They just mean you catch incorrect joins more easily because there is usually no overlap in keys between unrelated tables. Using int, you’re usually going to have some shared values between two unrelated tables.
A lot of oltp databases have modeling conventions for making read only reporting tables. Do tabular dbs have an inverse for transaction heavy data, that later gets batched to a read optimized structure? I kind of think most databases (even oltp workloads) really are read dominated. I feel like DuckDB is really close to working as the ‘main db’ for such systems, but my lack of knowledge for how to handle quick mutations bothers me. It feels like some form of temporal data modeling would solve it but I don’t know.
I think I saw an apple A16 takes about 8 watts, which would be about a square foot of solar panel. So assuming we keep making progress it doesn’t seem insane to me that a laptop where the back of the lcd is a solar panel would be enough?
The one that really bugs me is the Apple TV. It would be a great little box to use for terminals/thin client style work and there are a ton of old cheap ones. Having a $50 dollar used box that was low power and could run OSX would be great.
I’m sure it wouldn’t be profitable for them, but I feel like having some vendor sell a ‘reference machine’ that they know could run the core OS well would be a good in between. Someone like Framework selling a workstation looking desktop in a specific reference config couldn’t be too bad. Feels like just enough to get a community started. Most tasks really don’t need bleeding edge hardware anymore, the thing could go years without hardware changes.
It's good to see their response. I feel like between the issues with CNCF being talked about on the Oxide and friends podcast, and this recent Jepson report, nats tends to get a decent amount of negative coverage.
Which is a shame, since I do think it's a great tool.
You’re right, but would you also agree there is a difference between a bunch of people in social media saying, “we don’t like this racist person, you should fire them.” And a government official saying, “we don’t like what our critics say, we’re going to revoke their ability to broadcast unless they fire their employee”.
But the casualties of prior cancel culture were usually public figures who did racist or sexist things, not people who criticized the administration? I can’t believe you don’t understand this distinction.