I think the NCR Teradata approach is one of the most interesting. It is made up of a number of nodes (each quad Intel processor systems with separate memory and disk), each broken down into a number of logical machines. Data is hashed across all the nodes in the systems based on the data's indexing. So if two tables have the same indexing the join takes place at the "logical machine" level, and then the result is spooled together. The largest systems approach 300 nodes, with over 2,000 logical machines and 150 Tb of disk (some used to duplicate tables in case of node failure).
Personally, it has it's drawbacks, but if the indexing is right, you can join hundred million row tables at amazing speed. Based on my experience in data warehousing, it's performance Oracle can't touch (no, I'm not paid by NCR...just a user).
One way that Apple could be different right now, would be to post some sort minimal explanation as to what's going on. I guess there's probably some sort of legal reason for not doing so.
Maybe they'll be out of other business. I've had Macs since I had a Mac+. I was really looking forward to getting a new iMac. Now I find myself so angry, I'll at least take a good look at MS before I decide. I can't put my finger on it, but it seems Apple changed today. I heard someone refer to it as Microsoftification. They no longer deserve my loyalty.
I'm GIMP impaired;) Is there anyone out there that can pull down a photo of the iMac and resize the display accurately, to give a sense of what the new iMac would look like?
I think you need more information from RH before you can judge them. Certainly, patents are inconsistent with free software. BTW, if you're looking for more patent info:
http://lpf.ai.mit.edu/
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/
Unfortunately, RH and SuSE seem to want to play in the big server world (e.g. with IBM and HP). Those companies have so many patents, it can become necessary to have your own to use as "bargaining chips". It's not right, but you have to do it to survive
It seems like you have to wait and see how they handle licensing to determine their intentions. On the other hand, with their past involvement with the Open Source community, one would hope they might make their intentions clear now, with some sort of statement.
An example of a company that opposes patents, but feels the need to file them defensively:
http://lpf.ai.mit.edu/Patents/testimony/statemen ts / racle.statement.html
(I'm not sure this is still Oracle's position)
I'm more concerned about a cable monopoly than a telco monopoly. My only choice for better-than-dial-up is cable. I'm not too impressed with the service I've recieved from AT&T Broadband, and it keeps getting more expensive. Couple of points:
1) I'd love to see Verizon given an incentive to expand DSL into my neighborhood. Having numerous competitor's is ideal, but I don't think it's realistic. At least, let's pit the cable companies against the Bells where possible.
2) Why doesn't the cable company have to share its facilities with competitors?? I think a Covad-like company should be able to give me service over AT&T's facilities. Last I looked, there's more cable modems in service than DSLs. The cable companies claim there are technical issues. Yeah, right.
I was backpacking a few years ago in the Sierra Nevada. I came upon a group of people, and one of them had suffered a back injury. They needed an emergency evacuation. The leader of the group had been trying to use her cell phone for an hour. Fortunately, as a ham radio operator, I was able to call in a sheriff's helicopter. Verizon may have good coverage compared to it's competitors, but I think it's misleading not to tell people there's LOTS of places your cell phone won't work.
I'd use whatever SQL I could easily lay my hands on, and that allowed me to build some sort of application. I find it real hard to learn a tool just for the sake of learning it. It comes so much more easily when you apply it.
I see a number of comments comparing SQLs. Personally, I started with Oracle, and currently use mostly NCR Teradata (Try inserting 30 million 200 bytes rows into a table in 8 seconds with Oracle;-) ). I'd say about 80% of my Oracle knowledge transferred, even though Teradata is pretty strange animal (very distributed). Do others have opinions about what percentage of SQL knowledge transfers from one flavor to another?
Slashdot Mirror
I think the NCR Teradata approach is one of the most interesting. It is made up of a number of nodes (each quad Intel processor systems with separate memory and disk), each broken down into a number of logical machines. Data is hashed across all the nodes in the systems based on the data's indexing. So if two tables have the same indexing the join takes place at the "logical machine" level, and then the result is spooled together. The largest systems approach 300 nodes, with over 2,000 logical machines and 150 Tb of disk (some used to duplicate tables in case of node failure).
d =84960
Personally, it has it's drawbacks, but if the indexing is right, you can join hundred million row tables at amazing speed. Based on my experience in data warehousing, it's performance Oracle can't touch (no, I'm not paid by NCR...just a user).
http://www.teradata.com
Overview:
http://www.teradata.com/t/go.aspx/?i
One way that Apple could be different right now, would be to post some sort minimal explanation as to what's going on. I guess there's probably some sort of legal reason for not doing so.
Maybe they'll be out of other business. I've had Macs since I had a Mac+. I was really looking forward to getting a new iMac. Now I find myself so angry, I'll at least take a good look at MS before I decide. I can't put my finger on it, but it seems Apple changed today. I heard someone refer to it as Microsoftification. They no longer deserve my loyalty.
You mean:
Apple = Untrustworthy computing
I'm GIMP impaired ;) Is there anyone out there that can pull down a photo of the iMac and resize the display accurately, to give a sense of what the new iMac would look like?
http://lpf.ai.mit.edu/
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/
Unfortunately, RH and SuSE seem to want to play in the big server world (e.g. with IBM and HP). Those companies have so many patents, it can become necessary to have your own to use as "bargaining chips". It's not right, but you have to do it to survive It seems like you have to wait and see how they handle licensing to determine their intentions. On the other hand, with their past involvement with the Open Source community, one would hope they might make their intentions clear now, with some sort of statement. An example of a company that opposes patents, but feels the need to file them defensively:
http://lpf.ai.mit.edu/Patents/testimony/statemen ts / racle.statement.html
(I'm not sure this is still Oracle's position)
I'm more concerned about a cable monopoly than a telco monopoly. My only choice for better-than-dial-up is cable. I'm not too impressed with the service I've recieved from AT&T Broadband, and it keeps getting more expensive. Couple of points: 1) I'd love to see Verizon given an incentive to expand DSL into my neighborhood. Having numerous competitor's is ideal, but I don't think it's realistic. At least, let's pit the cable companies against the Bells where possible. 2) Why doesn't the cable company have to share its facilities with competitors?? I think a Covad-like company should be able to give me service over AT&T's facilities. Last I looked, there's more cable modems in service than DSLs. The cable companies claim there are technical issues. Yeah, right.
I was backpacking a few years ago in the Sierra Nevada. I came upon a group of people, and one of them had suffered a back injury. They needed an emergency evacuation. The leader of the group had been trying to use her cell phone for an hour. Fortunately, as a ham radio operator, I was able to call in a sheriff's helicopter. Verizon may have good coverage compared to it's competitors, but I think it's misleading not to tell people there's LOTS of places your cell phone won't work.
I'd use whatever SQL I could easily lay my hands on, and that allowed me to build some sort of application. I find it real hard to learn a tool just for the sake of learning it. It comes so much more easily when you apply it. I see a number of comments comparing SQLs. Personally, I started with Oracle, and currently use mostly NCR Teradata (Try inserting 30 million 200 bytes rows into a table in 8 seconds with Oracle ;-) ). I'd say about 80% of my Oracle knowledge transferred, even though Teradata is pretty strange animal (very distributed). Do others have opinions about what percentage of SQL knowledge transfers from one flavor to another?