things on people's computers is much more invasive than sending them an email.
Perhaps what is really needed is a skinnable RSS reader, so that we can skin it to look like it's directly from our company. That's actually a great idea. If it comes out commercially in 6-10 months you can tell people that you thought of it and told someone on Slashdot about it.
It's a little different when a corporation is doing this rather than an individual. Individuals have freedom, while corporations are products of the state and thus do not have the same freedoms individuals have.
"If I had a nickel for every spammer who claimed to be a legit marketer, I could retire to a place that didn't have email."
If I had a nickel for every convict that claimed to be innocent, I could retire as well. That does not mean that innocent people don't exist, nor that innocent people aren't wrongfully convicted. Just because everyone who behaves like X claims to be Y does not imply that every who claims to be Y is in fact X. You need to take another logic course.
"My ideal world is one where, in order to receive marketing fluff, one had to walk into the corporate offices, find the director of marketing and slap them in the face. Twice."
Slashdot Mirror
PITR is not a requirement of "durability". ACID, as far as I'm aware, does not include what happens if your data center goes up in a ball of flames, only what happens if your computer crashes.
In that case, PG is perfectly durable, using write-ahead logging. You can shut off your computer at any time and the result will be a sane dataset, with all committed transactions intact.
*GASP* is this a 9th circuit ruling that makes sense? I'm in shock!!!!
"Once you calm back down and bother to look at the cars in traffic around you, notice how most of these SUVs are single persons driving and are not being used to haul or tow vehicles."
That's usually me, too. however, although 40% of the time I'm not, 60% of the time I am.
I think the biggest problem in the whole scenario that everyone is missing out on is the fast pace of life that has become standard in America. The reason that we even need cars (instead of public transportation) is often because we need to do everything RIGHT NOW instead of when we happen to get there. Having things scheduled every hour of the day necessitates and individual means of transporting yourself there. If we scheduled breaks a few hours in-between each activity, we might not need a car for every individual in the family.
Unfortunately, most of American culture (including work, school, play, events, etc.) is centered on the fast-paced lifestyle. So we each need an overly-equipped car to keep up.
We're looking into getting minivan when we have the money to do it. I get 18-20mpg on my Isuzu Rodeo in-town, though. It only cost $12,000 when it was 1-year-old. I bought it 8 years ago. I've only had to have it serviced once in that entire time (costing only $400), which is one of the reasons I'm wary about purchasing a minivan (they tend to need to be replaced or heavily serviced after about 5 years).
You're probably right about most people being better off with a van. I think conversion vans are the greatest thing since sliced bread. However, I'm weary of how lasting the newer minivans are.
"People who drive SUV's, IMO, greatly suffer from the heard mentality anyways. So, any logical argument is more than likely going to be completely lost. IMO, owning a SUV is about status and keeping up with the neighbors."
This is complete crap. I have an SUV, and I know both rich and poor people who have SUVs. The reason they get SUVs is usually because they have to cart crap around. Before SUV's it was the station wagon - again a big car that you can load a bunch of stuff in.
I need my SUV for many things, not the least of which is carting around my older son's wheelchair and my younger son's stroller, my older son's emergency medical bag, his specialized formula and feeding supplies, and regular kid stuff.
I often use my car to help neighbors move stuff. My Dad used his in his business when he had to move stuff to and from his warehouse.
Basically, people get SUV's for two reasons: (1) kids, and (2) to prevent from having to rent U-Hauls for small transport jobs.
"Worse, both parents are driving SUVs. How many times do they need to haul two SUV full of kids around."
It's not that. Do you have kids? I'm guessing no. Both parents need to be equipped to take the kids anywhere, or else you wind up playing the constant car switcharoo game. For example, if your wife is dropping off the kids, and you are picking them up, and you have to cart their baseball/basketball/whatever equipment with them, maybe friends, and maybe you have a passenger, too, you need an SUV. If only one of you ever took care of the kids, and the other one didn't need the car for transport purposes, sure, you only need one. And, in fact, most people like that only have one.
Actually, if you want to give false data to the true spammers, just stick false email addresses on you website, or, better yet, email addresses of known spammers. That way you aren't doing anything unethical yourself, and someone else would have to be doing something unethical to get those addresses..
