I’ve always thought this would be helpful for small in-house ops scripts and things like that, but unfortunately the logo and terminology makes this a bit to risqué for a corporate environment. I suppose that’s part of the GNU spirit!
The logo is a bit childish but still made me chuckle at least[1].
So much of the entire industry already relies on GNU code that I think that baring licensing issues no one ever got fired for choosing the GNU option. You know it will work and it will probably work well, forever.
1. I once went to an RMS talk where he said that the whole point of writing your own software was "so that you can give it a funny name". Which I take as good advice! :)
I'm not sure if you are being serious or not. You don't need the logo for anything. And as for terminology, the "rec" part stands for (database) records, not "rectum" or whatever one might imagine. I mean, seriously, what's the problem with just grabbing the code and using it if it's useful and the license has been approved by your company?
> And as for terminology, the "rec" part stands for (database) records, not "rectum" or whatever one might imagine.
Why are you assuming the pun wasn’t intentional, and that both meanings aren’t implied? What exactly is the point of talking about male turtles copulating in the FAQ?
There is nothing wrong with ignoring the logo and just using the code, that isn’t the issue. The issue is the story of the logo & FAQ are intentionally controversial, even if the author only intended humor, and that loading the site and using the code at work would promote conversation about the topic of the logo and it’s narrative.
> and that loading the site and using the code at work would promote conversation about the topic of the logo and it’s narrative.
Or we could be adults and treat it in the way we treat any peculiar thing in a corporate environment, that is, ignore it and move on to what is actually needed? I've been in such situations quite a few times (mixed male/female environment, some old guys and young interns), and the maximum you could count on was a "well, that's an interesting choice", but most often people would just completely ignore it. We're not in elementary school to shout, "look, copulating turtles!"
On the other hand, I see your point. People got extremely cautious over the years because of real and perceived harassment attempts and their consequences. I can understand showing this page at work could be perceived by some in the same way as the famous dongle joke on a Python conference.
You’re lucky! I’ve definitely worked places where supposedly adult people made many constant tasteless jokes around sex and homosexuality, and about women while speaking to women, where the environment was actually hostile and the “adults” truly didn’t even know it and thought their conduct was okay. The problem with saying “we could be adults” is that many many people disagree on what it means to be adult, it’s a criteria that’s too vague and indirect. Counting on people being adults is what we’ve tried and failed at for, I dunno, hundreds of years? Forever? BTW, I don’t think just showing the page at work is the issue, the issue is talking about it, and that is something that would happen.
Who is going to read the manual on an obscure program used in a shell script somewhere? Mostly likely, another dev whose never encountered recutils before, and probably long after the OG developer is gone.
The command itself is a `recsel -e`. Which is not even remotely humorous, unlike, say, `dwarfdump`.
If your corporate environment can't deal with the reality that a logo is there to be memorable and fundamentally has nothing to do with functionality, is it even worth working there? It sounds like a very stifling environment that takes itself entirely too seriously.
Have you worked in a corporate environment? Copulating turtles isn't the half of the "very stifling environment that takes itself entirely too seriously." But they have no choice. How long would it take for someone to run to HR complaining of a "hostile work environment" because of the turtles? If a company doesn't have "policies in place to prevent this sort of imagery", they will as soon as the turtles show up.
I have, and I'm pretty sure a quarter of the corporate people I worked with wouldn't be able to point to me the Java logo in a lineup with other logos. Another quarter wouldn't know what a Java is. The rest wouldn't even know there's a thing that runs their programs. How would the logo of a single library in the myriad a company use be even brought to attention?
I'm almost positive that if we dig in a modern project dependency tree deep enough we'll find at least a couple that have an inappropriate joke in the readme or in the documentation. So how would recutils be any different?
> If your corporate environment can’t deal with the reality that a logo is there to be memorable and fundamentally has nothing to do with functionality
Unfortunately, that argument is entirely straw man. Most corporate environments are absolutely fine with memorable non-functional logos. The issue is the narrative about gay turtle sex and perhaps the implied suggestion that the “rec” in recutils might stand for rectum.
In my personal life, I’m comfortable discussing turtles and rectums and sex and homosexuality. But I don’t want to discuss those topics at work with my co-workers, and most corporate environments aren’t just avoiding them for fun because they’re a bunch of stiffs, they’re avoiding such topics because there is a history of them causing actual problems at work, often lead to hurt feelings and the sense that the environment is not welcoming to all, and as a result there are several ways they’re legally required to encourage employees to avoid discussing such topics, and legally required to take disciplinary action if someone complains that someone else made negative comments about gay turtles or sex.
