31–40 of 167 posts
What would this be best used for?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Words can have multiple meanings and meanings of words can change.
Almost like how the English language has been literally hijacked and destroyed. Language does change and evolve. The misuse and subsequent additional meaning for “literally” to now also be a simile for “figuratively” is a good example of how this isn’t necessarily always a good thing.
It's just language, you might disagree but usage determines correctness (eventually).
I have a Google Cloud Function that uses SQLite to store a user's previous day tweets and do some minor sorting and filtering of data. Works very well and saves me the cost of a "real" SQL instance.
Where's the SQLite database written? How do you ensure only one writer is modifying it?
[0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-phase_commit_protocol
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> SQLite was already serverless. Yes but now it runs on someone else server! Wait a minute, this makes no sense... 'serverless' is perhaps the stupidest marketing buzzword developers have come up with.
Indeed it's quite stupid. Any alternative catchy name for the concept?
My idea is to modify SQLite to use ajax with the HTTP Range header to fetch B+ pages from the server as they are needed. SQLite already has a VFS (virtual file system) so this shouldn't be too hard.
I am not sure how fast it would be and it would waste a lot of bandwidth. That's why I haven't made it yet.
This would only be useful for using it with Github pages.
I've also experimented with this, unfortunately the 50ms CPU time isn't enough for datasets larger than 1.5MB. And the wasm init add at least 100ms to each request even when "hot" in cache. Also, out of a cost perspective, running a VM with SSD for cheap with SQlite will give much more requests than a CF worker for much less. Adding writes to this is also very limited due to the max 1sec write per KV key limit.
SQLite was already serverless. https://www.sqlite.org/serverless.html
> Recently, folks have begun to use the word "serverless" to mean something subtly different from its intended meaning in this document. Here are two possible definitions of "serverless": Classic Serverless: [...] Neo-Serverless: [...]
SQLite was already "Classic Serverless". Now it's "Neo Serverless" as well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Words can have multiple meanings and meanings of words can change.
Almost like how the English language has been literally hijacked and destroyed. Language does change and evolve. The misuse and subsequent additional meaning for “literally” to now also be a simile for “figuratively” is a good example of how this isn’t necessarily always a good thing.
[1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/misuse-of-lite...
[1] https://github.com/sql-js/sql.js [2] https://ml-ranking.geospiza.me
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the misused "literally" is to indicate exaggeration Used to be. Now "literally" literally means "figuratively". [1] [1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/literally
From your link: > Can literally mean figuratively? > One of the definitions of literally that we provide is "in effect, virtually—used in an exaggerated way to emphasize a statement or description that is not literally true or possible." Some find this objectionable on the grounds that it is not the primary meaning of the word, "with the meaning of each individual word given exactly." However, this extended definitio…
Complaining that modern people are literally ruining the word literally is a popular internet gripe.