So, when you have an operation and they wind up performing a sex reassignment surgery instead of an appendectomy due to the lack of atomicity, consistency, isolation and durability in their database, you would be OK with it?
Demagogy. Your example has nothing to do with ACID. Such a case would inditate wrong data entry or a client software bug.
By the way, such errors do occur. Even in systems where the database is ACID.
I have not read the article, but I guess they store either very frequent data (measurements) in NoSQL, or large data (3D images). Depending on nonfunctional requirements, neither is possible at all, or cost-effective with RDBMS.
I haven't wanted to hurt anybody's feelings. We also have four Ubuntu desktops and two Ubuntu laptops in our house, including both old and current high-end machines. However, I believe it is quite unusual when it turns out that 15% of some group of teenagers uses Linux, and it must have some rational reason. I am sure that there are other reasons too, like my son's advocacy, but having old PCs are likely a reason.
I believe you make my point stronger by showing that even with such small resources and incompetent developers, it was possible to create the most moddable game (ever?). Without actually putting any effort into moddability... That made it possible to spend all of their limited resources on a good game design. That is not a small feat.
I worked in both C and Java for many years, and regarding moddability, no, it is not possible to beat Java using C with equal resources. My son's code regurly replace builtin Minecraft classes, runtime, without a significant effort, if the existing extension system does not provides (yet) the necessary hooks for him.
I am a server side developer for 14 years on a single system. We use MySQL but still not its ACID table types. After so much time maybe I am in the position that I can state, that, no, most of our data does not require ACID. Even which would require it theoretically is doing fine after 14 years.
What we would indeed need, is the multi-datacenter capability. Which you get for free with Cassandra... We also sorely needed performance a few years ago (15k SAS drives was slow after an internet hiccup for example), but SSD drives helped in that. Again we could get infinite scalability with Cassandra for free.
You must choose in such a situation: either the - only theoretically needed - ACID, or the actually performing and highly available NoSQL with its additional operations, coding burden?
I only have a little experience with Cassandra, but I can tell you, that consistency is very easily tuneable in it and it is also provides durability. Atomicity is restricted (AFAIK you can get atomicity if all your data goes onto a single data partition). Isolation does not exist.
I believe that it is very easy to say that something need ACID, while actually most data does not require ACID. They can, and as I read the article they do use relational database for those data which actually require ACID. NoSQL does not mean that you are in a constant state of getting garbage from your database. And yes, RDBMS are not failsafe either, if nothing else there are coding errors in the applications which use them.
I would add that Java also made it trivial to run Minecraft on Linux. More than one of his friends play Minecraft on Ubuntu, I guess they have old PC-s.
I think one of the things which made Minecraft popular is Java. There are a huge number of plugins and mods, these wouldn't happen without Java. It is easy to reverse engineer and modify anything in Minecraft exactly because it is in Java. Even its plugin system was written by an external developer! I do not really know Minecraft myself, but my 13 old years son plays Minecraft, and he spent months coding Minecraft extensions, and as far as I hear from him, a usual server uses a very large number of extensions.
Java is not ideal for graphics intensive applications, but it is also not that bad either. Minecraft (without mods) does not represent what is possible in Java, becuase it is very under-optimized. The new 1.8 version is much faster, but there is still much room for optimization.
This is similar to why PHP web softwares are very popular, they are not perfect, but they are very easy to be modified.
Huh? The two cores of the Bulldozer module indeed has one common FPU unit, but that is a 256 bit one, which can be divided into two 128 bit unit (or even into four 64 bit unit!). I did test FPU performance and in the worst case it was 25% slower, in the best case it was actually faster, when I run two threads on a single module vs on two modules. Usually the difference is very small. Please do not compare the AMD Bulldozer architecture to Intel Hyperthreading, the two technology has very different purposes.
I agree. I went from cheap to the most expensive consumer routers in several steps (the current one is above 200$) but I have trivial problems with all. Because of this I slowly migrate all of their functions to a PC. If the current router fails, I will not buy a new one.
I believe these home routers are useful only if you do not want to touch them at all (after setting the password). If you do anything more, and have enough space, use a real PC.
It does not consume too much power, a usual PC uses less than 80W if it is idle. If you do not have a surplus PC, thenn buy an AMD AM1 APU with an ITX or mATX motherboard, and the idle consumption will be less than 25W. And you can use your favourite unix/linux OS.
