If you want the pipe, and to be left alone, call up your local fibre supplier and pay the $500/mo for it. They won't care what you do with it. Ditto for ISDN or several other 'mainstream' subscriber systems. Sure, cable is excessively fast, but the only reason you're getting it at the price point its at is because they limit your use of it (especially upstream).
Note: I E-mailed @Home at one point and pointed out that I ran Linux and had SSHD2 running on my machine to transfer files from home to work and to access my home Email while at work. They told me that was fine, and put a flag on my account.
If you have a problem with a company's policies, ask them about it politely, don't make a big case out of it.
This would make perfect sense if their market research didn't (probably) show that users pick companies with simple options and a single price point.
That's why all those phone companies market on 'shows up on your normal bill'. You and I aren't 'normal' people to market researchers, so our opinions aren't valid. Remember, this is a market-based society, not a democratic one.
You're right in saying that MySQL's speed should not be tested against full RDBMS solutions without a qualifier saying that they provide more functionality than it does. However, even if you were to write an external piece of software in C to handle the functionality you need from Oracle for your MySQL backed database solution, you'd most likely (feel free to test it) still be much faster than Oracle.
When I use MySQL, I add the functions I need as per the documentation. If I need some form of atomicity, I implement it in my software. My software + MySQL becomes my full database package. That's what most people using MySQL are wanting out of it, a back-end database solution.
That said, the benchmarks are still valid (if tested properly) because a programmer can decide "do I need speed, or the features available in a full RDBMS?" and then choose appropriately.
On another note, are you aware of ReiserFS at all? It is a filesystem on top of a modified (non-relational) database system. It uses many database tricks, to be more accurate, to make file sorting, finding, opening, etc. faster than a normal filesystem. With ReiserFS, one could implement, for example, something like the Pick filesystem right on top of it using files, directories and metadata files (or inodes). Pick already does this with its own internal filesystem. Why does 'putting a SQL front-end on a filesystem' not make for a SQL database? Sure, its not an enterprise application type RDBMS, but its sufficient for much textbook database work.
If I may re-iterate what you said without the improper use of RDBMS, it would be:
No transactions [means] the Database is not relational?
[This is] non-sense, and [...] is essentially why Microsoft keeps winning the software wars. A relational database is a database where data is related in a series of tables.
MYSQL is a fine RDBMS [ed. Relation Database, not RDBMS] which does a great job and can be a drop in replacement for [most of the features of] Access, Foxpro, Paradox, etc. [if an external programming language is used].
These are the programs it can replace at very reasonable cost and little overhead. Given time it will likely have ACID complience [sic] as well.
It's time to learn that usability is REALLY important to the end user and the developer. And the MYSQL team actually supports the product on their mailing list. I've never seen a question go unanswered [ed. as opposed to Pick Systems].
If anyone needs a cluestick poke, I think it's some of the DBA's of the world who religiously beleive in their own Dogma.
No, its more comparable to Lamborghini saying 'well, Ford only wins in those car magazines because they have three cup holders and we don't have room for those. But we're faster.'
Of course people drink coffee while they drive, but Lamborghini drivers are more interested in a small car with raw speed than having such luxuries.
Keep things in perspective.
There are many, many uses for a very fast select database that doesn't do frequent inserts (if you can't think of any, consider the site you're on right now).
Again, an RDBMS does not exclusively equate to a database system. Sure, MySQL is not an entire platform, etc. I work with Pick every day; I'm aware of RDBMS features. MySQL is also used by about half of our office and considered by Pick programmers to be a database system. Why wouldn't it be? Software is written in C, PERL and PHP that use SQL calls via the MySQL API. Which part of MySQL fails to be a database? Not a complete relational database management system (please, find on the MySQL site where it claims to be one), but a simple database solution.
You _do_ realise that there is a difference, right?
Yet another person who seems to believe that 'database' has some form of strict definition requiring that it be what is commonly refered to as an MVDB (multi value data base).
As it is, MySQL offers the basics required to be considered a SQL database -- it responds to SQL requests internally. It does not use external applications to store data or index it or search it. It does the SQL functions (and others) itself. It does not support a couple of SQL functions which are supported in a different manner.
How can it NOT be defined as a database? It may not be as thorough a database _platform_ as Oracle or Pick, but it is definately a database application.
Yet another person who seems to believe that 'database' has some form of strict definition requiring that it be what is commonly refered to as an MVDB (multi value data base).
