MySQL has had replication as a built-in for a long time, and I encountered such a system at work when it was 3.x. BUT the clustering system seemed to cause more problems than it solved - stuff kept getting out of sync or the syncing completely stops. Was someone else's job to maintain it, but I had to help fix it from time to time...
Might be better now, but point is MySQL implied it was fine back in 3.x despite its crappiness.
I don't doubt what you say (I don't have the expertise to judge it) but I should have pointed out that the number of people who really need clustering (as opposed to hot or warm backup) is very small. We realised that beefier hardware with hot backup was a much easier solution. Our DB expert tells me that the number of people who need a scalable conventional SQL cluster is getting to be a really small niche, with single-node systems improving and eating into the bottom half and NOSQL systems eating into the top.
About the only technical advantage MySQL has over Postgres is an easier setup, and generally better performance out of the box (before any tuning).
I think that clustering on Postgres is so obscure as to frighten off all but the most knowledgeable (or foolhardy idiots). You are presented with a list of do it yourself options, but no concrete recommendations. Comments like "pgpool 1/2 is a reasonable solution. it's statement level replication, which has some downsides, but is good for certain things" probably only help if you know exactly what you want already!
Actually, once XHTML came out, why do we have HTML being perpetrated at all, instead of switching over completely to XHTML?
I thought HTML 5 finally was valid XML? And without all the jiggery-pokery of XHTML and different DTD flavors.
According to Wikipedia it is "... also an attempt to define a single markup language that can be written in either HTML or XHTML syntax. XHTML5 is " the XML serialization of HTML5". I take this to mean that it can be written as XML without jiggery-pokery, but it is not mandatory to write well-formed XML.
Maybe the fallout will cause a mutation in the town's economy.Together with the economic downturn it could be a toxic combination, resulting in an civic apocalypse.
Both sides are often arrogant as they believe they have everything figured out absolutely.
I have to say that I disagree with this. If you talk to a true scientist, rather than a non-scientist on a secular agenda, they will say that like any theory it is falsifiable, it may not be complete, yet there is so much evidence for it that to falsify it you would need an extraordinary discovery. Abrahamic theists, on the other hand, do believe that their knowledge is absolute.
I 100% believe the theory of evolution provides the best fit with the available data. But stating any theory is a "fact" and "incontrovertible" is just too far. One of the issues is that it is hard to experimentally falsify the thoery of evolution. Either we are scientists and honest about what we do, or we are not. Get off my lawn.
I have to agree - for all I know I'm a Boltzman brain
If god exists, then he does, end of. Therefore what is there to fear from facts?
I therefore strongly suspect those objecting to teaching evolution don't believe in god at all, really. They have another agenda.
I think you are misunderstanding their motivation. Their motivation is not to prove/disprove the existence of God in any rigorous way, but to go to heaven. The Christian belief system says that the only way to do that is through faith, which in modern times is interpreted as belief. This means that it is best for them (and their children) to avoid any attempt at rigorous proof if it could end up with them seeing the alternative as a viable possibility. To them this is losing faith, which their god will punish with eternal torture. (OK for Christian pedants their god will allow them to be eternally tortured by someone else despite having the power to stop it).
The "British alternative" is a red herring and bad PR. FutureLearn is simply an alternative MOOC platform that has been built from the ground up with mobile in mind. Coursera, Udacity and EdX all still assume that the world and his dog only access the internet at a desk, with an unlimited high-speed connection. FutureLearn have a massive potential advantage over their competitors, and they need to start pushing it to build the business before the established players catch up.
Now if this is correct it will be a selling point. On a coursera course in order to study "offline/slow connection" on a mobile I had to download lectures, transcode them, put transfer them to the mobile device, then access them through file manager. If this worked like Google Drive - brows online on the device, check the "make accessible offline" it would be great. The thing is.... the site does not mention accessibility from other devices, offline/slow connection access, or anything. If this their "unique selling point" they aren't making much of it.
Hurrah for your friend! Yes, this is the historical OU way. Having something excellent but slightly outdated is always better than having a fashionable structure built on sand. I hope that attitude is brought into this project.
The University of London and Edinburgh provide courses through coursera. What does having a "British alternative" give the UK. I would expect that a MOOC provider would cost rather than make money.
how about intentionally not patching know security holes immediatly?
happens all the time in open source, especially on less bleading edge type distros where corporations are involved.
Interesting thought. I always knew that this happened but thought it was just "lets wait until the bleeding edge distros iron out the issues". There may well be cases where pressure is put on distros to delay a fix too; either "in the interests of National Security", or "In order to get a government support contract", etc. -- ~~~~
*If* such a mechanism was coded in, the nature of open source would mean it would be found by others. This in turn would compromise the trust of the ENTIRE kernel. That trust can take years to build up - but be detroyed in a heartbeat.