I have to sanitize DRM ePubs immediately anyway, so I can backup them. As a side effect, I can read them anywhere, ePub is an open format. Of course, Kindle does not support it, but that is their problem, I simply do not buy a Kindle. Every book which is available on Amazon is available in ePUB too, while the opposite is not true. There are books available in ePUB, which are not sold by Amazon.
I regularly do restores from an LTO-3 drive, and the whole process takes no more than 5 minutes. If your data is useless after 5 minutes, then it is indeed unecessary to backup it, not to mention archiving it.
I can easily imagine that Verizon is correctly saying that the backbone providers have not got enough bandwidth to them. After all Verizon knows very well if they intentionally crippled these connections and agreements. Backbone providers gladly build better connections. Their customers, like me or anybody who rent or colocate a server, or maintains his own datacenter, for example Netflix, pay them to have good connections to end users.
It does not work that way. Even if Apple or Samsung or anybody else invents all the components themself, they still have to pay the same royalty to the original "inventors", because they received monopoly for 20 years.
"Many of the provisions would have the effect of treating every patent holder as a patent troll."
Software should not have been patented, and software patents are indeed not allowed in Europe (although they are lobbying hard to bring the broken US system into Europe).
I am yet to see a software patent which worth the effort of reading and decoding its intentionally unclear text. In the best case they are basically direct applications of unpatentable mathematical knowledge produced by real scientists, and not the inventors mentioned in the patent.
So yes, anybody who uses software patents for litigation or for any other purpose except defending against a troll, is indeed a patent troll.
It is not the file systems which mess up the data (at least with journaling file systems), but the SSD drives without power loss protection capacitors. What a journaling file system could do, if it successfully syncs the journal, but after a restart the journal is gone, the result of later partial writes are there? This is the so called serialization error. It happens with costomer HDD drives too, but it is much worse with these SSD drives. Take a look at the publication I linked in my other comment above.
I don't expect total power loss protection. I do expect reasonable behaviour, like data already synced to the drive is there even after a power loss. SSD drives without capacitors fail spectacularly, they are much worse than HDD drives. Just google for "SSD failure modes abstract", for example: https://www.usenix.org/system/...
No file system can deal with the situation when data synced to drive is lost. And that is the better case for SSD in case of a power loss, they frequently lose completely unrelated data.
Actually I cannot think of any scenario, where I would use such a drive. We have lost 3 desktop drives which has no capacitors. One is still working. Meanwhile there are no issues with four drives which has capacitors.
"mSATA solid state drives performs extremely well"
It has no power loss protection capacitors, so if it performs extremely well, then it also lose data extremely well. Maybe you can put it into a laptop, but I would not risk even that. This is another useless "customer" SSD drive.
Actually we also upgraded to Java 7 I just forgot to mention that in my original post.
I am not sure what do you mean on deprecated calls. In new Java releases they deprecate functions or classes but they never remove them. Therefore deprecated functions do not cause backward compatibility issues. As others already mentioned likely you mean calls into JRE internal sun.* classes. Those are never deprecated, because they were never public! No code should call them, except very special applications in very special circumanstances, but then they should always provide a default fallback algorithm, and advertise this issue on the very first page of this documentation. Actually the only software I know which has a good reason to call internal sun.* code is the big data database, Cassandra, which is assumed to manage memory in the hundreds of gigabytes range.
However, I understand you, because with such a large amount of code you likely run into each and every bug in the JRE class libraries at some point in your code. But your situation is definitely not the usual, and based on your disappointed tone, I believe your organisation is doing something strange. You say that you have 74 gigabytes of code, but the entire Java EE codebase is less than 80 megabytes of binary code. It is quite strange that you blame that 0.1% code for all your problems. You should either pay for Oracle support, and receive bug fixes early, or pay developers who can quickly fix JRE bugs themselves, and that will be still a tiny fraction of your IT budget. Java related costs must be compared to the similar cost of some alternative technology, so you could tell whether Java or that alternative is the more cost effective in your situation. I do not know anything else which seems to be better for us.
I am working on a 80 000 lines long Java web application in the last 15 years. I have upgraded through 5 major versions, from Java 1.1 to 1.2 to 1.3 to 1.4 to 5 to 6. I do not remember a single issue related to any of these upgrades. There vere about 2 minor issues when we migrated from Unix to Windows to Linux (related to the case sensitivity of the file system).
I am sure that a visit to a site which distributes cheating tools is only one of the many factors in the evaluation of whether the player is a likely cheater or not.
