Disqus - Latest Comments for banane

Re: San Jose Bike Party!!

banane — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 00:20:28 -0000

Hey Lawrence! Mark did mention that you were carrying, but we were 1/2 way back home by the time it really caught up with us. Good times.

Re: My Thoughts on the Current State of FriendFeed

krynsky — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 01:08:00 -0000

Thanks Anna. I'm crossing my fingers too. You never know.

Re: My Thoughts on the Current State of FriendFeed

banane — Thu, 13 Aug 2009 15:48:34 -0000

Great level-headed analysis, Mark, and I completely agree. I'm kind of waiting to find another service, and do maintain a small hope that perhaps, perhaps, FF would stay as some kind of 'google labs' of feature. Just as I type this I find it unlikely, tho.

Re: The Sweet Decay: Composting

banane — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 02:41:17 -0000

Cambridge/Boston doesn't have curbside?

Re: http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/06/matthew-and-sarah-turn-one-year-old-12.html

banane — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 14:33:29 -0000

It's been so fun watching them grow- thanks for keeping us in on it!

Re: Redheads & Pratfalls

banane — Sat, 16 May 2009 21:59:49 -0000

My friend Sally & her husband were contesting my redheads theory with blondes. Ainsley Hayes, Donna Moss, later on the other staffer (I haven't gotten there yet). I still think there are more characters with red, or serious red highlights.

Re: Email Fail

banane — Fri, 01 May 2009 19:27:52 -0000

I imap a few accounts into Gmail, and roughly have 2 active inboxes I check (I know you don't want to do that) one is professional, and for services (banking, etc.) the other is purely personal/fun, and most of my social networks key into that one.

I can't believe you're using client-based email. Seriously, the spam filters are AMAZING on web-based emails, and that may be one of your problems.

Also, if you remember, adding yourname + [storename/service]@gmail.com - sub-addresses, helps with organization.

I check mail on my iPhone but I rarely reply. Just a "FYI" kind of thing. I also take driving and walking seriously, or perhaps I'm not gifted in that area, ha.

I also unsubscribe to things periodically to clean out my inbox. Good luck.

Re: Dollhouse… the last episodes

banane — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 19:05:36 -0000

Yeah I also LOVED the cliche, as I love Miss Marple, and Agatha Christie, and wishing upon wish the hot young husband was not the murderer.

Re: Redheads & Pratfalls

banane — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 16:04:07 -0000

Yeah TV has htat challenge with exposition. I never watch CSI. I just couldn't get over all of the loose long hair and tight button-downs. the only forensic person I've seen in trials actually totally goofed the job- and she was probably a new hire with the influx of CSI-recruits, kids coming out of associate degree programs wanting to look hot while envisioning guns penetrating pillows, or something.

Re: Redheads & Pratfalls

njudah — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 15:17:55 -0000

I keep meaning to do a post or a story where everyone talks like CSI, where they explain every single thing they're doing day to day..."Hi I'm riding the N Judah" "Ah Yes, the N Judah, a trolley system which uses electricity to drive a car on rails to your destination..."

Re: Redheads & Pratfalls

banane — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 14:11:52 -0000

Thanks Greg- it's fun to be snarky.

Re: Mystery Title & Smilies

banane — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 20:03:57 -0000

nice one Hang! Especially as I confront my inability to write about LOLCats (despite adding it in the line-up up there

Re: On Social Media, Are You a Type X or Type Y Thinker?

banane — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 16:47:23 -0000

OK, see it now

Re: On Social Media, Are You a Type X or Type Y Thinker?

shey — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 16:31:51 -0000

weird -- try reloading?

Re: On Social Media, Are You a Type X or Type Y Thinker?

banane — Tue, 17 Mar 2009 16:29:07 -0000

Shey I can't see Rahsheen's comments above...

Re: How FriendFeed uses MySQL to store schema-less data - Bret Taylor's blog

John — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 07:23:26 -0000

They used a hammer to drive screws into wood but found that it didn't work well. Then they invented a machine to strip the threads from the screws so that they could continue to use the hammer.

Re: How FriendFeed uses MySQL to store schema-less data - Bret Taylor's blog

BuggyFunBunny — Sun, 01 Mar 2009 10:15:30 -0000

>> By removing Joins, they are saving quite a bit of time. They're taking the connecting tissue out of the Database and putting it in the code.

