grumpydba

6 ms·

1.
by grumpydba 7y ago
> Small native binaries don't seem like much of an advantage when writing servers. However when deploying server binaries it's a substancial advantage. End users like them. Ops like them.
2.
by grumpydba 7y ago
They never said that they had to use c because go is not a systems language, so your assertion looks wrong. They wanted to avoid using unsafe. In c everything is unsafe by the way, so it makes it less of a systems language?
3.
by grumpydba 7y ago
> As we wanted to keep unsafe code to a minimum, we instead chose to employ the C code from the original driver as an opportunity to present cgo. It's not for performance reasons. I think you misread. Also the driver is pure go now:
4.
by grumpydba 7y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18399389 . It's been done. Performs well.
5.
by grumpydba 7y ago
> GPLv2 and v3 gave hobbyists, students, and anti-corporate hackers a means to feel as though their work resists the evil empire of the software industry, while in fact serving it up with unpaid work product. I got linux and the GNU user
6.
by grumpydba 7y ago
To stay in France, it's a bit as if you said the cathedrals construction was a total failure basing your judgment on the Beauvais cathedral which also suffered of the second system effect.
7.
by grumpydba 7y ago
What percentage of the waste is radiating for 10000 years? And how radioactive is it? Without facts, precise facts to back it up your statement looks irrational indeed.
8.
by grumpydba 7y ago
I don't judge a software on an alpha release.
9.
by grumpydba 7y ago
Because of the irrational fear of nuclear.
10.
by grumpydba 7y ago
It's the first of its generation and is quite a failure on many aspects. It's not representative of all the nuclear reactors in France, far from it. Thus it is quite insignificant.
11.
by grumpydba 7y ago
> Maybe you don't owe that to the closers-of-source-code You assume I have something against closers of source code. Do not assume bad faith please. I don't like closers of source code who say "Yes, We're Open (source
12.
by grumpydba 7y ago
That's why the gpl without CLA remains the best collaborative platform. That's a lesson for me, Stallman was right, as they say.
13.
by grumpydba 7y ago
Sure, but those are only weasel words and blatant lies. Talking about "Commercializing Open-Source", when you are in fact closing your source code is dishonest. And I think HN needs honesty. Even with some bluntness.
14.
by grumpydba 7y ago
A paragraph of this announcement is literally titled "Commercializing Open-Source". This is a blatant lie.
15.
by grumpydba 7y ago
> Yes I'm generally happy when I get new stuff for free, but I don't expect that to always happen. Sure. But when a product is advertised as open source, I expect it to be true.
16.
by grumpydba 7y ago
Oracle has been free riding red hat with unbreakable Linux, for years. Then red hat got bought for 30 billions. When you are confident about you ability to outsmart the competition and keep your customers, you don't have to use thos
17.
by grumpydba 7y ago
> You can still run the software, for free, in your business. You can still change the software, for free, and run that in your business. You can still fork the software, from today, and do what you want with it. You cannot reuse and pub
18.
by grumpydba 7y ago
Those are deceptive tactics. How can one expect to spin it and make knowledgable people swallow it?
19.
by grumpydba 7y ago
Hence the huge need for nuclear power.
20.
by grumpydba 7y ago
No we don't. We use ordinateur.
21.
by grumpydba 7y ago
No you don't lose them. Fdw supports push down of where clauses, only selects the required columns. You can also create views in clickhouse to make sur the joins are processed there.
22.
by grumpydba 7y ago
> Anyone considering a “time series database” should first set up a modern commercial column store, partition their tables on the time column, and time their workload. For any scan-oriented workload, it will crush a row store like Timesc
23.
by grumpydba 7y ago
In 5 years from now, will there still be svners?
24.
by grumpydba 7y ago
> It’s things like this that keep us paying $millions for SQL Server Enterpise vs. Postgres. Using these millions to better design your applications is better in the long run. You can totally live without those with a good schema and be
25.
by grumpydba 7y ago
It's on yum.postgresql.org, the official repo. Come on!
26.
by grumpydba 7y ago
Gross....
27.
by grumpydba 7y ago
> Well that settles it. Next time a pizza traditionalist blasts me for having pineapple on my pizza, I'll counter that he shouldn't have tomatoes on theirs. I don't think it's a matter of tradition. It's a matter
28.
by grumpydba 7y ago
> Yes, maybe there will be built in automatic fail over in a few years so you don't have to hack it together using a bunch of scripts. thanks microsoft !! https://github.com/citusdata/pg_auto_failover
29.
by grumpydba 7y ago
How to bake a better loaf: https://youtu.be/8B_7AFYmkYo
30.
by grumpydba 7y ago
It's a trade-off. Programmer's productivity versus theorically perfect ownership handling. I think that rust fills the needs of applications with extreme requirements. A browser is in that niche. Not all software is. Thus most of

More ›