Slashdot Mirror
So, when you have an operation and they wind up performing a sex reassignment surgery instead of an appendectomy due to the lack of atomicity, consistency, isolation and durability in their database, you would be OK with it?
Demagogy. Your example has nothing to do with ACID. Such a case would inditate wrong data entry or a client software bug.
By the way, such errors do occur. Even in systems where the database is ACID.
I have not read the article, but I guess they store either very frequent data (measurements) in NoSQL, or large data (3D images). Depending on nonfunctional requirements, neither is possible at all, or cost-effective with RDBMS.
Again we could get infinite scalability with Cassandra for free.
Jesus Christ......
No, no, it is the Apacha Foundation.
I haven't wanted to hurt anybody's feelings. We also have four Ubuntu desktops and two Ubuntu laptops in our house, including both old and current high-end machines. However, I believe it is quite unusual when it turns out that 15% of some group of teenagers uses Linux, and it must have some rational reason. I am sure that there are other reasons too, like my son's advocacy, but having old PCs are likely a reason.
I believe you make my point stronger by showing that even with such small resources and incompetent developers, it was possible to create the most moddable game (ever?). Without actually putting any effort into moddability... That made it possible to spend all of their limited resources on a good game design. That is not a small feat.
I worked in both C and Java for many years, and regarding moddability, no, it is not possible to beat Java using C with equal resources. My son's code regurly replace builtin Minecraft classes, runtime, without a significant effort, if the existing extension system does not provides (yet) the necessary hooks for him.
What we would indeed need, is the multi-datacenter capability. Which you get for free with Cassandra... We also sorely needed performance a few years ago (15k SAS drives was slow after an internet hiccup for example), but SSD drives helped in that. Again we could get infinite scalability with Cassandra for free.
You must choose in such a situation: either the - only theoretically needed - ACID, or the actually performing and highly available NoSQL with its additional operations, coding burden?
I only have a little experience with Cassandra, but I can tell you, that consistency is very easily tuneable in it and it is also provides durability. Atomicity is restricted (AFAIK you can get atomicity if all your data goes onto a single data partition). Isolation does not exist.
I believe that it is very easy to say that something need ACID, while actually most data does not require ACID. They can, and as I read the article they do use relational database for those data which actually require ACID. NoSQL does not mean that you are in a constant state of getting garbage from your database. And yes, RDBMS are not failsafe either, if nothing else there are coding errors in the applications which use them.
I would add that Java also made it trivial to run Minecraft on Linux. More than one of his friends play Minecraft on Ubuntu, I guess they have old PC-s.
I think one of the things which made Minecraft popular is Java. There are a huge number of plugins and mods, these wouldn't happen without Java. It is easy to reverse engineer and modify anything in Minecraft exactly because it is in Java. Even its plugin system was written by an external developer! I do not really know Minecraft myself, but my 13 old years son plays Minecraft, and he spent months coding Minecraft extensions, and as far as I hear from him, a usual server uses a very large number of extensions.
Java is not ideal for graphics intensive applications, but it is also not that bad either. Minecraft (without mods) does not represent what is possible in Java, becuase it is very under-optimized. The new 1.8 version is much faster, but there is still much room for optimization.
This is similar to why PHP web softwares are very popular, they are not perfect, but they are very easy to be modified.
That is a nice theory, but it is false. You can easily validate it yourself, as I did, see my other post about the results.
Huh? The two cores of the Bulldozer module indeed has one common FPU unit, but that is a 256 bit one, which can be divided into two 128 bit unit (or even into four 64 bit unit!). I did test FPU performance and in the worst case it was 25% slower, in the best case it was actually faster, when I run two threads on a single module vs on two modules. Usually the difference is very small. Please do not compare the AMD Bulldozer architecture to Intel Hyperthreading, the two technology has very different purposes.
I agree. I went from cheap to the most expensive consumer routers in several steps (the current one is above 200$) but I have trivial problems with all. Because of this I slowly migrate all of their functions to a PC. If the current router fails, I will not buy a new one. I believe these home routers are useful only if you do not want to touch them at all (after setting the password). If you do anything more, and have enough space, use a real PC. It does not consume too much power, a usual PC uses less than 80W if it is idle. If you do not have a surplus PC, thenn buy an AMD AM1 APU with an ITX or mATX motherboard, and the idle consumption will be less than 25W. And you can use your favourite unix/linux OS.
