I think this would work better if it could be a baby instead of a cat. After all, babies love to push buttons, and they're not possessions, and it's pretty well established that babies can't enter into contracts.
Okay, I RTFA. I've made a living with relational databases for ten years, but I have no experience with key/value databases. So maybe someone can explain this better than TFA did.
Bain writes: "The first benefit is that they are simple and thus scale much better than today's relational databases. If you are putting together a system in-house and intend to throw dozens or hundreds of servers behind your data store to cope with what you expect will be a massive demand in scale, then consider a key/value store."
So, they scale well if you're going to throw tons of hardware at them? Okay, I guess I can live with that. But then, in the "The Bad" section:
"In the cloud, key/value databases are usually multi-tenanted, which means that a lot of users and applications will use the same system. To prevent any one process from overloading the shared environment, most cloud data stores strictly limit the total impact that any single query can cause.... These limitations aren't a problem for your bread-and-butter application logic (adding, updating, deleting, and retrieving small numbers of items)."
So the resource usage in the cloud with a large number of users consumes so many resources (of your "hundreds of servers") that you need to limit your application to retrieving "small numbers of items."
I can see how there'd be some benefit to providing a subset of RDMS functionality to improve efficiency. But, if I'm understanding this article, they're apparently offsetting any gains from simplicity by duplicating data, justified by "hard drives are cheap." How the hell is this scaling "much better than today's relational databases?"
There's a civilization-destroying race out there that listens for signals, then goes off and incinerates entire solar systems in a zealous attempt to keep the universe quiet.
Intelligent beings that happen to live know that they have to shut... the... hell... up.
That's interesting. I don't have 2.5 (using Python 3). Do you have an example of a year that returns the wrong result under Python 2.5? This was just a five-minute exercise, but I'd like to figure out what the difference is. Did they change the order of operations in Python 3?
> US Born Muslims have been terrorists less > frequently than Michigan rednecks
I used to live in Taylor, you insensitive clod!
Seriously, though, I feel more comfortable hanging out in Dearborn (the biggest Muslim population in the US) than in Taylor (the capital of the Michigan redneck).
Others have mentioned a power surge, but I'd still run diagnostics on the DIMMs. That's at least something that you can DO something about very easily.
Just for fun, also check/var/log/messages and last reboot. If Fedora noticed a problem before going down, it might show up there.
The system was just frozen, then? If so, could be a bad DIMM. They don't usually just fail after years of use, but it's possible. I've been machines with bad DIMMs just freeze, and then reboot like nothing happened.
Anyway, no need to keep the post short. What's the hardware? What logs did you already check?
...to at least tell us why it crashed. Hard drive failure? Your fan gave out? Some sort of kernel panic or MCE? Was there a black cat in the server room? Maybe there's more Zune in it than you think.
> Why is it that the number pad on a telephone is > vertically mirrored from the number pad on > computers and calculators?
It's because phones used to have these weird clickety rotary dials, with the 1 up at the top right. So they wanted to sort of keep that arrangement in the transition.
It's a pain when using a cell phone as a calculator.
> No, they can't stop you from using their > trademark or logo when selling, since you are > selling real Apple products and not fakes.
I didn't say they could STOP you from using their trademark or logo. I said that they can ask that you not use their logo or trade name in an ad, and that can be a condition of being a dealer. There's a difference between not doing something because it's illegal, or not doing something because it might lose you your dealership.
> If I sell you an apple from my apple tree then > what right should I have to say that you sell > that apple at?
MAP does not claim any jurisdiction on the selling price of an apple. If you have a store that sells, to slightly warp your analogy, Apples, and Apple has a product that has a MAP of $149.00, there's absolutely no law or contract provision that forces you to sell that Apple for $149.00. You can sell it for $89.00 if you want to.
If the Apple company were to tell you that you can't sell Apples for $89.00, that would be illegal. But they can ask that you not use their logo or trade name in an advertisement that SAYS and Apple is $89.00, and it's legal for them to enforce that as a condition for selling Apples to YOU, the retailer.
They want to protect the perceived value of their trade name and products. And brick-and-mortar retailers approve, because it helps to level their playing-field with online or catalog retailers with less overhead. And making brick-and-mortar dealers happy is important to companies that make things like Apples because it provides a way to let shoppers actually taste their Apples in the real world.
"UPDATE: Please note that the use of an alarmist headline and imagery to increase the casual reader's desire to look at the entire article was an intentional parody."
CNN should hard-code that into their website's header.
Yes. There was nothing in my clipboard. But the exploit isn't just supposed to put something in my clipboard; it's supposed to force me to "click" on something.
> Now we're at a quandary. Your humble > correspondent is at a loss to even speculate as > to the nature of a technology that Ffirstly isn't > Javashit, but which can conceivably be invoked by > web content regardless of which web browser is in > use, but lastly can be secured against by > disabling hated plug-ins.