The only problem with this is that it encourages people to include images already attached - meaning spammers will send images WITH their emails, causing even more bandwidth to be lost even if you don't open it. With remote images, you get the advantage of only sending the images to people who care.
You obviously have never had a two-year-old.
It's not the word size of the CPU and has nothing to do with the word size of the CPU, it's the smallest addressable unit.
So, if my CPU has 101010101024023041902341 bits, but I can address memory down to the bit, then bytes are equal to bits.
You forgot, RMS likes Scheme and Lisp, so his response would probably be
((lambda (entity)
(write "Dear ")
(write entity)
(newline)
(write "Please RTFM, STFW, FU, HAND")
) "SCO")
I believe on subpoenas "reasonable costs" include the direct costs like paper, not indirect costs like employee and lawyer time.
"lack of best practices in the Open Source community."
The ONLY organization who follows best practices as I can tell, proprietary or open-source, is GNU.
I mean, honestly, in how many businesses do you think lawyers review code written by internal employees to verify that the code they include is original. How might one validate that, anyway? If someone is copying from a private archive, it would be impossible to tell, because it's private.
Anyway, open-source in general is the best about this, because the source code is available for third-party examination. So, if you feel someone might be infringeing on you, no need for lawyers or subpeonas, just check the code from the website!
With proprietary software, if someone is infringing, you have to subpoena the source code just to verify it, and you wind up with significant amounts of egg on your face if you are wrong.
I did, but it was unclear to me. Probably my head cold.
"Otherwise you're an open relay."
Uhhh no. Otherwise you don't allow people not on your network to send mail.
I've heard a lot about SMTP auth, but I don't know anyone who actually uses it. Is it very widespread? All of the postfix servers I manage use IP-based authentication.
"Note that you would usually connect to your own SMTP server to send that message since you don't have credentials to use company X's mail server and we can assume that it's not an open relay."
Not really. They are usually IP-based, and the salesperson would be on their network.
But the problem is that if you're a salesman, you are never at the same place twice.
How does SPF handle roaming users? For example, if I'm a salesman and am in company X's building (not my own), how do I send mail as myself to a technician? Won't my SMTP be coming from the wrong SMTP server?
Check out My article on the subject. Basically it talks about the problems of corporations as apposed to sole proprietorships.
Of course, QNX has all of these except basic, and it fits on a floppy. It even includes a half-decent web browser.
Actually, if you take a look at it:
* Windows - 1 CD
* MS Office - 2 CDs
* VS.net - 3 CDs if I remember (and you only get 1 interface and 3 languages!)
* Photoshop - 1 CD
* Quicken - 1 CD
* Exchange (? never used it)
* SQL Server 2 CDs (I think - it's been a while)
* WinZIpp - download only
And this is only a small subset of what's available on most Linux distributions.
It's not bloat because (a) you can not load it, (b) even if you load it, it doesn't slow you down unless you run it, and (c) you have the freedom to build your own distribution without it.
"I do, however, know that Scott Richter is lying when he says that all the addresses he mails to are opt-in."
That's great, I agree with you!
"I don't feel like arguing facts
That's obvious."
Wow. Logical copouts and then out-of-context quotes. Gotta love it.
That's actually a very interesting idea. The only drawback is that installing things on people's computers is much more invasive than sending them an email.
Perhaps what is really needed is a skinnable RSS reader, so that we can skin it to look like it's directly from our company. That's actually a great idea. If it comes out commercially in 6-10 months you can tell people that you thought of it and told someone on Slashdot about it.
It's a little different when a corporation is doing this rather than an individual. Individuals have freedom, while corporations are products of the state and thus do not have the same freedoms individuals have.
"If I had a nickel for every spammer who claimed to be a legit marketer, I could retire to a place that didn't have email."
If I had a nickel for every convict that claimed to be innocent, I could retire as well. That does not mean that innocent people don't exist, nor that innocent people aren't wrongfully convicted. Just because everyone who behaves like X claims to be Y does not imply that every who claims to be Y is in fact X. You need to take another logic course.
"My ideal world is one where, in order to receive marketing fluff, one had to walk into the corporate offices, find the director of marketing and slap them in the face. Twice."
You would probably not have a job in your world.