I have to sanitize DRM ePubs immediately anyway, so I can backup them. As a side effect, I can read them anywhere, ePub is an open format. Of course, Kindle does not support it, but that is their problem, I simply do not buy a Kindle. Every book which is available on Amazon is available in ePUB too, while the opposite is not true. There are books available in ePUB, which are not sold by Amazon.
I regularly do restores from an LTO-3 drive, and the whole process takes no more than 5 minutes. If your data is useless after 5 minutes, then it is indeed unecessary to backup it, not to mention archiving it.
I can easily imagine that Verizon is correctly saying that the backbone providers have not got enough bandwidth to them. After all Verizon knows very well if they intentionally crippled these connections and agreements. Backbone providers gladly build better connections. Their customers, like me or anybody who rent or colocate a server, or maintains his own datacenter, for example Netflix, pay them to have good connections to end users.
It does not work that way. Even if Apple or Samsung or anybody else invents all the components themself, they still have to pay the same royalty to the original "inventors", because they received monopoly for 20 years.
"Many of the provisions would have the effect of treating every patent holder as a patent troll."
Software should not have been patented, and software patents are indeed not allowed in Europe (although they are lobbying hard to bring the broken US system into Europe).
I am yet to see a software patent which worth the effort of reading and decoding its intentionally unclear text. In the best case they are basically direct applications of unpatentable mathematical knowledge produced by real scientists, and not the inventors mentioned in the patent.
So yes, anybody who uses software patents for litigation or for any other purpose except defending against a troll, is indeed a patent troll.
It is not the file systems which mess up the data (at least with journaling file systems), but the SSD drives without power loss protection capacitors. What a journaling file system could do, if it successfully syncs the journal, but after a restart the journal is gone, the result of later partial writes are there? This is the so called serialization error. It happens with costomer HDD drives too, but it is much worse with these SSD drives. Take a look at the publication I linked in my other comment above.
I don't expect total power loss protection. I do expect reasonable behaviour, like data already synced to the drive is there even after a power loss. SSD drives without capacitors fail spectacularly, they are much worse than HDD drives. Just google for "SSD failure modes abstract", for example: https://www.usenix.org/system/...
No file system can deal with the situation when data synced to drive is lost. And that is the better case for SSD in case of a power loss, they frequently lose completely unrelated data.
Actually I cannot think of any scenario, where I would use such a drive. We have lost 3 desktop drives which has no capacitors. One is still working. Meanwhile there are no issues with four drives which has capacitors.
To be fair, queued TRIM is actually useful. The old TRIM killed performance in a high IO environment.
"mSATA solid state drives performs extremely well" It has no power loss protection capacitors, so if it performs extremely well, then it also lose data extremely well. Maybe you can put it into a laptop, but I would not risk even that. This is another useless "customer" SSD drive.
Actually we also upgraded to Java 7 I just forgot to mention that in my original post.
I am not sure what do you mean on deprecated calls. In new Java releases they deprecate functions or classes but they never remove them. Therefore deprecated functions do not cause backward compatibility issues. As others already mentioned likely you mean calls into JRE internal sun.* classes. Those are never deprecated, because they were never public! No code should call them, except very special applications in very special circumanstances, but then they should always provide a default fallback algorithm, and advertise this issue on the very first page of this documentation. Actually the only software I know which has a good reason to call internal sun.* code is the big data database, Cassandra, which is assumed to manage memory in the hundreds of gigabytes range.
However, I understand you, because with such a large amount of code you likely run into each and every bug in the JRE class libraries at some point in your code. But your situation is definitely not the usual, and based on your disappointed tone, I believe your organisation is doing something strange. You say that you have 74 gigabytes of code, but the entire Java EE codebase is less than 80 megabytes of binary code. It is quite strange that you blame that 0.1% code for all your problems. You should either pay for Oracle support, and receive bug fixes early, or pay developers who can quickly fix JRE bugs themselves, and that will be still a tiny fraction of your IT budget. Java related costs must be compared to the similar cost of some alternative technology, so you could tell whether Java or that alternative is the more cost effective in your situation. I do not know anything else which seems to be better for us.
I am working on a 80 000 lines long Java web application in the last 15 years. I have upgraded through 5 major versions, from Java 1.1 to 1.2 to 1.3 to 1.4 to 5 to 6. I do not remember a single issue related to any of these upgrades. There vere about 2 minor issues when we migrated from Unix to Windows to Linux (related to the case sensitivity of the file system).
I am sure that a visit to a site which distributes cheating tools is only one of the many factors in the evaluation of whether the player is a likely cheater or not.