Only if the engine sucks.

Re: How FriendFeed uses MySQL to store schema-less data - Bret Taylor's blog

BuggyFunBunny — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 09:44:54 -0000

>> didn't have the skills on staff to manage those beasts

That sort of like my neighbor. He knows how to cut up a chicken for dinner. He also thinks that qualifies him to be a neurosurgeon.

>> But I am interested in the differences between the homemade stop-gap measure here and how enterprise databases handle it

In the case of DB2, anyway, they have almost everything but the code itself available on their website explaining how the engine works. It helps if you've Elmasri or the like first.

Re: How FriendFeed uses MySQL to store schema-less data - Bret Taylor's blog

banane — Sat, 28 Feb 2009 00:50:53 -0000

#5 is the issue- and they're proving that SQL will be more of a time suck than what they're doing. By removing Joins, they are saving quite a bit of time. They're taking the connecting tissue out of the Database and putting it in the code. It's funny, I used to be a Java/Perl developer, and moved to databases. Listening/reading this thread is reminding me of the split between DB and programming, and this is such a programmer's solution. But I can't quibble with the fact, that, as a user of FF, it totally works.

One big aspect that makes this make sense for FF (and not other companies, software, or apps) is that FF is really, really simple schematically. They simply have two basic entities, the user, and the post.

What's the motivation for them to do something that works with other systems? There's no *reason* to be generic. Except, perhaps, that he can never fire his devlopers!

Re: How FriendFeed uses MySQL to store schema-less data - Bret Taylor's blog

Buck Nuggets — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 23:37:34 -0000

Banane,

Support for OLAP is only one of many reasons to avoid abandoning the relational or dimensional model. Even if an organization were to decide that their core business activity did not warrant the kind of analysis made possible by OLAP then there is still a basket full of reasons not to go this route, including but not limited to:
1. the fact that this design does not completely eliminate the need for table alterations and outages will still be required
2. no reporting products of any kind are supported
3. no tools that leverage database metadata are supported
4. any reports, queries or views not anticipated by the application will have to be built leveraging the application layer rather than SQL. A vast number of potential requests or requirements will face additional costs or may not be feasible to implement with this kind of design.
5. although I'm a huge fan of Python I have to admit that languages come & go and this team may find it desirable to replace or augment this application with another language. That won't talk easily to their python APIs. Sure, web services, etc are options - but are also far more costly than native sql in terms of performance.
6. no database constraints are possible. I realize that some people don't use them anyway - but the simple declarative constraint language common to all database products more reliably protects against data corruption that application validation - which is more subject to coding defects and changes over time.

So, take away the argument that OLAP capability is lost and you are still left with 6 huge reasons not to go this route. And that is for a product which is not a 100% solution and is only required because the database is being hosted by a product which fails to support common dbms functionality.

Re: Moroccan Stew

sean_mcgee — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 19:56:18 -0000

Thanks!! (O HAI back atcha)

Re: Moroccan Stew

banane — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 19:23:37 -0000

Hi Sean
Yeah you do a hard boiled egg, then cube it (roughly chop is OK)

Re: How FriendFeed uses MySQL to store schema-less data - Bret Taylor's blog

banane — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 16:02:13 -0000

Buck you were making the point to " use the more powerful OLAP products " and avoid the thick Java layer. I'm saying that FF is purely transactional, very minorly analytical, so OLAP-style design and products aren't of much use. I think they are somewhat useful in consideration since they have similar scale that Bret's dealing with.

I agree that there are more robust, bug-free apps out there that mirror what he's doing, but they're not open source (to my knowledge), and they're willing to rebuild them, so it's all good.

Re: How FriendFeed uses MySQL to store schema-less data - Bret Taylor's blog

Buck Nuggets — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 15:50:14 -0000

Well, I'd say that enabling OLAP isn't really the point (and BTW, works fine on live little databases as well).

What is the point is that there is a considerable amount of functionality dependent upon a data model that is lost with this kind of approach. And if the objective is to address database manageability there are far better approaches that won't cost the loss of this functionality.

Not to say that this isn't creative and fun. Just seems to be a solution for some other problem.

Re: How FriendFeed uses MySQL to store schema-less data - Bret Taylor's blog

banane — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 15:39:57 -0000

I concur- my experience in corp. DB environments has been the same