oowa

8 ms·

1.
by oowa 17d ago
TLDR basically old tech is not optimized for scrapers / slurpers / etc. to the point it would take 42^n to solve all possible combinations. Why? Murphy's law. Solution for OP is to ignore for now. Otherwise Use or invent some
2.
by oowa 17d ago
remember, its only difficult for you. at the end of the day its just 7gb of data...
3.
by oowa 17d ago
have a hackathon to solve for this. OP says it's not a problem for him right now but if we extrapolate what he's talking about it's definitely a problem aaaaaaand It's totally solvable, Even with all of the crazy combina
4.
by oowa 17d ago
no its only difficult for you. and only at this moment... any minute now you will see the way. btw, the OP is just saying "its OK for now". And the OP is just telling us: this is what has been happening... maybe its difficult for
5.
by oowa 17d ago
using the current solution and a cache pattern doesnt solve it, but it is an "affordable" solvable problem. but first we need to ignore OP said its ok for now...have a hackathon to solve for this. OP says it's not a problem f
6.
by oowa 17d ago
anyway, I have solved this exact scenario many times in the last 30 years... thanks for the dv.. have a hackathon to solve for this. OP says it's not a problem for him right now but if we extrapolate what he's talking about it&#x2
7.
by oowa 17d ago
have a hackathon to solve for this. OP says it's not a problem for him right now but if we extrapolate what he's talking about it's definitely a problem aaaaaaand It's totally solvable, Even with all of the crazy combina
8.
by oowa 18d ago
i think its only 7gb of data total, therefore there should be a strategy to fully optimize for this deterministic scenario, but instead of caching instead with maybe compiled streaming renderer(s)... but he said its ok for now.. and anyway
9.
by oowa 18d ago
he said its fast enough for now actually...
10.
by oowa 3mo ago
thanks, Kotaku is dogshhhhh
11.
by oowa 3mo ago
that would be hela curryketchup nice