As a Linux user who downloads a compiled distribution I can't help worrying that the organisations building the distributions may also have been asked, and maybe given incentives, to put backdoors into the binaries. How do I know that the binary comes from the public source?
Candidates at Universities get the opportunity to work with people who are pioneering their fields. They are often brilliant, will nurture talent when they see it, but can be a bit eccentric and will respond to something like "I can't remember how to do integration by parts" with a reference to a textbook or by passing them on to a more able student.
This works well for the brightest, and reasonably well for the average - but it has long been known that those of less ability (who are still bright by average population standards) would do better in a technical college. Here they would be taught by dedicated teachers, who would do little or no research.
Is the solution to make Universities more like technical colleges? Well, maybe now they are looking at taking closer to 50% of all kids instead of the 10% that hey did decades ago then it is. We should not forget that even if we need to add tuition staff then to turn out new scientific pioneers we still need the research professors, even though they may not be the best teachers for all students.
its hard to save without being at least indirectly effected.
Oh really? What exactly stops you from putting the money in a box or buying gold?
Maybe you mean "It's hard to play the same game they are playing, to create profit from my money without working for it, as they do, but to do it without the risks that they take.".
Gold prices certainly affected by speculation. As for putting it in a box - perfectly possible but you would be better off using a savings account even at today's low interest rates
Slashdot Mirror
The "problem" with Postgresql is the Postgresql developers/team are more likely to present a realistic picture of things.
Those who really know about clustering will know it's all a bunch of compromises.
Just because MySQL fans paint a rosier picture doesn't mean the MySQL situation is really that much better: http://bugs.mysql.com/bug.php?id=25543 https://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.6/en/mysql-cluster-replication-issues.html
MySQL has had replication as a built-in for a long time, and I encountered such a system at work when it was 3.x. BUT the clustering system seemed to cause more problems than it solved - stuff kept getting out of sync or the syncing completely stops. Was someone else's job to maintain it, but I had to help fix it from time to time...
Might be better now, but point is MySQL implied it was fine back in 3.x despite its crappiness.
I don't doubt what you say (I don't have the expertise to judge it) but I should have pointed out that the number of people who really need clustering (as opposed to hot or warm backup) is very small. We realised that beefier hardware with hot backup was a much easier solution. Our DB expert tells me that the number of people who need a scalable conventional SQL cluster is getting to be a really small niche, with single-node systems improving and eating into the bottom half and NOSQL systems eating into the top.
About the only technical advantage MySQL has over Postgres is an easier setup, and generally better performance out of the box (before any tuning).
I think that clustering on Postgres is so obscure as to frighten off all but the most knowledgeable (or foolhardy idiots). You are presented with a list of do it yourself options, but no concrete recommendations. Comments like "pgpool 1/2 is a reasonable solution. it's statement level replication, which has some downsides, but is good for certain things" probably only help if you know exactly what you want already!
Maybe it didn't have the NSA/GCHQ backdoor
Actually, once XHTML came out, why do we have HTML being perpetrated at all, instead of switching over completely to XHTML?
I thought HTML 5 finally was valid XML? And without all the jiggery-pokery of XHTML and different DTD flavors.
According to Wikipedia it is "... also an attempt to define a single markup language that can be written in either HTML or XHTML syntax. XHTML5 is " the XML serialization of HTML5". I take this to mean that it can be written as XML without jiggery-pokery, but it is not mandatory to write well-formed XML.
At some point the city library will want to save money by switching off the external sockets - or charging a nominal amount. This will close him down
This was probly at the request of Nigel Farage, given his opinion on Belgium and attempts to "..be the quiet assassin of European democracy and of European nation states.".
Aliens over Yorkshire? they just be laikin ye lad!
That's a pretty radical statement. Remember that this is still a gray area.
Sievert.
That's clever. If I hadn't commented I'd mod you up!
the fallout from a nuclear plant closing
Maybe the fallout will cause a mutation in the town's economy.Together with the economic downturn it could be a toxic combination, resulting in an civic apocalypse.
One easy way to falsify The theory of evolution by natural selection is to simply falsify the entire field of genetics.
As you pointed out yourself this would not be sufficient, as there could be some other mechanism.
40-Million-Year-Old 'Walking Whale' Fossil Found In Peru
I was wondering what had happened to Cowboy Neil. Glad they found him again.
Both sides are often arrogant as they believe they have everything figured out absolutely.
I have to say that I disagree with this. If you talk to a true scientist, rather than a non-scientist on a secular agenda, they will say that like any theory it is falsifiable, it may not be complete, yet there is so much evidence for it that to falsify it you would need an extraordinary discovery. Abrahamic theists, on the other hand, do believe that their knowledge is absolute.
