Sort of, at least some degree of relativism exists though how much is debated. Would you ever talk about sea having the same color as wine? But that's exactly what Homer called it.
This is still quite clearly something different than being unable to see the different colors, though.
Their mental model, sure. The way they convey it to others, sure.
But you can easily distinguish between two colors side by side that are even closer in appearance than wine and the sea, even if you only know one name for them. We can differentiate between colors before we even know the words for them when we're young, too.
GHA’s componentized architecture is appealing, but it’s astonishing to me that there’s still seemingly no way to actually debug workflows, run them locally, or rapidly iterate on them in any way. Alas.
Redis is fundamentally the wrong storage system for a job queue when you have an RDBMS handy. This is not new information. You still might want to split the job queue onto its own DB server when things start getting busy, though.
For caching, though, I wouldn’t drop Redis so fast. As a in-memory cache, the ops overhead of running Redis is a lot lower. You can even ignore HA for most use cases.
Source: I helped design and run a multi-tiered Redis caching architecture for a Rails-based SaaS serving millions of daily users, coordinating shared data across hundreds of database clusters and thousands of app servers across a dozen AWS regions, with separate per-host, per-cluster, per-region, and global cache layers.
We used Postgres for the job queues, though. Entirely separate from the primary app DBs.
> Redis is fundamentally the wrong storage system for a job queue when you have an RDBMS handy
One could go one step further and say an RDBMS is fundamentally the wrong storage system for a job queue when you have a persistent, purpose-built message queue handy.
Honestly, for most people, I'd recommend they just use their cloud provider's native message queue offering. On AWS, SQS is cheap, reliable, easy to start with, and gives you plenty of room to grow. GCP PubSub and Azure Storage Queues are probably similar in these regards.
Unless managing queues is your business, I wouldn't make it your problem. Hand that undifferentiated heavy lifting off.
Rails shops seem to not like to use SQS/PubSub/Kafka/RabbitMQ for some reason. They seem to really like these worker tasks like SideKiq or SolidQueue. When I compare this with Java, C# or Python who all seem much more likely to use a separate message queue then have that handle the job queue.
Rails shops running on normal CRuby, have difficult in effectively scaling out multithreading due to the GVL lock. It's much easier to "scale" ruby using forking with sidekiq or multi process, and to have it consume data from a Redis list. It is possible to get around the GVL using JRuby, but that poses a different set of constraints and issues.
There is some definite blending of async messaging in the Ruby world though. I've seen connectors which take protobufs on a kafka topic and use sidekiq to fan out the work. With Redis (looking at sidekiq specifically) it becomes trivial to maintain the "current" working set with items popped out of the queue, with atomic commands like BLMOVE (formerly BRPOPLPUSH).
Kafka is taking an interesting turn however with the KIP-932 "Queues for Kafka" initiative. I personally believe it could eat RabbitMQ's lunch if done effectively. Allowing for multiple consumers, a "working set" of unack'ed data, without having to worry as much about the topic partition count.
> Rails shops running on normal CRuby, have difficult in effectively scaling out multithreading due to the GVL lock. It's much easier to "scale" ruby using forking with sidekiq or multi process, and to have it consume data from a Redis list.
This isn't cloud-native at all. In a cloud-native world, these workers would be running in hosted functions (e.g. Lambda) and be consuming from a work queue. I assume this is possible in Rails, but the startup overhead might be considerable.
I've also noticed that they conflate the notion of workers, queues, and message busses. A worker handles asynchronous tasks, but the means by which they communicate might be best served by either a queue or a message bus, depending on the specific needs. Tight coupling might be good for knocking out PoCs quickly, but once you have production-grade needs, the model begins to show its weaknesses.
Food products are so complex that it’s unlikely there’s anything we eat that could be called strictly “good” or “bad”. I would say that fixation on some vague and nonspecific issue like “inflammation” is probably a red flag for the quality of the information at hand. What inflammation exactly? In what people? Under what conditions? It surely varies widely by individual and interacts with other elements of diet, genetics, activity, and environment.
Your experience is not the same as other people. No one cares if you don’t understand their own life and choices. Get off your high horse and stop assuming that “those dumb depressed fat people just need to sleep better, eat better, and exercise and obviously it’s just that easy”. If you had success with whatever method, that’s great. We’re thrilled for you. But what works for you is not a universal solution.
We've asked you to stop posting like this to HN. I understand that the topic is sensitive and personal, but being this aggressive in HN comments is not ok and we ban accounts that do it.
You've been a good contributor to HN for a long time and most of your comments aren't like this, but there is also a long history of us asking you to stop posting personal attacks:
I don't want to ban you but it's important to preserve this place for its intended purpose of curious conversation (which depends on thoughtful, respectful comments), so if you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stop doing this going forward, we'd be grateful.
As a long time Usenetter, I don't care about the first two sentences being abrasive, but the material in quotes is insinuating that the replied-to grandparent at some point contained that verbatim text. I have a hunch that it did not, which is not cool. Particularly because the text is negative, making the false attribution defamatory, which is a different category from insults.
Yes, using quotation marks to make it look like you're quoting someone when you're not is a trope of internet aggression and something we've long asked HN commenters not to do: https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que..., and is one of the reasons why the GP comment was abusive.
I won’t argue against you. It’s clear you would’ve been in complete support of the lobotomy craze. Exercise, diet, sleep, and good company are the most universal cure for the average form of depression. I specifically called out treatment resistant depression as requiring medication. Surely your basic bitch depression caused by being overworked, underfed, and slammed with bills can’t be fixed with anything but a simple pill.
You missed the greater point that medicines are overprescribed and OP all but made a Pfizer ad out of their post. HNers lack contextual reading ability, and life experience. It’s a shame really. The over prescription of drugs is a tremendous problem in the west.
My “high horse” is supported by actual medical science. Unlike the entire field of mental health.
Pfizer ad or not I'll say my AD experience was positive. I got it prescribed by a psychiatric NP in a time when my job situation was about to go to hell but I was planning to tough it out till I got the project done.
I did get the sexual side effects but because men often come too quick it can be a blessing as much as a curse, personally I found it took longer to orgasm and when it did happen it was a much more complex and richer experience with a definite periodization I haven't had before or since.
When I was taking ADs I did have problems I blamed on the ADs that really had to do with the "non-drowsy" antihistamine I was taking crossing my blood brain barrier anyway.
When I did stop ADs I tapered over a month and the physical effects were not bad at all. It was the beginning of a time of personal growth that I can look back on now and think it worked out great but was challenging for the people around me for a while.
Yeah, any of these studies that show “X works better than Y” are inevitably operating on averages. Not everyone will respond the same way. Not to mention that the very existence of the structure and human interaction required for these studies makes a huge difference in their outcomes.
I hope you realize that what works for you and your body doesn’t work for everyone. Your experience is not universal. Your body chemistry and genetics are not universal.
We can argue about whether or not punching yourself in the face will hurt, universally and for all, or we can acknowledge that arguing about this is picking the wrong level of information with which to take issue.
Kids often still need to learn that punching yourself in the face hurts.
reply