<P>As it is, MySQL offers the basics required to be considered a SQL database -- it responds to SQL requests internally. It does not use external applications to store data or index it or search it. It does the SQL functions (and others) itself. It does not support a couple of SQL functions which are supported in a different manner.</P>
<P>How can it NOT be defined as a database? It may not be as thorough a database _platform_ as Oracle or Pick, but it is definately a database application.</P>
<P>PS, I work in a <a href="http://picksys.com">Pick</a> office.</P>
T1 used to infer DS1 over copper. T1 is both a protocol and a speed reference now. T1 is commonly used to refer to the standard 1.54 meg abit speed it offers. Those of us in the industry long enough now just refer to 'fractional T1' when refering to partial megabit divisions of bandwidth... as they were when I used copper at all.
Also cf. the T1 standards committee for the picky version, and specifically T1E1, the standards committee for "consideration and development of optical, electrical and mechanical characteristics of interfaces".
I hear these silly arguments constantly. As a person who sells services, it is very difficult to price them for consumers. I offer computer training. If you're a business, the going rate is over $75/hr. Am I going to charge a small family of 4 $75 for an hour's Internet training? How about installing a modem for them? Not a chance. How do I justify the pricing difference? By making good-faith deals with people, that's how.
@Home has a service they want to sell, and they're selling it really close to their break-even point. My $42.75 (CAN)/mo is pretty cheap for the 1.5 or so megabits I get (quite often). Where do they make up their margins? By charging more to businesses. Why? To make real money at all. As someone in business, I can understand perfectly.
@Home simply takes a certain set of services and says 'off limits' to non-business clients so they have something to sell to business clients. They can tell businesses "You're allowed to host a VPN on our network!" and not have the business retort "but I can do that at home for $40".
I'm waiting for the hardware companies to start using more intelligent bus systems like I2O (over PCI or multiple AGP) to allow for new and improved systems.
For gamers, this could mean a 3D card that stores scene description data and allows the sound card and video card to intercommunicate with it, doing co-rendering (one card handles the scene itself as a mathematical entity, the others handle mapping the sounds and/or images).
These types of interactions between hardware are difficult because of competition, of course.
This is true -- but doesn't explain why it shouldn't be legal. It explains why Apple can be upset, and why they could internally discipline leakers, but not why the receivers of that information shouldn't be protected. For instance, official journalists would have protection from this sort of suit, so why shouldn't online reporters?
I'm glad to see we don't have any bigots on Slashdot:-).
That said, and overgeneralisations cast aside, the legal system of a given country is their right to establish. Just because another country's mindset and worldview disagrees with it does not make either right or wrong. The choice to 'do business' in a country includes the choice to abide by their business-related laws.
The only thing I would request of Germany et. al. (including the USA), is that non-profit status be given software "groups" developing 'free' software and special rights given to protect them against such lawsuits as they have little means of defence.
This would, of course, not apply to 'services' companies who give away software but sell a service.
I'd tell the 'poor old lady' that she shouldn't have put the styrofoam cup between her bare legs, then removed the lid, while squeezing it sufficiently with her legs to hold up a full cup of coffee, which, inevitably, made the cup smaller, and spilled the coffee on her legs.
The fact is that the coffee was too hot. The issue is that she was stupid to have spilled it in the way she did.
Your desire to philisophically argue the merits of the Free Software Movement's beliefs does not change the fact that your initial interpretation of the article is incorrect*.
* Read: "wrong, bad, improper, not right."
That said, you probably just needed something to start your "I don't agree with you" and "I don't like political correctness" speech.
Other than its showing up in the common phrase 'politcally correct', correctness itself has little to do with the full meaning of the former.
Correctness simply means the opposite of wrongly, or incorrrectly (to be precise but uselessly simple).
Wanting to drive correctly or to write an exam correctly does not even imply desiring to be 'politically correct', but I hope you enjoyed your/. soapbox.
I have a site with a 7 IP block... only the gateway IP address is accessible by pinging, etc.
Doing a full service scan of them might reveal something, but that would be dangerous considering the number of people who take a dim view of being probed.
The two turned out to be conspiring, with increasing desperation, not only to break Microsoft into separate companies, force it to abandon its most lucrative and hardball business practices, and turn over its proprietary Windows source code to competitors, but also to deny the company some of its most fundamental rights.
Comments like that almost amount to libel in some places...! (click for full piece).
My fibre optic fractional T1 opened the edit page in less than a second. It took about 3 seconds to load the list of comments ranked over '2' but that was mostly CPU usage.