It's a Flash exploit. I found a proof-of-concept by clicking around TFA, and it promised that the Flash movie would take over my clipboard, forcing me to close the browser window. I'm on Firefox 3.0.2, and the "proof-of-concept" did nothing.
At least nothing obvious. I suppose I could have been rootkitted.
This sounds great at first. But if it's in space, then aliens will get hold of it, clone me a hundred million times, arm all the mes to the teeth, and then invade.
It's okay if that happens with somebody else, but it would make me feel sort of guilty, being the template for the harbinger of extinction.
> For a new father approaching 40, the new range of > Lego is abysmal. There's zero creativity in them.
Okay, I'm also a father approaching 40, too, and I've held a similar opinion of new-fangled specialized Lego sets for years. Sure, you could always buy the basic sets, but the space sets had these crazy single-tasking pieces.
My oldest son just turned six, and got a couple of the new Mars Missions space sets for his birthday. These sets are sweet. If you loved the Galaxy Explorer when you were ten, you'd have killed for the 7692 Recon Dropship set. If you just look at it, it LOOKS like it's chock full of pieces that you could never use for anything else. But it's not. The specialized pieces are not inherently less useful than the wing, tail, and window pieces of the Galaxy Explorer.
After years and years of junk, I think the Mars Mission sets are excellent.
Backinmyday, which was the Galaxy Explorer era, all the little figures had the same face. It was a 1970s-era smiley face. The only thing that changed was the headwear: space helmet, fireman hat, girl-hair.
Now, my son has space lego sets. The guys in the Mars Mission sets have decidedly bad-ass faces. Bad-ass facial hair with the bad-ass grimace of a real bad-ass.
Make no mistake about this: my 1970s astronauts did not lead pleasant lives. They fought brave battles, lost limbs, sometimes cracked (literally) under the pressure. Sometimes they even had that stupid smile wiped off their faces (again, literally).
Why do today's miniature astronauts wear their emotions on their sleeves? What happened to the steel resolve of yesteryear? Why not, when under alien attack, smile?
Slashdot Mirror
I think this would work better if it could be a baby instead of a cat. After all, babies love to push buttons, and they're not possessions, and it's pretty well established that babies can't enter into contracts.
Okay, I RTFA. I've made a living with relational databases for ten years, but I have no experience with key/value databases. So maybe someone can explain this better than TFA did.
Bain writes: "The first benefit is that they are simple and thus scale much better than today's relational databases. If you are putting together a system in-house and intend to throw dozens or hundreds of servers behind your data store to cope with what you expect will be a massive demand in scale, then consider a key/value store."
So, they scale well if you're going to throw tons of hardware at them? Okay, I guess I can live with that. But then, in the "The Bad" section:
"In the cloud, key/value databases are usually multi-tenanted, which means that a lot of users and applications will use the same system. To prevent any one process from overloading the shared environment, most cloud data stores strictly limit the total impact that any single query can cause.... These limitations aren't a problem for your bread-and-butter application logic (adding, updating, deleting, and retrieving small numbers of items)."
So the resource usage in the cloud with a large number of users consumes so many resources (of your "hundreds of servers") that you need to limit your application to retrieving "small numbers of items."
I can see how there'd be some benefit to providing a subset of RDMS functionality to improve efficiency. But, if I'm understanding this article, they're apparently offsetting any gains from simplicity by duplicating data, justified by "hard drives are cheap." How the hell is this scaling "much better than today's relational databases?"
Wow, thanks for reminding me of Lode Runner.
The Ancient Art of War was another fun game with a user level generator. I used to try to create maps of real places.
There's a civilization-destroying race out there that listens for signals, then goes off and incinerates entire solar systems in a zealous attempt to keep the universe quiet.
Intelligent beings that happen to live know that they have to shut... the... hell... up.
> Stop writing Perl as PERL please, it hurts my eye.
The cyclops has spoken!
> It breaks where y%100 is not 0.
That's interesting. I don't have 2.5 (using Python 3). Do you have an example of a year that returns the wrong result under Python 2.5? This was just a five-minute exercise, but I'd like to figure out what the difference is. Did they change the order of operations in Python 3?
And now that I think about it, some parentheses help make it understandable:
ly = (not y % 4) and (y % 100) or (not y % 400);
> Here's your 500 year plan:
Or generalize with code (Python here) for a forever plan:
ly = not y % 4 and y % 100 or not y % 400;
> US Born Muslims have been terrorists less
> frequently than Michigan rednecks
I used to live in Taylor, you insensitive clod!
Seriously, though, I feel more comfortable hanging out in Dearborn (the biggest Muslim population in the US) than in Taylor (the capital of the Michigan redneck).
Others have mentioned a power surge, but I'd still run diagnostics on the DIMMs. That's at least something that you can DO something about very easily.
Just for fun, also check /var/log/messages and last reboot. If Fedora noticed a problem before going down, it might show up there.
> Anyone know why they failed?
You know what I blame this on the downfall of?
