From what I see so far, there isn't much equivalent to any of this so far. You create a database, and your server config determines where ig goes and (I think) the format/type used for the physical files.
To put it bluntly, you're going to use the default filetype for everything in MySQL. There's some nods to the idea of having ram-based tables and the like, but if you're really serious about that stuff then MySQL is the wrong tool to be using.
One of the biggest knocks against MySQL is that its favorite file type is basically a flat file with just a bit of an index to it. More or less, that's true. MySQL isn't meant for somebody who cares about where exactly on the hard drive the data is going, just that it's being saved and will respond when called upon with a SELECT query.
Think of yourself as a database user rather than a database admin. This thing has most of the "administrative" stuff hardcoded. You don't start until it's time to define tables and indexes...
Access is the database sibling to Visual Basic... in fact, a code module in a.mdb file is Visual Basic for Applications... which aside from the fact that it depends on having Microsoft Access present is just about as powerful as Visual Basic itself. Access projects can even be compiled into.mbe files which locks down the forms and code users can't see or change your source.
It's a great cheap tool when what you've got to do is open up a bunch of flat files, grab some data from each of them, and then output a pretty-looking report. You can then get it down to a push-button interface so that a newbie can run your tool, and you can go on to something more important.
Watch those queries get slower and slower the more users you add. With Oracle, watch the queries perform the same under a far greater load than MySQL will handle.
Of course, most of us who run on MySQL dream of the day that we'll have enough users to have to upgrade to another database engine. Afterall, it's much cheaper to throw MySQL onto a faster box than to bring in Oracle.:)
If you haven't got the point of this whole debate yet... the headline is that MySQL only implements a subset of the features that any "real database" system does.
So really, most of the features you're used to in Sybase just plain aren't there. You might as well start with a "MySQL for Dummies..." or similar starter-title to understand what MySQL does have, and hopefully help you get PhpMyAdmin setup because that has to be the dominant UI tool for using it.
From there, use the MySQL.com document pages to make sure you're using proper syntax and know what functions you have available to you. You're mostly going to have to un-learn any non-standard SQL fuctions you're used to working with, and then lose the parts that MySQL hasn't done yet...
Well, that means our home PCs aren't likely to get exploited by this. However, if our ISP's router gets exploited, we're knocked offline and our PC isn't as useful as it used to be.
The threat here is a DOS aimed at a few things that we don't want to see go down.
It means this isn't earth-shaking, but it likely means another security patch that Microsoft needs to issue for Windows... but this one other TCP stacks may have fallen for too.
- The FAA doesn't like them because of the longshot theory that radio waves of any kind might just add up to a signal that tricks autopilot or other navigational systems into glitching, causing the plane to crash. That's a long shot risk, but the disaster case is kinda a bad one if it ever happens.
- The FCC also has a ban because when you're in flight, you're always at least 6-8 miles away from the nearest cell tower. You end up communicating with too many towers and bogging down the network. One or two such calls is tolerable, but a whole plane load moving through would disrupt the ground-based users of the network.
This picocell concept solves both problems by moving the nearest cell tower to just a few feet away from the phone. Therefore, the phone kicks into its lowest power setting, and never talks to any other tower.
The only thing is, you might as well use the back-of-seat AirPhones to get to that satellite trnasponder rather than your own phone and the picocell...
I get the feeling that even if this allows you to use your cell phone like normal, you're going to be considered to be on a "roaming tower" as far as your cell phone company is concerned because your cell phone company won't own the picocell. Therefore, forget about using your unlimited night and weekend minutes on these flights, you'll be still paying the same through-the-nose rates for plane-to-ground communications.
If you use iTunes, the only handheld player that can help you is an iPod. You're stuck picking from Apple's line of products.
If you use Real's offerings, you need to have your head examined. There aren't very many players out there supporting Real's file type.
Strangely enough... Microsoft's the one coming to the plate offering a competitive environment. WMA is the most popular "secure media" media format among the players being reviewed. There's several music stores competiting for your business on a song-by-song basis, with Wal*Mart as low as 88 cents a song and BuyMusic as low as 79 cents for hit songs, blowing Apple's 99 cent offer out of the water.
Also... Microsoft has the most exposed API. If you want to build your own application to control your digital jukebox, Microsoft has a full SDK for its Windows Media Player 9 Series, with a powerful ActiveX object and the ability to go deeper if you want to. Real has no open API for playing its scrambled files, and Apple's is only available to C++ programs with a lot of time on their hands. In short, if you think you can design a better interface for digital music, Microsoft's giving you to the best tools to do so.
Yet OGG isn't "Where it's at" business-wise right now. Right now the handhelds are optimizing to be compatible with either Apple iTunes (FairPlay-ed AACs), RealNetworks Rhapsody (RealAudio codec), or Napster/BuyMusic/Walmart files (Microsoft WMAs).
