Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Redis 4.0

groups.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 184 posts

Re: Redis 4.0

#101

Post by djtriptych »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #42
matt4077 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering how meaningless words are, they seem to have quite an effect on on you... I'm pretty sure your suffering would be alleviated if people chose to respect others' claims if injuries, at least in cases where the cost of doing so is absolutely zero. You can't pretend that there is absolutely no case for people to be upset with this naming scheme. Politics, in this case, is only intruding on your valuable "tech…

My changing my tech terminology isn't going to fix systemic racial tensions. It's not going to fix white officers getting away with killing unarmed black civilians. It's not going to fix the mass incarceration of black males due to broken public policy over the last few decades. It's not going to fix systemic policy issues that lead to a higher chance of poverty for minorities, preventing class mobility. Pick the rig…

I think you're good at heart, but you are wrong here. Words carry meaning, not only the meaning we each attach but also the meaning that is imposed on us. By your logic, white folks should be able to say nigger without black folks being upset about it, which is an absurd result of your premise.

Constantly maintaining a clear separation of symbolic meaning (words) and actual meaning (reality) is what monks and yogis do in a sense. It's a life-long discipline to do it perfectly, and it takes a lot of energy. The energy expended to constantly separate words from meaning is an unfair burden on certain classes.

Re: Redis 4.0

#102

Post by [deleted] »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #42
matt4077 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering how meaningless words are, they seem to have quite an effect on on you... I'm pretty sure your suffering would be alleviated if people chose to respect others' claims if injuries, at least in cases where the cost of doing so is absolutely zero. You can't pretend that there is absolutely no case for people to be upset with this naming scheme. Politics, in this case, is only intruding on your valuable "tech…

My changing my tech terminology isn't going to fix systemic racial tensions. It's not going to fix white officers getting away with killing unarmed black civilians. It's not going to fix the mass incarceration of black males due to broken public policy over the last few decades. It's not going to fix systemic policy issues that lead to a higher chance of poverty for minorities, preventing class mobility. Pick the rig…

[deleted]

Re: Redis 4.0

#103

Post by juliensab »

zedpm wrote: post #53
frou_dh wrote: post #40

Maybe with the new modules support there will emerge some explicit way to do robust worker/job queues? So you don't have to remember your BRPOPLPUSH/LREM dances (or whatever it is) just so.

Antirez has talked about moving Disque to a Redis module, which should solve that problem neatly. I'd love to drop our RabbitMQ dependency and move queueing into Redis.

Why?

Re: Redis 4.0

#104

Post by tertius »

dewitt wrote: post #97
tertius wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honest question: Is that how you feel when you type those out?

Yeah, I actually dislike it every time myself, though that's not hugely important to me, nor why I commented. There was some interesting commentary in this thread about cultural appropriation and whatnot, which seems to me to be beside the point. My intent was only this: if there are other people rightly upset by something, it doesn't matter if you're not, it doesn't even matter if the majority are not, it's still va…

Question then: who decides whether someone is "rightly" upset? There is some implication there that we don't need act on every offense taken.

For instance, I don't expect others to act (i.e. should be forced to change) because something offends me.

Notes:

Don't confuse this question with me arguing that we shouldn't be empathetic.

I'm also not from the U.S. so my approach and offenses are different culturally than your own.

Re: Redis 4.0

#106

Post by schneems »

Mouse47 wrote: post #91
schneems wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Master/slave was also a commonly accepted role of business for far longer than it has been a computer term. We managed to change that in the west. I believe in us, we can do it. > I genuinely find this argument...disingenuous My argument is that the term is not technically correct. How is that disingenuous?

I'm arguing specifically against the term being offensive. EDIT: and oddly, I can't seem to find the word anywhere in your comment that I replied to. Am I losing my mind, or did you take that part out?

I had it in there to emphasize how un-technically incorrect it is. Apparently people saw the word "offensive" and they didn't read the rest, so I took it out to add clarity. I forgot that HN doesn't provide a diff of edits, so went back and added a note in the comment that it was edited.

Edit: Edited this note to mention I updated the previous note with an edit note.

Re: Redis 4.0

#107

Post by antimatter »

numbsafari wrote: post #5

I really wish Redis wouldn't use the "master/slave" terminology. Primary/replica or even Master/replica are better terms. I know I'll probably get flamed for saying this, but it's a pox on a project that I otherwise very much love.

There it is. Post modernism in clear form.

Re: Redis 4.0

#108

Post by Mouse47 »

schneems wrote: post #106
Mouse47 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm arguing specifically against the term being offensive. EDIT: and oddly, I can't seem to find the word anywhere in your comment that I replied to. Am I losing my mind, or did you take that part out?

I had it in there to emphasize how un-technically incorrect it is. Apparently people saw the word "offensive" and they didn't read the rest, so I took it out to add clarity. I forgot that HN doesn't provide a diff of edits, so went back and added a note in the comment that it was edited. Edit: Edited this note to mention I updated the previous note with an edit note.

I'm fine with an argument based solely on its technical merits. But then you're going to lose out to things like backwards compatibility and the sheer force of momentum - everyone understands these terms.

There are probably hundreds of ill-fitting terms in the tech world that now mean what we mean them to mean (lol). This one receives blowback not because it's technically unsound (which it might be), but because some paint it 'offensive'. That's why everyone seized on this part of your (now edited) argument.

EDIT: thanks for being honest btw

Re: Redis 4.0

#110

Post by aangjie »

banned1 wrote: post #76
joshlemer wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this satire? "man" here is short for "manual".

Manual? What if someone lacks hands? It's not a manual. It's a reference guide.

Meh.. manual does not mean hands.. or if you were trying to be satirical, please don't turn HN into reddit.
Post reply on HN