The "CSV" in the parent post was an editing artifact. I was going to say "CSV is an example of a very simple file format but BDB, for instance, is a binary file format optimized for doing lookups, much more efficient than reading through all "records" (lines) and parsing them for "columns" (and searching for a matching value.
backend meaning the format and retrieval method for actually storing the data. InnoDB and BDB both have file formats that tables are actually stored in, CSV and APIs for accessing those formats. So when they refer to the 'backend' they are talking about the actual data storage mechanism that the database server uses.
Why, do you have stock in Postgres, Inc.?
Oracle paying the developers of open source database engines to stop working on them helps you in what way? You have a very twisted sense of proprietariness.
Yes, so what they are doing is buying out the principle contributors for JBoss and InnoDB. There's nothing stopping you or me from taking over the MySQL or JBoss source except I'm not Monty and you're not Marc
You have heard of a something called 'open source' haven't you? You release your software even when it's unstable, that way other people can help you test and fix it.
Playstation is here because it can play movies. That's how they beat Sega and Nintendo. If they give in, XBox will eat their lunch too, because it's a full PC.
Why should Bush supporters be denied the ability to edit the topics they are most familiar with? Simple answer. The owners of wikipedia disagree with their opinion.
Why should an expert on RNA synthesis be allowed to post his research? He is obviously too close to the subject matter, and only creationists should be allowed to comment on the subject.
If you're going to have a wiki, a source of information that can be edited by all, and if you believe that doing so allows for better dissemination of information, then you have to stand by it.
But, in cases where there are just hundreds of paid political staffers with nothing else to do than fight over politicians' articles and it's consuming an inordinate amount of bandwidth and server resources, then restricting editing is reasonable. So too is it reasonable to freeze articles to maintain stability.
But then you are not maintaining an open wiki. Things like physical resource limitations and article stabilization are inherent problems that can be dealt with if they are treated as technical issues and not as political issues.
But wikipedia sets it's own policy. Just be aware of it when you base your information on it.
What he doesn't know but is a good thing is that Segue is basically a legacy support provider for their old automation tools. But the good thing is that there are a lot of people who still use Silk test (or still have licenses) and are looking for a good comforatble name to sell them an upgrade, because they probably haven't used it in years, their applications have migrated beyond their tests, and they don't want to pay Mercury's prices and then pay for Mercury training. Alot of orgs would love to see the word Borland attached to a competitor.
ALM means an automated windows testing tool, in this case, Silk Test. (Think spy+ plus a recorder and scripting language) It's competitors are Mercury Interactive (Winrunner, Loadrunner, Quick Test Pro) and IBM (Rational Robot.) There are various other tools that are often bundled with this (bundled meaning sold together) that are basically bad bug tracking tools, worse build tools, version control, and some programs that allow you to write requirements and tests in outlines or spreadsheets using really cool widgets, posting with ActiveX COM objects instead of regular HTTP. (Test Director, Clearcase, ClearQuest, etc.) Combine these with UML tools (Rational Rose or TogetherJ - another recent Borland acquisition) and &in theory* your "lifecycle" from design to code to test is managed.
In reality these products mostly suck but a few of them have uses and a few of them just don't have good competitors. UML design tools and Automation recorders are just starting to take off in open source (ArgoUML and SAMIE/PAMIE/Watir), Load testing tools can't compete with simple scripts, requirements and test documentation are best done using word processors and spreadsheets, and bug tracking tools are a dime a dozen (Bugzilla, Scarab, Mantis,...). Version control can be done open source or proprietary (CVS/Subversion/Arch vs. Perforce, VSS (ich)) and builds can use ant, make, cruise control, junit, etc.
The real trick is integrating this stuff so your developers, testers, deployers, analysts, and especially managers (we love pretty graphs!) can all work together without communicating. It's a laudable goal, but its performed really poorly, with tools that are as a rule a hodgepodge of acquisions and and one-offs. Webify and glum together in a propietary format and voila! the infamous step 3.
I know I'm getting into the market.
A kike who converts is still a kike. But Democrats secretly fawn over Southerners who take their side.
Wait, there were black and white boobies in Schindler's List too.
The religious crowd happens to have a whole damn lot of evidence that their holy spirit is a much more reliable moral compass than anything else that's come along.
Put it up empirically against any other belief system, and you'll conclude, scientifically, that it's better to listen to a bible thumping Christian's take on morality, than an athiest's.
So your definition of "scientist" is "someone in a white lab coat with a clipboard that votes Democrat"?