Each manufactuer is picking exactly one to align with... and nobody's pushing OGG from that side of the business.
The RIAA actually might not mind if leaching was legal and sharing not. As the number of sharers decreses, eventually all the leaches will force the remaining sharers off by saturating their upbound bandwidth.
If I'm downloading copies of song which I already own on CD, then I'm not infringing, am I? Maybe I'm just too lazy to rip my own disks. I can think of other reasons why I might do that.
Gray area for you because this kind of case really hasn't made it to the courts... however, the person you're downloading from is definitely in trouble. MP3.com's "locker" service where they allowed people to stream MP3.com's copy of a song after proving that they owned a CD with the song on it was what ended up bringing down the whole company, and forcing it to sell out to RIAA-interests.
Schools are also presently paying to get packet-shaping devices to try to slow/block P2P shares because they get in the way of other users, or would require the school to get more overall bandwidth. The RIAA is of course offering this service for free.
Uhm, nope. This is just a provider who has possession of a legit copy of the tunes that was given to them, and they're requiring the owner of the songs, the artists, step forward before distributing them.
RIAA has nothing to do with this. These were all indie bands to begin with...
This is hillarious. Darl's been huffing and puffing for a year trying to squeeze water out of a rock; now here comes OSRM, and before long they made more money essentially by betting that Darl's got nuthin!
If this was poker, OSRM is basically telling the table that SCO's hand is a 5-high.:)
(But wait a second... there's no way SCO's hand can be as bad as a 5-high...)
if you read the article, you would have seen that they traced the roots of all the code (be it bsd/pd or the credited author) and are basing their opinion on that research. They feel they have "sourced" all the source.
But SCO claims that somebody submitted what they claimed they had to the rights to when realy it was SCO's IP. Of course, they've yet to say who... but whomever lied while submitting would simply need to lie to Pam and Bruce to fool them.
It'd be easier to just buy SCO... as soon as the first ruling goes against SCO and the SCOX stock starts its plumet, be on the buying side of that transaction. Once 51% of the voting control company is amassed, vote to release all IP of the company into the public domain, game over.
I'm not sure how they can come to that conclusion without having access to the code which SCO is claiming that they have which was inapproprately added into the Linux kernels. Just what exactly did they do in their six-month process to prove that what SCO has behind door #3 isn't there?
Of course, SCO might turn out to have nothing but some farm animals behind door #3, and that outcome is more likely than not to be the one that comes out in the end... but really, what more is this group doing but just spreading counter-FUD about SCO's FUD?
Besides, if you take them at their word, then you don't need their insurance because you're exposed to no risk. They're basically offering a competive form of "SCO lawsuit insurance" that seems only about as strong as buying SCO's "license".
Groklaw's running a more detailed piece that gives more information than in the press release. This basically ammounts to a reporter reporting about herself, but that also makes it information straight from the source.
I'm not quite sure an insurance policy from these people is worth as much as a SCO license, in that they're either selling policies that won't pay if SCO owns nothing, and they'll be overextended if it does turn out SCO owns something.
However, if you've got a PHB who's seriously thinking about sending his $699 per server into SCO... this may just be a company that you can use to fool your fooled-by-SCO PHB into sending money to the anti-SCO lawyers instead of the pro-SCO lawyers.
Insurance policies are always grouped into lots that allow the "law of large numbers" to come into play. That is to say, small numbers might go on a random walk, but within a large group the actual number of claims will always be reasonably close to the expected number of claims.
Sorry... an insurance company that's offering only one liability product that is either going to have claims from all customers or have no claims at all is not going to fly. Either they'll be pocketing all of the premiums, or the whole house of cards will colapse in more claims than they can ever handle. There's no middle case... either every user of Linux is going to end up owing big bucks to SCO, or none of them do.
Why do people that support 'free' trade always paint those that hold different views then they do as isolationists?
Most of the people who I know aren't upset because of trade, they are upset that the fucking playing field is majorly slanted against the American middle class.
The major problem with "free trade" is that it requires that all sides play fairly. A nation that isolates itself from having its some of its markets open to outsiders, but then wants to play in ours is not taking part in free trade. This game is not as simple as it looks.
C) Hold the outsourcer (and the geniuses who decided to save money with these outsources) are held accountable to their decisions.
In part, this means making sure that whenever the outsourcer fails and causes expenses or delays as a result, you should at least note that somewhere. Having such a log is very valuable when the outsourcer's contract comes up for renewal, as it makes it very easy to generate a dollar figure for wasted employee time or impacted sales as a result of an outsourcer error. If that number comes up bigger than the "savings" number... management starts to ask questions...
Slashdot Mirror
From what I see so far, there isn't much equivalent to any of this so far. You create a database, and your server config determines where ig goes and (I think) the format/type used for the physical files.