Slashdot Mirror
If you want the pipe, and to be left alone, call up your local fibre supplier and pay the $500/mo for it. They won't care what you do with it. Ditto for ISDN or several other 'mainstream' subscriber systems. Sure, cable is excessively fast, but the only reason you're getting it at the price point its at is because they limit your use of it (especially upstream).
Note: I E-mailed @Home at one point and pointed out that I ran Linux and had SSHD2 running on my machine to transfer files from home to work and to access my home Email while at work. They told me that was fine, and put a flag on my account.
If you have a problem with a company's policies, ask them about it politely, don't make a big case out of it.
This would make perfect sense if their market research didn't (probably) show that users pick companies with simple options and a single price point.
That's why all those phone companies market on 'shows up on your normal bill'. You and I aren't 'normal' people to market researchers, so our opinions aren't valid. Remember, this is a market-based society, not a democratic one.
:-)
You're right in saying that MySQL's speed should not be tested against full RDBMS solutions without a qualifier saying that they provide more functionality than it does. However, even if you were to write an external piece of software in C to handle the functionality you need from Oracle for your MySQL backed database solution, you'd most likely (feel free to test it) still be much faster than Oracle.
When I use MySQL, I add the functions I need as per the documentation. If I need some form of atomicity, I implement it in my software. My software + MySQL becomes my full database package. That's what most people using MySQL are wanting out of it, a back-end database solution.
That said, the benchmarks are still valid (if tested properly) because a programmer can decide "do I need speed, or the features available in a full RDBMS?" and then choose appropriately.
Where does MySQL claim to be an RDBMS?
(and/or)
Where is a database defined as only being an RDBMS?
On another note, are you aware of ReiserFS at all? It is a filesystem on top of a modified (non-relational) database system. It uses many database tricks, to be more accurate, to make file sorting, finding, opening, etc. faster than a normal filesystem. With ReiserFS, one could implement, for example, something like the Pick filesystem right on top of it using files, directories and metadata files (or inodes). Pick already does this with its own internal filesystem. Why does 'putting a SQL front-end on a filesystem' not make for a SQL database? Sure, its not an enterprise application type RDBMS, but its sufficient for much textbook database work.
If I may re-iterate what you said without the improper use of RDBMS, it would be:
There.No, its more comparable to Lamborghini saying 'well, Ford only wins in those car magazines because they have three cup holders and we don't have room for those. But we're faster.'
Of course people drink coffee while they drive, but Lamborghini drivers are more interested in a small car with raw speed than having such luxuries.
Keep things in perspective.
There are many, many uses for a very fast select database that doesn't do frequent inserts (if you can't think of any, consider the site you're on right now).
Again, an RDBMS does not exclusively equate to a database system. Sure, MySQL is not an entire platform, etc. I work with Pick every day; I'm aware of RDBMS features. MySQL is also used by about half of our office and considered by Pick programmers to be a database system. Why wouldn't it be? Software is written in C, PERL and PHP that use SQL calls via the MySQL API. Which part of MySQL fails to be a database? Not a complete relational database management system (please, find on the MySQL site where it claims to be one), but a simple database solution.
You _do_ realise that there is a difference, right?
Yet another person who seems to believe that 'database' has some form of strict definition requiring that it be what is commonly refered to as an MVDB (multi value data base).
As it is, MySQL offers the basics required to be considered a SQL database -- it responds to SQL requests internally. It does not use external applications to store data or index it or search it. It does the SQL functions (and others) itself. It does not support a couple of SQL functions which are supported in a different manner.
How can it NOT be defined as a database? It may not be as thorough a database _platform_ as Oracle or Pick, but it is definately a database application.
PS, I work in a Pick office.
(Hmm, should've been moderated down to a troll)Yet another person who seems to believe that 'database' has some form of strict definition requiring that it be what is commonly refered to as an MVDB (multi value data base).
<P>As it is, MySQL offers the basics required to be considered a SQL database -- it responds to SQL requests internally. It does not use external applications to store data or index it or search it. It does the SQL functions (and others) itself. It does not support a couple of SQL functions which are supported in a different manner.</P>
<P>How can it NOT be defined as a database? It may not be as thorough a database _platform_ as Oracle or Pick, but it is definately a database application.</P>
<P>PS, I work in a <a href="http://picksys.com">Pick</a> office.</P>
(Hmm, should've been moderated down to a troll)
T1 used to infer DS1 over copper. T1 is both a protocol and a speed reference now. T1 is commonly used to refer to the standard 1.54 meg abit speed it offers. Those of us in the industry long enough now just refer to 'fractional T1' when refering to partial megabit divisions of bandwidth ... as they were when I used copper at all.