BTW this is all a side point to the fact that this photograph of turtles makes a terrible logo. It doesn’t work as a small icon or with reduced colors. It has no shape or symbolism. It’s unrelated to the product. It’s hard to see the detail even as a large full color image. The only thing that makes this logo memorable is the FAQ text, the story that it’s gay copulating turtles, which for all we know isn’t even true - turtles sometimes climb over each other, sometimes fight, and there’s no way to identify the sex of the turtles from this photo.
I really don’t know why this is getting downvoted like so, but in case it’s the “rec” comment, I am of course aware that rec stands for record, I meant to suggest the alternate meaning may be a pun. If this is lame or wrong or offensive for some other reason, I’m curious and open to feedback.
I did not know about this, but I have used SQLite with bash scripts a lot do do ops tasks. I've given a few presentations about it, sysadmins and ops people are often surprised how easy it is to use.
Most of these third parties are using official API's to get pricing data, if there is something with a hidden price do ask and someone can probably help you figure it out. One reason AWS got popular is that it actually was historically much HARDER to get pricing from your internal IT team / vendors like IBM etc. So AWS wasn't the cheapest (by any means) but was pretty clear on cost. So it's interesting to hear that AWS is purposely hiding pricing and making price complicated to "waste company's budgets".
Nomad was designed for efficiency (linear scalability) and performance from the very beginning. One of major aspects of this is that it is monolithic. The single nomad binary contains:
- The CLI for interacting with Nomad clusters via their HTTP API
- The HTTP API
- The "server" agent which contains the scheduler, state store, and Raft implementation
- The "client" agent which runs workloads and has builtin task drivers for docker, plain processes, and more.
Not only is there no dependency on an external state store like etcd, but there's no pluggable abstraction for state storage. The tradeoff is that all cluster state must fit in memory. Pi clusters should use far less than 100mb of memory while something like C2M (6,100 nodes, 2 million containers) used just under 100gb of memory. Memory use scales linearly with cluster size (nodes+containers).
Since Raft and the scheduler are colocated within a single server agent process, many operations can be performed in the replicated FSM as a simple function call instead of if Raft was an external process requiring networking overhead to interact with.
I'm not very familiar with k8s internals, so I'm afraid I can't offer a very detailed direct comparison.
Thanks for that detailed explanation. The fact that all main functions live in a single process probably helps a lot with CPU and RAM usage, compared to k8s where etcd, API server, scheduler and controller manager live in independent processes, which means serialization/deserialization and less optimization opportunities.
+1 for openfaas. I haven’t used it in production, but the option to run an entirely custom container underneath the function opens up the possibility of running a “proper” application underneath (the use case I’ve been meaning to test is a fully-featured rails app)
I think this is a great example of the existential dread I feel when thinking about modern cloud “solutions” — at what point are there too many moving parts? I say this as someone who administers kubernetes clusters in AWS (kops, not EKS). I’m starting to wonder how much of this abstraction and “scale” is needed for 99% of use cases
The caveat with a third party oauth solution is that you are now dependent and reliant on the third party to _let_ you use them to log in. Here are some fun experiences I’ve had with Facebook over the last couple of years:
- Our app was _deleted_ without any notice and any means of appealing (didn’t appear in the appeals page, and of course there’s no human support). We even filed a ticket and were told that they couldn’t help us because the app was “gone” in their system. Luckily we require an email address or we would have completely lost the ability to authenticate a subset of our users.
- A different internal app was banned from using “Facebook Login” because we were “providing a broken user experience” — the app was not even exposed for login in our system. We couldn’t appeal because the warning notice didn’t allow responding from our mailing list. Changing the primary contact didn’t work either, and we even disabled the login on the app just in case. Still revoked with no means of getting it back.
Google has been less awful to work with, but they make you jump through lots of hoops to get public login permissions. In summary, think very carefully about a third party Oauth solution.
Is there a CPU limit or timeout for queries? I’d be a little concerned that an intentionally slow and inefficient query could pin the CPU at 100% and ruin the performance for other users
We currently limit all queries to 30s of execution and 10000 rows returned (by adding a `LIMIT` clause to queries that don't have it). We also have some mechanisms like query result caching and rate limiting for better QoS. One of our directions is building a basically CDN for databases, so it's good to figure these things out as early as possible.
I think 5 is probably the biggest — in terms of emulation, you can run TK4 in Hercules, but it’s literal decades behind the modern mainframe. How am I supposed to learn if the concepts are hidden behind a massive monetary barrier? Reading manuals can only get you so far