If someone in a lab coat with a clipboard votes Republican, then he's obviously not a real scientist, and therefore not objective; because only *real* scientists can be objective.
There's a flaw in your argument somewhere, but though I have the objectivity to see it, I don't have a lab coat and clip board, so I can't be trusted.
NASA's science is building rockets (aka "Rocket Science"), which they haven't done for almost 30 years. You might as well listen to the personal opinions of actors on politics, politicians on history, or poets on mathematics as the bureaucrats at NASA on such religious issues.
How about a contest? Set up a set of specs for a version 1 (you can even hide your cool idea if you want) and let people submit working models for you, along with demo graphics if wanted. Then you can pick from the (much smaller) list of candidates who show both initiative and expertise.
There aren't any 20 story websites. It's like hiring Bechtel to build your patio. A web application is a small program connected to a http listener that spits out a formatted text file based on a request. It may communicate with a database, hold session information, or even *gasp* use a transaction or two. Maybe it will have a load balancer or session replication. But this isn't the software equivalent of building a skyscraper or suspension bridge. It's closer to the level of adding railings, a balcony, or some steps.
Almost every bad design decision that is made concerning web applications is due to too much architecting. Even plain CGI is quite secure and scalable, though it might not be too maintainable.
If there wasn't some unreasonable taboo about player killing, then justice could easily be served. And people could post bouties for offenders. And courts could be convened to weigh the evidence.
You don't want a VPS....
but your hosting provider does, especially now that off the shelf hardware is so fast that under full load, if you divide the CPU by 10 or even 100 under lighter loads, your'e still I/O and network bound.
How's this for perspective?
US, British, and Dutch oil companies may be evil or benign, but no one except the most evil or idiotic think that Khomeini, Hussein, and Chavez are a better alternative.
The whole requirement is a deliberate ploy by the POTS services (Qwest/SBC/Verizon) to eliminate the competition from Vonage and other VOIP providers. So, whether they are being uncooperative or not is moot. Do you think you should be forced to pay more (to a company, not the government) to force you to have 911 service on a line that you may not need it for?
Slashdot Mirror
You don't know that MySQL had the rug pulled out from under them. Maybe Oracle bought sleepycat and they keep releasing BDB as open source.
The "CSV" in the parent post was an editing artifact. I was going to say "CSV is an example of a very simple file format but BDB, for instance, is a binary file format optimized for doing lookups, much more efficient than reading through all "records" (lines) and parsing them for "columns" (and searching for a matching value.
backend meaning the format and retrieval method for actually storing the data. InnoDB and BDB both have file formats that tables are actually stored in, CSV and APIs for accessing those formats. So when they refer to the 'backend' they are talking about the actual data storage mechanism that the database server uses.
Why, do you have stock in Postgres, Inc.? Oracle paying the developers of open source database engines to stop working on them helps you in what way? You have a very twisted sense of proprietariness.
Yes, so what they are doing is buying out the principle contributors for JBoss and InnoDB. There's nothing stopping you or me from taking over the MySQL or JBoss source except I'm not Monty and you're not Marc
You have heard of a something called 'open source' haven't you? You release your software even when it's unstable, that way other people can help you test and fix it.
Playstation is here because it can play movies. That's how they beat Sega and Nintendo. If they give in, XBox will eat their lunch too, because it's a full PC.
Why should Bush supporters be denied the ability to edit the topics they are most familiar with? Simple answer. The owners of wikipedia disagree with their opinion. Why should an expert on RNA synthesis be allowed to post his research? He is obviously too close to the subject matter, and only creationists should be allowed to comment on the subject. If you're going to have a wiki, a source of information that can be edited by all, and if you believe that doing so allows for better dissemination of information, then you have to stand by it. But, in cases where there are just hundreds of paid political staffers with nothing else to do than fight over politicians' articles and it's consuming an inordinate amount of bandwidth and server resources, then restricting editing is reasonable. So too is it reasonable to freeze articles to maintain stability. But then you are not maintaining an open wiki. Things like physical resource limitations and article stabilization are inherent problems that can be dealt with if they are treated as technical issues and not as political issues. But wikipedia sets it's own policy. Just be aware of it when you base your information on it.
Maybe the buying company could be called Borland. They tried the same thing with Interbase a few years ago.
What he doesn't know but is a good thing is that Segue is basically a legacy support provider for their old automation tools. But the good thing is that there are a lot of people who still use Silk test (or still have licenses) and are looking for a good comforatble name to sell them an upgrade, because they probably haven't used it in years, their applications have migrated beyond their tests, and they don't want to pay Mercury's prices and then pay for Mercury training. Alot of orgs would love to see the word Borland attached to a competitor.