Note: PC Webopedia T1 Definition for a not-too-bad reference.
Also cf. the T1 standards committee for the picky version, and specifically T1E1, the standards committee for "consideration and development of optical, electrical and mechanical characteristics of interfaces".
But why hasn't Intel started offering true multi-bus boards with 4 PCI slots, 2 64 bit PCI slots and 2 AGP slots?
I'd love to have my Ultra3 SCSI on an AGP port instead -- imagine what they do then!
I hear these silly arguments constantly. As a person who sells services, it is very difficult to price them for consumers. I offer computer training. If you're a business, the going rate is over $75/hr. Am I going to charge a small family of 4 $75 for an hour's Internet training? How about installing a modem for them? Not a chance. How do I justify the pricing difference? By making good-faith deals with people, that's how.
@Home has a service they want to sell, and they're selling it really close to their break-even point. My $42.75 (CAN)/mo is pretty cheap for the 1.5 or so megabits I get (quite often). Where do they make up their margins? By charging more to businesses. Why? To make real money at all. As someone in business, I can understand perfectly.
@Home simply takes a certain set of services and says 'off limits' to non-business clients so they have something to sell to business clients. They can tell businesses "You're allowed to host a VPN on our network!" and not have the business retort "but I can do that at home for $40".
I'm waiting for the hardware companies to start using more intelligent bus systems like I2O (over PCI or multiple AGP) to allow for new and improved systems.
For gamers, this could mean a 3D card that stores scene description data and allows the sound card and video card to intercommunicate with it, doing co-rendering (one card handles the scene itself as a mathematical entity, the others handle mapping the sounds and/or images).
These types of interactions between hardware are difficult because of competition, of course.
This is true -- but doesn't explain why it shouldn't be legal. It explains why Apple can be upset, and why they could internally discipline leakers, but not why the receivers of that information shouldn't be protected. For instance, official journalists would have protection from this sort of suit, so why shouldn't online reporters?
Have you used it lately?
Just because news.com doesn't comment on Mozilla daily doesn't mean its dead.
I'm glad to see we don't have any bigots on Slashdot :-).
That said, and overgeneralisations cast aside, the legal system of a given country is their right to establish. Just because another country's mindset and worldview disagrees with it does not make either right or wrong. The choice to 'do business' in a country includes the choice to abide by their business-related laws.
The only thing I would request of Germany et. al. (including the USA), is that non-profit status be given software "groups" developing 'free' software and special rights given to protect them against such lawsuits as they have little means of defence.
This would, of course, not apply to 'services' companies who give away software but sell a service.
But you can get a patent...
... Intel has the letter 'i' patented.
I'd tell the 'poor old lady' that she shouldn't have put the styrofoam cup between her bare legs, then removed the lid, while squeezing it sufficiently with her legs to hold up a full cup of coffee, which, inevitably, made the cup smaller, and spilled the coffee on her legs.
The fact is that the coffee was too hot. The issue is that she was stupid to have spilled it in the way she did.
You're right, and wrong.
In this case, its a computer software company, suing over a computer software name. Banking software vs. networking software.
Its the same domain.
Your desire to philisophically argue the merits of the Free Software Movement's beliefs does not change the fact that your initial interpretation of the article is incorrect*.
* Read: "wrong, bad, improper, not right."
That said, you probably just needed something to start your "I don't agree with you" and "I don't like political correctness" speech.
Other than its showing up in the common phrase 'politcally correct', correctness itself has little to do with the full meaning of the former.
/. soapbox.
Correctness simply means the opposite of wrongly, or incorrrectly (to be precise but uselessly simple).
Wanting to drive correctly or to write an exam correctly does not even imply desiring to be 'politically correct', but I hope you enjoyed your
I have a site with a 7 IP block ... only the gateway IP address is accessible by pinging, etc.
Doing a full service scan of them might reveal something, but that would be dangerous considering the number of people who take a dim view of being probed.
Consider his previous writings ...
And I quote (re: the Judge and the DOJ):
Comments like that almost amount to libel in some places...! (click for full piece).
He's a strange oneMy fibre optic fractional T1 opened the edit page in less than a second. It took about 3 seconds to load the list of comments ranked over '2' but that was mostly CPU usage.