To put it bluntly, you're going to use the default filetype for everything in MySQL. There's some nods to the idea of having ram-based tables and the like, but if you're really serious about that stuff then MySQL is the wrong tool to be using.
One of the biggest knocks against MySQL is that its favorite file type is basically a flat file with just a bit of an index to it. More or less, that's true. MySQL isn't meant for somebody who cares about where exactly on the hard drive the data is going, just that it's being saved and will respond when called upon with a SELECT query.
Think of yourself as a database user rather than a database admin. This thing has most of the "administrative" stuff hardcoded. You don't start until it's time to define tables and indexes...
Access is the database sibling to Visual Basic... in fact, a code module in a .mdb file is Visual Basic for Applications... which aside from the fact that it depends on having Microsoft Access present is just about as powerful as Visual Basic itself. Access projects can even be compiled into .mbe files which locks down the forms and code users can't see or change your source.
It's a great cheap tool when what you've got to do is open up a bunch of flat files, grab some data from each of them, and then output a pretty-looking report. You can then get it down to a push-button interface so that a newbie can run your tool, and you can go on to something more important.
Watch those queries get slower and slower the more users you add. With Oracle, watch the queries perform the same under a far greater load than MySQL will handle.
:)
Of course, most of us who run on MySQL dream of the day that we'll have enough users to have to upgrade to another database engine. Afterall, it's much cheaper to throw MySQL onto a faster box than to bring in Oracle.
If you haven't got the point of this whole debate yet... the headline is that MySQL only implements a subset of the features that any "real database" system does.
So really, most of the features you're used to in Sybase just plain aren't there. You might as well start with a "MySQL for Dummies..." or similar starter-title to understand what MySQL does have, and hopefully help you get PhpMyAdmin setup because that has to be the dominant UI tool for using it.
From there, use the MySQL.com document pages to make sure you're using proper syntax and know what functions you have available to you. You're mostly going to have to un-learn any non-standard SQL fuctions you're used to working with, and then lose the parts that MySQL hasn't done yet...
Well, that means our home PCs aren't likely to get exploited by this. However, if our ISP's router gets exploited, we're knocked offline and our PC isn't as useful as it used to be.
The threat here is a DOS aimed at a few things that we don't want to see go down.
It means this isn't earth-shaking, but it likely means another security patch that Microsoft needs to issue for Windows... but this one other TCP stacks may have fallen for too.
Nope... there's two bans on phones in flight...
- The FAA doesn't like them because of the longshot theory that radio waves of any kind might just add up to a signal that tricks autopilot or other navigational systems into glitching, causing the plane to crash. That's a long shot risk, but the disaster case is kinda a bad one if it ever happens.
- The FCC also has a ban because when you're in flight, you're always at least 6-8 miles away from the nearest cell tower. You end up communicating with too many towers and bogging down the network. One or two such calls is tolerable, but a whole plane load moving through would disrupt the ground-based users of the network.
This picocell concept solves both problems by moving the nearest cell tower to just a few feet away from the phone. Therefore, the phone kicks into its lowest power setting, and never talks to any other tower.
The only thing is, you might as well use the back-of-seat AirPhones to get to that satellite trnasponder rather than your own phone and the picocell...
I get the feeling that even if this allows you to use your cell phone like normal, you're going to be considered to be on a "roaming tower" as far as your cell phone company is concerned because your cell phone company won't own the picocell. Therefore, forget about using your unlimited night and weekend minutes on these flights, you'll be still paying the same through-the-nose rates for plane-to-ground communications.
If you use iTunes, the only handheld player that can help you is an iPod. You're stuck picking from Apple's line of products.
If you use Real's offerings, you need to have your head examined. There aren't very many players out there supporting Real's file type.
Strangely enough... Microsoft's the one coming to the plate offering a competitive environment.
WMA is the most popular "secure media" media format among the players being reviewed. There's several music stores competiting for your business on a song-by-song basis, with Wal*Mart as low as 88 cents a song and BuyMusic as low as 79 cents for hit songs, blowing Apple's 99 cent offer out of the water.
Also... Microsoft has the most exposed API. If you want to build your own application to control your digital jukebox, Microsoft has a full SDK for its Windows Media Player 9 Series, with a powerful ActiveX object and the ability to go deeper if you want to. Real has no open API for playing its scrambled files, and Apple's is only available to C++ programs with a lot of time on their hands. In short, if you think you can design a better interface for digital music, Microsoft's giving you to the best tools to do so.
Slashdot Error: Karma-whore detected. :)
Yet OGG isn't "Where it's at" business-wise right now. Right now the handhelds are optimizing to be compatible with either Apple iTunes (FairPlay-ed AACs), RealNetworks Rhapsody (RealAudio codec), or Napster/BuyMusic/Walmart files (Microsoft WMAs).