ALM means an automated windows testing tool, in this case, Silk Test. (Think spy+ plus a recorder and scripting language) It's competitors are Mercury Interactive (Winrunner, Loadrunner, Quick Test Pro) and IBM (Rational Robot.) There are various other tools that are often bundled with this (bundled meaning sold together) that are basically bad bug tracking tools, worse build tools, version control, and some programs that allow you to write requirements and tests in outlines or spreadsheets using really cool widgets, posting with ActiveX COM objects instead of regular HTTP. (Test Director, Clearcase, ClearQuest, etc.) Combine these with UML tools (Rational Rose or TogetherJ - another recent Borland acquisition) and &in theory* your "lifecycle" from design to code to test is managed. In reality these products mostly suck but a few of them have uses and a few of them just don't have good competitors. UML design tools and Automation recorders are just starting to take off in open source (ArgoUML and SAMIE/PAMIE/Watir), Load testing tools can't compete with simple scripts, requirements and test documentation are best done using word processors and spreadsheets, and bug tracking tools are a dime a dozen (Bugzilla, Scarab, Mantis,...). Version control can be done open source or proprietary (CVS/Subversion/Arch vs. Perforce, VSS (ich)) and builds can use ant, make, cruise control, junit, etc. The real trick is integrating this stuff so your developers, testers, deployers, analysts, and especially managers (we love pretty graphs!) can all work together without communicating. It's a laudable goal, but its performed really poorly, with tools that are as a rule a hodgepodge of acquisions and and one-offs. Webify and glum together in a propietary format and voila! the infamous step 3. I know I'm getting into the market.
is that the Japanese economy is apparently coming back, as evidenced by a capital investment like that.
A kike who converts is still a kike. But Democrats secretly fawn over Southerners who take their side. Wait, there were black and white boobies in Schindler's List too.
The religious crowd happens to have a whole damn lot of evidence that their holy spirit is a much more reliable moral compass than anything else that's come along. Put it up empirically against any other belief system, and you'll conclude, scientifically, that it's better to listen to a bible thumping Christian's take on morality, than an athiest's.
No, science is about repeatable results. There are no facts behind gravity, electricity, or friction. It just happens that way every time.
So your definition of "scientist" is "someone in a white lab coat with a clipboard that votes Democrat"?
If someone in a lab coat with a clipboard votes Republican, then he's obviously not a real scientist, and therefore not objective; because only *real* scientists can be objective.
There's a flaw in your argument somewhere, but though I have the objectivity to see it, I don't have a lab coat and clip board, so I can't be trusted.
NASA's science is building rockets (aka "Rocket Science"), which they haven't done for almost 30 years. You might as well listen to the personal opinions of actors on politics, politicians on history, or poets on mathematics as the bureaucrats at NASA on such religious issues.
How about a contest? Set up a set of specs for a version 1 (you can even hide your cool idea if you want) and let people submit working models for you, along with demo graphics if wanted. Then you can pick from the (much smaller) list of candidates who show both initiative and expertise.
There aren't any 20 story websites. It's like hiring Bechtel to build your patio. A web application is a small program connected to a http listener that spits out a formatted text file based on a request. It may communicate with a database, hold session information, or even *gasp* use a transaction or two. Maybe it will have a load balancer or session replication. But this isn't the software equivalent of building a skyscraper or suspension bridge. It's closer to the level of adding railings, a balcony, or some steps. Almost every bad design decision that is made concerning web applications is due to too much architecting. Even plain CGI is quite secure and scalable, though it might not be too maintainable.
If there wasn't some unreasonable taboo about player killing, then justice could easily be served. And people could post bouties for offenders. And courts could be convened to weigh the evidence.
You don't want a VPS.... but your hosting provider does, especially now that off the shelf hardware is so fast that under full load, if you divide the CPU by 10 or even 100 under lighter loads, your'e still I/O and network bound.
That's rediculous. The best thing government can do is nuke Iran.
How's this for perspective? US, British, and Dutch oil companies may be evil or benign, but no one except the most evil or idiotic think that Khomeini, Hussein, and Chavez are a better alternative.
The whole requirement is a deliberate ploy by the POTS services (Qwest/SBC/Verizon) to eliminate the competition from Vonage and other VOIP providers. So, whether they are being uncooperative or not is moot. Do you think you should be forced to pay more (to a company, not the government) to force you to have 911 service on a line that you may not need it for?