I get chills when I see phrases like:
The fact of evolution is incontrovertible
I 100% believe the theory of evolution provides the best fit with the available data. But stating any theory is a "fact" and "incontrovertible" is just too far. One of the issues is that it is hard to experimentally falsify the thoery of evolution. Either we are scientists and honest about what we do, or we are not. Get off my lawn.
I have to agree - for all I know I'm a Boltzman brain
The P believes in "facts" and thinks he follows science.
Ah, a Mr Gradgrind
Unless the two dominant sources of e-books (Amazon and Apple) support it: no.
That would be a yes then:
Amazon infuses e-books with HTML5 power with new KF8 format
It’s Official: iBooks Now Supports Epub3 which is based on XHTML1.1 which introduced html5 features to XHTML
or be both, which these Texans seem to be.
If god exists, then he does, end of. Therefore what is there to fear from facts?
I therefore strongly suspect those objecting to teaching evolution don't believe in god at all, really. They have another agenda.
I think you are misunderstanding their motivation. Their motivation is not to prove/disprove the existence of God in any rigorous way, but to go to heaven. The Christian belief system says that the only way to do that is through faith, which in modern times is interpreted as belief. This means that it is best for them (and their children) to avoid any attempt at rigorous proof if it could end up with them seeing the alternative as a viable possibility. To them this is losing faith, which their god will punish with eternal torture. (OK for Christian pedants their god will allow them to be eternally tortured by someone else despite having the power to stop it).
The "British alternative" is a red herring and bad PR. FutureLearn is simply an alternative MOOC platform that has been built from the ground up with mobile in mind. Coursera, Udacity and EdX all still assume that the world and his dog only access the internet at a desk, with an unlimited high-speed connection. FutureLearn have a massive potential advantage over their competitors, and they need to start pushing it to build the business before the established players catch up.
Now if this is correct it will be a selling point. On a coursera course in order to study "offline/slow connection" on a mobile I had to download lectures, transcode them, put transfer them to the mobile device, then access them through file manager. If this worked like Google Drive - brows online on the device, check the "make accessible offline" it would be great. The thing is .... the site does not mention accessibility from other devices, offline/slow connection access, or anything. If this their "unique selling point" they aren't making much of it.
rooms rented by the hour
sounds kinda like a whore house to me LMAO
I don't get it ... why so long?
Hurrah for your friend! Yes, this is the historical OU way. Having something excellent but slightly outdated is always better than having a fashionable structure built on sand. I hope that attitude is brought into this project.
... I guess not "posted from my iPhone 5s"
The University of London and Edinburgh provide courses through coursera. What does having a "British alternative" give the UK. I would expect that a MOOC provider would cost rather than make money.
how about intentionally not patching know security holes immediatly?
happens all the time in open source, especially on less bleading edge type distros where corporations are involved.
Interesting thought. I always knew that this happened but thought it was just "lets wait until the bleeding edge distros iron out the issues". There may well be cases where pressure is put on distros to delay a fix too; either "in the interests of National Security", or "In order to get a government support contract", etc. -- ~~~~
*If* such a mechanism was coded in, the nature of open source would mean it would be found by others. This in turn would compromise the trust of the ENTIRE kernel. That trust can take years to build up - but be detroyed in a heartbeat.
As a Linux user who downloads a compiled distribution I can't help worrying that the organisations building the distributions may also have been asked, and maybe given incentives, to put backdoors into the binaries. How do I know that the binary comes from the public source?
Candidates at Universities get the opportunity to work with people who are pioneering their fields. They are often brilliant, will nurture talent when they see it, but can be a bit eccentric and will respond to something like "I can't remember how to do integration by parts" with a reference to a textbook or by passing them on to a more able student.
This works well for the brightest, and reasonably well for the average - but it has long been known that those of less ability (who are still bright by average population standards) would do better in a technical college. Here they would be taught by dedicated teachers, who would do little or no research.
Is the solution to make Universities more like technical colleges? Well, maybe now they are looking at taking closer to 50% of all kids instead of the 10% that hey did decades ago then it is. We should not forget that even if we need to add tuition staff then to turn out new scientific pioneers we still need the research professors, even though they may not be the best teachers for all students.
I use it for news and nothing else. Well, I also chastise my member of parliament, but that's another story..
Hey, is that you Miss Whiplash?
its hard to save without being at least indirectly effected.
Oh really? What exactly stops you from putting the money in a box or buying gold?
Maybe you mean "It's hard to play the same game they are playing, to create profit from my money without working for it, as they do, but to do it without the risks that they take.".
Gold prices certainly affected by speculation. As for putting it in a box - perfectly possible but you would be better off using a savings account even at today's low interest rates