Viewing profile — quassnoi
quassnoi
HN member- Joined
- Tue, Aug 04, 2009, 8:58 AM UTC
- HN karma
- 66
- Public activity
- 19 items
- HN profile
- View on Hacker News ↗
About quassnoi
http://explainextended.com
Recent public activity
- story
-
comment
Comment #19643483
Lack of access to central sewage system does not necessarily imply a lack of a "normal WC". This figure includes households which use individual sewage systems ending up in septic …
-
comment
Comment #7003553
There is no advantage: the modern GPU can build thousands of full page resolution fractals per second while SQL takes seconds to produce a hundred by hundred characters ASCII art. …
-
comment
Comment #2436056
Sure, especially if you nest the sets using a datatype indexable with an R-Tree index: http://explainextended.com/2009/09/29/adjacency-list-vs-nest... However, nested sets is still…
-
comment
Comment #2057553
Thank you all guys and happy New Year!
-
comment
Comment #1887097
OK, OK. Most of your workloads are HDD bound.
-
comment
Comment #1886820
"HDD bound" here means that not all data fits into the cache. Given the average RAM size on even an entry-level server (some 16 or maybe even 8 GB) and the average size of a databa…
-
comment
Comment #1886632
What do you actually get from using MySQL? Convenience of the complex queries. If you need anything more than a simple key-value access, you'll in fact need to implement the query …
-
comment
Comment #1886359
So, if you're bypassing most of the bits of an RDBMS, what do you actually gain? Speed. Is the InnoDB storage engine that much superior compared to other products? InnoDB is faster…
-
comment
Comment #1886352
This is a single-value KVS within a field, not a replacement for SQL. You still need to write an SQL statement to access it.
-
comment
Comment #1886307
InnoDB was initially designed as a KVS. MySQL only added the SQL frontend to it. Initially, MySQL also supported BerkeleyDB, another KVS, but as for now they dropped the support. F…
-
comment
Comment #1882183
All major engines have collations and collation-specific behavior (which can be confusing). However, this one I saved for the next post (with another set of completely unrelated pi…
-
comment
Comment #1882176
All "wrong" queries are wrong in PostgreSQL as well (and #3 won't even parse). The workarounds for #4, #3 and #2 are different for PostgreSQL, the others will work.
-
comment
Comment #1882172
This is very often "expected to work". Just search StackOverflow for FIND_IN_SET. Here are just three random hits: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4037145/mysql-how-to-sele... h…
-
comment
Comment #1342452
> He's cheating a bit. He created two tables each with 1 million rows, offset by 999,000. (i.e. 1 - 1,000,000 and 999,000 - 1,999,000) Of course this is cheating, but only to demon…
-
comment
Comment #1342216
Unfortunately, with a B+Tree index, you cannot jump in powers of 2 (well, you can but only within one page). To find a record with a given offset you'd need to traverse the whole l…
-
comment
Comment #1048170
I'm currently #26 on the rep list and I am employed (which means there is a workplace I have to go to every day and be there during the business hours). I cannot tell much about my…
-
comment
Comment #954913
Thanks!
-
comment
Comment #954906
Hi, I'm the author of the blog. Actually, most askers (both on Stack Overflow and on the site) are either the ORM developers or the people who need to deal with huge volumes of dat…