<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for qu1j0t3</title><link>http://disqus.com/people/qu1j0t3/</link><description></description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 02:00:13 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: How FriendFeed uses MySQL to store schema-less data - Bret Taylor's blog</title><link>http://brettaylor.disqus.com/how_friendfeed_uses_mysql_to_store_schema_less_data_bret_taylors_blog/#comment-15587109</link><description>Answered above ^^</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">qu1j0t3</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 02:00:13 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: How FriendFeed uses MySQL to store schema-less data - Bret Taylor's blog</title><link>http://brettaylor.disqus.com/how_friendfeed_uses_mysql_to_store_schema_less_data_bret_taylors_blog/#comment-15587088</link><description>As others have pointed out, MySQL stands up pretty well as a key value store; not only in raw performance, but in maturity and supporting infrastructure. Makes more sense the more one thinks about it.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">qu1j0t3</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 01:58:32 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: How FriendFeed uses MySQL to store schema-less data - Bret Taylor's blog</title><link>http://brettaylor.disqus.com/how_friendfeed_uses_mysql_to_store_schema_less_data_bret_taylors_blog/#comment-15587043</link><description>Mind defining "filesystem databases"? Do you mean the traditional key-value stores such as BDB that might have been contemporary with your anecdote? Running a web site on BDB would have been radical, not to mention blog-worthy, in 1997.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;It should be remembered that end of 90's/early 00's was the period that saw MySQL gain ground in this very niche, and retain hold of it to the point that it now powers all major web properties (including, according to this article, FriendFeed).</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">qu1j0t3</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 01:55:08 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: How FriendFeed uses MySQL to store schema-less data - Bret Taylor's blog</title><link>http://brettaylor.disqus.com/how_friendfeed_uses_mysql_to_store_schema_less_data_bret_taylors_blog/#comment-15586914</link><description>Long keys are inefficient to store and handle. A primary key over 8 bytes is usually hard to justify; a 725-character key (under normal circumstances) defies common sense. Its use here indicates a denormalised schema.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Furthermore with InnoDB, a long PK is a liability where secondary keys are used, as in such keys the PK value is used to reference the row.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">qu1j0t3</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 30 Aug 2009 01:43:41 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Upset at Apple?</title><link>http://krarick.disqus.com/upset_at_apple/#comment-14017843</link><description>You don't think The Steve Jobs *just might* have had mobile applications in mind in 2005?? Let's remember the iPod touch and iPhone run OS X itself. I'd say the preparation for that considerably predates the release of 10.4. :)&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Mr Jobs doesn't *do* hindsight. He's most likely working on what you'll be using in 2015.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">qu1j0t3</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 05 Aug 2009 23:12:27 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Upset at Apple?</title><link>http://krarick.disqus.com/upset_at_apple/#comment-14014037</link><description>Obvious in hindsight, maybe, but I think what Palm did was both gutsy and clever.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">krarick</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 05 Aug 2009 21:58:49 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Upset at Apple?</title><link>http://krarick.disqus.com/upset_at_apple/#comment-13953353</link><description>&lt;i&gt; they invented HTML-CSS-Javascript-based phone apps&lt;/i&gt;&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Well, they basically did. Apple standardised the Widget framework for JS+HTML+CSS applications, including an IDE (Dashcode), and released it in 2005. The OS X Dashboard (10.4 and later) runs them and it was an obvious step to make the same runtime work on mobile devices.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">qu1j0t3</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2009 20:50:03 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: The NoSQL's need to engage the DBA’s</title><link>http://tonybain.disqus.com/the_nosqls_need_to_engage_the_dbas/#comment-13661874</link><description>Time was, it wasn't going to get adoption until Microsoft productised it.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Perhaps we're finally leaving that sad era. But if non-R DBMS catch more mainstream attention, I am sure they'll wake up and do a Zune. (Note they already jumped on the functional bandwagon with F#, LINQ.)</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">qu1j0t3</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 30 Jul 2009 11:30:07 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Fwd: Scorching hot Startup Needs Scalability Sorcerer and Optimization Freak</title><link>http://homo-adminus.disqus.com/fwd_scorching_hot_startup_needs_scalability_sorcerer_and_optimization_freak/#comment-1138225</link><description>It could be either remote or in Toronto (afaik)</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Scoundrel</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2008 16:39:07 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Fwd: Scorching hot Startup Needs Scalability Sorcerer and Optimization Freak</title><link>http://homo-adminus.disqus.com/fwd_scorching_hot_startup_needs_scalability_sorcerer_and_optimization_freak/#comment-1138150</link><description>Where is this job located?</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">qu1j0t3</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2008 16:32:51 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>