Society.
The system was just frozen, then? If so, could be a bad DIMM. They don't usually just fail after years of use, but it's possible. I've been machines with bad DIMMs just freeze, and then reboot like nothing happened.
Anyway, no need to keep the post short. What's the hardware? What logs did you already check?
...to at least tell us why it crashed. Hard drive failure? Your fan gave out? Some sort of kernel panic or MCE? Was there a black cat in the server room? Maybe there's more Zune in it than you think.
> Why is it that the number pad on a telephone is
> vertically mirrored from the number pad on
> computers and calculators?
It's because phones used to have these weird clickety rotary dials, with the 1 up at the top right. So they wanted to sort of keep that arrangement in the transition.
It's a pain when using a cell phone as a calculator.
> No, they can't stop you from using their
> trademark or logo when selling, since you are
> selling real Apple products and not fakes.
I didn't say they could STOP you from using their trademark or logo. I said that they can ask that you not use their logo or trade name in an ad, and that can be a condition of being a dealer. There's a difference between not doing something because it's illegal, or not doing something because it might lose you your dealership.
> If I sell you an apple from my apple tree then
> what right should I have to say that you sell
> that apple at?
MAP does not claim any jurisdiction on the selling price of an apple. If you have a store that sells, to slightly warp your analogy, Apples, and Apple has a product that has a MAP of $149.00, there's absolutely no law or contract provision that forces you to sell that Apple for $149.00. You can sell it for $89.00 if you want to.
If the Apple company were to tell you that you can't sell Apples for $89.00, that would be illegal. But they can ask that you not use their logo or trade name in an advertisement that SAYS and Apple is $89.00, and it's legal for them to enforce that as a condition for selling Apples to YOU, the retailer.
They want to protect the perceived value of their trade name and products. And brick-and-mortar retailers approve, because it helps to level their playing-field with online or catalog retailers with less overhead. And making brick-and-mortar dealers happy is important to companies that make things like Apples because it provides a way to let shoppers actually taste their Apples in the real world.
expect to get virtually trampled.
From TFA:
"UPDATE: Please note that the use of an alarmist headline and imagery to increase the casual reader's desire to look at the entire article was an intentional parody."
CNN should hard-code that into their website's header.
> Sometimes, there really isn't a catch.
You think this statement is going to make you look all socially-conscious, but I can see right through your little angle.
> Did you even try pasting from your clipboard?
Yes. There was nothing in my clipboard. But the exploit isn't just supposed to put something in my clipboard; it's supposed to force me to "click" on something.
> Now we're at a quandary. Your humble
> correspondent is at a loss to even speculate as
> to the nature of a technology that Ffirstly isn't
> Javashit, but which can conceivably be invoked by
> web content regardless of which web browser is in
> use, but lastly can be secured against by
> disabling hated plug-ins.
It's a Flash exploit. I found a proof-of-concept by clicking around TFA, and it promised that the Flash movie would take over my clipboard, forcing me to close the browser window. I'm on Firefox 3.0.2, and the "proof-of-concept" did nothing.
At least nothing obvious. I suppose I could have been rootkitted.
> There's hardly any information about the person
> William Shakespeare.
That's just totally wrong.
This sounds great at first. But if it's in space, then aliens will get hold of it, clone me a hundred million times, arm all the mes to the teeth, and then invade.
It's okay if that happens with somebody else, but it would make me feel sort of guilty, being the template for the harbinger of extinction.
> For a new father approaching 40, the new range of
> Lego is abysmal. There's zero creativity in them.
Okay, I'm also a father approaching 40, too, and I've held a similar opinion of new-fangled specialized Lego sets for years. Sure, you could always buy the basic sets, but the space sets had these crazy single-tasking pieces.
My oldest son just turned six, and got a couple of the new Mars Missions space sets for his birthday. These sets are sweet. If you loved the Galaxy Explorer when you were ten, you'd have killed for the 7692 Recon Dropship set. If you just look at it, it LOOKS like it's chock full of pieces that you could never use for anything else. But it's not. The specialized pieces are not inherently less useful than the wing, tail, and window pieces of the Galaxy Explorer.
After years and years of junk, I think the Mars Mission sets are excellent.
Backinmyday, which was the Galaxy Explorer era, all the little figures had the same face. It was a 1970s-era smiley face. The only thing that changed was the headwear: space helmet, fireman hat, girl-hair.
Now, my son has space lego sets. The guys in the Mars Mission sets have decidedly bad-ass faces. Bad-ass facial hair with the bad-ass grimace of a real bad-ass.
Make no mistake about this: my 1970s astronauts did not lead pleasant lives. They fought brave battles, lost limbs, sometimes cracked (literally) under the pressure. Sometimes they even had that stupid smile wiped off their faces (again, literally).
Why do today's miniature astronauts wear their emotions on their sleeves? What happened to the steel resolve of yesteryear? Why not, when under alien attack, smile?
Kids these days.