Each manufactuer is picking exactly one to align with... and nobody's pushing OGG from that side of the business.
The RIAA actually might not mind if leaching was legal and sharing not. As the number of sharers decreses, eventually all the leaches will force the remaining sharers off by saturating their upbound bandwidth.
If I'm downloading copies of song which I already own on CD, then I'm not infringing, am I? Maybe I'm just too lazy to rip my own disks. I can think of other reasons why I might do that.
Gray area for you because this kind of case really hasn't made it to the courts... however, the person you're downloading from is definitely in trouble. MP3.com's "locker" service where they allowed people to stream MP3.com's copy of a song after proving that they owned a CD with the song on it was what ended up bringing down the whole company, and forcing it to sell out to RIAA-interests.
Schools are also presently paying to get packet-shaping devices to try to slow/block P2P shares because they get in the way of other users, or would require the school to get more overall bandwidth. The RIAA is of course offering this service for free.
Uhm, nope. This is just a provider who has possession of a legit copy of the tunes that was given to them, and they're requiring the owner of the songs, the artists, step forward before distributing them.
RIAA has nothing to do with this. These were all indie bands to begin with...
RTFA shows that they're shopping around for reinsurance companies.
Which means they don't yet have one.
This is hillarious. Darl's been huffing and puffing for a year trying to squeeze water out of a rock; now here comes OSRM, and before long they made more money essentially by betting that Darl's got nuthin!
:)
If this was poker, OSRM is basically telling the table that SCO's hand is a 5-high.
(But wait a second... there's no way SCO's hand can be as bad as a 5-high...)
if you read the article, you would have seen that they traced the roots of all the code (be it bsd/pd or the credited author) and are basing their opinion on that research. They feel they have "sourced" all the source.
But SCO claims that somebody submitted what they claimed they had to the rights to when realy it was SCO's IP. Of course, they've yet to say who... but whomever lied while submitting would simply need to lie to Pam and Bruce to fool them.
It'd be easier to just buy SCO... as soon as the first ruling goes against SCO and the SCOX stock starts its plumet, be on the buying side of that transaction. Once 51% of the voting control company is amassed, vote to release all IP of the company into the public domain, game over.
I'm not sure how they can come to that conclusion without having access to the code which SCO is claiming that they have which was inapproprately added into the Linux kernels. Just what exactly did they do in their six-month process to prove that what SCO has behind door #3 isn't there?
Of course, SCO might turn out to have nothing but some farm animals behind door #3, and that outcome is more likely than not to be the one that comes out in the end... but really, what more is this group doing but just spreading counter-FUD about SCO's FUD?
Besides, if you take them at their word, then you don't need their insurance because you're exposed to no risk. They're basically offering a competive form of "SCO lawsuit insurance" that seems only about as strong as buying SCO's "license".
Groklaw's running a more detailed piece that gives more information than in the press release. This basically ammounts to a reporter reporting about herself, but that also makes it information straight from the source.
I'm not quite sure an insurance policy from these people is worth as much as a SCO license, in that they're either selling policies that won't pay if SCO owns nothing, and they'll be overextended if it does turn out SCO owns something.
However, if you've got a PHB who's seriously thinking about sending his $699 per server into SCO... this may just be a company that you can use to fool your fooled-by-SCO PHB into sending money to the anti-SCO lawyers instead of the pro-SCO lawyers.
Insurance policies are always grouped into lots that allow the "law of large numbers" to come into play. That is to say, small numbers might go on a random walk, but within a large group the actual number of claims will always be reasonably close to the expected number of claims.
Sorry... an insurance company that's offering only one liability product that is either going to have claims from all customers or have no claims at all is not going to fly. Either they'll be pocketing all of the premiums, or the whole house of cards will colapse in more claims than they can ever handle. There's no middle case... either every user of Linux is going to end up owing big bucks to SCO, or none of them do.
Why do people that support 'free' trade always paint those that hold different views then they do as isolationists?
Most of the people who I know aren't upset because of trade, they are upset that the fucking playing field is majorly slanted against the American middle class.
The major problem with "free trade" is that it requires that all sides play fairly. A nation that isolates itself from having its some of its markets open to outsiders, but then wants to play in ours is not taking part in free trade. This game is not as simple as it looks.
C) Hold the outsourcer (and the geniuses who decided to save money with these outsources) are held accountable to their decisions.
In part, this means making sure that whenever the outsourcer fails and causes expenses or delays as a result, you should at least note that somewhere. Having such a log is very valuable when the outsourcer's contract comes up for renewal, as it makes it very easy to generate a dollar figure for wasted employee time or impacted sales as a result of an outsourcer error. If that number comes up bigger than the "savings" number... management starts to ask questions...