> "Customers of the data track have stateless applications, because they have outsourced all their state management to the various products and services of the data track."
I have no idea what this is even supposed to mean. It's like somebody combined some buzzwords thought up by a fresh business school marketing graduate working in the 'cloud' industry with an attempt at actual x86-64 hardware systems engineering.
The whole premise of the first half of the article seems to be 'you don't need to design a lot of redundancy and fault tolerance', the second part then goes into a weird explanation of NVME targets on CentOS. I hope this person isn't actually responsible for building storage systems at the bare metal level supporting some production business application.
I think the article is saying that a web server (customers) should be stateless, because everything important should be in a database (data track) on another host. And that database probably has application level handling for duplicating writes to another disk or another host.
The conclusion seems to be that it's not important for hardware level data redundancy because existing database software already handles duplication in application code. I don't understand how that conclusion was reached. Hardware level redundancy like raid1 seems useful because it simplifies handling a common failure case when a single HDD or NVME fails on a database server. Hardware redundancy is just the first stage in a series of steps to handle drive failure. I do agree that a typical stateless server doesn't need raid1, but afaik it's not standard practice for a stateless web application to bother with raid1 anyway.
> I think the article is saying that a web server (customers) should be stateless, because everything important should be in a database (data track) on another host. And that database probably has application level handling for duplicating writes to another disk or another host.
Correct.
> Hardware level redundancy like raid1 seems useful because it simplifies handling a common failure case when a single HDD or NVME fails on a database server
Nobody needs that if your database does replicate. Cassandra replicates data. MySQL in a replication setup replicates data. And so on. Individual nodes in such a setup are as expendable as individual disks in a RAID. More so, because you get not only protection against a disk failure, but depending on deployment strategy also against loss of a node, a Rack or a Rack Row. Or even loss of DC or AZ.
If there wasn't one manager at Mozilla who said to himself maybe in the pandemic with all the working from home stuff being done. Maybe we should look in our webrtc, video codec stack just is sad. No excuse that's just plain bad management.
Unfortunately, hardware VP9 decoding isn't really well-supported except in high-end phones (in context of multiple decoding, single decoding works fine) due to bugs in Mediatek's implementation. There's software decoding, but that's still taxing to a phone, and transcoding to H.264 server-side but that doesn't bode well to end-to-end encryption.
> A lot of devices are just too weak to encode anything other than H.264
Not that your point is wrong, but a lot of devices are too weak to encode/decode H264 as well. It's very recent for me to have access to second-hand hardware with H264 support and still i'm in western Europe where it's easier to come by.
Though as the other commenter pointed out, if you can afford to use hardware en/decoders then it's always the better option.
00s internet culture/content I hear everybody talking about it but I don't really get what is? Do you mean more of a feeling of companionship like in an IRC or Group?
Whilst being post-dotcom, where a lot of the internet was worked out technically, culturally platforms were still only just starting out. It was before social network UIs all looked the same and there was a play book for creating a network for X. Small communities were thriving and they all still had control of their ecosystems. Internet "mediums" were still in a state of flux on all fronts.
It was the start of "the masses" coming online and creating profiles - but they came online through things like MSN spaces, MySpace and geocities. Which were a lot less sanitized than today's equivalents. Everyday people experimented with their pages the same way teenages do with their bedroom walls. They looked awful, but the medium was alive.
Both of these made me feel more like making for the sake of making was less linked to ego. And overall every community I was part of was still innovating on the medium as much as their niche (be it art, netsec, photography, local history etc).
The parallels I'm thinking of in particular are both artists rushing to the platforms and trying digital art for the first time (admittedly many driven by $$). Meanwhile community leaders are having to deal with new technical, cultural and governance issues - many of which are novel issues imo.
There is a lot of stuff you can do better in person especially with the secrecy behind everything like in apples case. For Grunt work you are totally right.
You complain about nonsense and than go forward and spread some on your own. You saying that SmartScreen and Defender slows down a Windows machine by a factor of 2 just makes you a nonsense clown.
Yes, I was wrong - its not by a factor of 2, more like a factor or 3 to 5. The best way to make your computer age 10 years in a second is to enable ANY antivirus. There are so many places that you can check that out if you didn't experience it, or u need me to LMGTFY ?
So you decide to double down on your wrongness? Windows Defender has a marginal impact on performance, such that for most users and most tasks it's not even perceptible.
> need me to LMGTFY
You've provided zero evidence to the contrary. The burden of proof is on you.
> As far as I can tell, as long as Windows Defender (and presumably other A/V scanners) are running, there's no way to make the Windows I/O APIs consistently fast.
This is really even a common knowledge - if you did ANY IT work, you should already know it. I can't count the number of times when server wasn't working correctly when it turns out it just has Defender on.
Yes, PC desktops commonly run AV which can impact certain common subsystems in their routine operations. This is true on Windows, Linux, and MacOS. This is perfectly reasonable for the 99% of PC users that are not programmers and power users.
> it just has Defender on
It's unfortunate Defender would come pre-installed even on Server.
Yeah, because I am not babysitter. You should do your homework :) I am glad when people hint me good info.
I do have ample personal experience - when government web server was randomly dropping from 2k req/s to 2 req/s we disabled defender and from there we had continuous 2k req/s. I have seen this literary hundreds of times. Not sure why people install AV on servers but its common in banks and similar. On home computers its even worst. I witnessed new laptop computer with 2 AVs - defender + something vendor installed like mcafe. It was so slow that while typing letters appeared 1/s.
AVs inject themselves on number of places and do all kind of "funky" stuff. All power users should disable that junk. You have other means to protect yourself. If you are grandma, sure, go for it, but grandma will not run "Reclaim Windows10" from github gist, no ?
Context is everything. It certainly doesn't justify above comment claiming "DO NOT DO THIS!!!" on HN. Its utter nonsense. We are here to talk about hacking things by definition. Power users customize their OS, not the other way around. Its pity that MS doesn't provide minimal OS (like Linux OS's usually do) but the first thing I do is not run single script like Reclaim, but dozen of such scripts and my healthy nervous system thanks me all the time because benefits are huge and minuses are minor and fixable.
If anything, we need more projects like that, more polished, more documented, more maintained. My personal fav so far is [1]
Nobody uses antiviruses on Linux (except if they host a mail or file server). As far as I know most people who use MacOS do not either. It is true that a lot (most?) windows users use antiviruses but this is not an argument against the claim that it causes massive slowdowns.
> Windows Defender has a marginal impact on performance,
Oh, come on; there are issues like this: https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/issues/5028 and the app developers do handstands in order to minimize the impact; for example, cargo guys had to redo their file closing on Windows to be done asynchronously, so they would not have to wait for Defender.
Yeah, after two failed Macbooks from 2016 because of their ssds I can just say stay away from apple hardware until they reverse course on storage devices.
