aflukasz

There are actually two separate pricing increases. One was introduced about 1-2 months ago. The one from today was announced at the end of May, without actually revealing new pricing then. The new levels were made public today or yesterday, I believe. And they are much bigger than before, some hikes are well above 200%.

Lead: "I am pleased to announce that pgBackRest will continue! Over the last few weeks, a coalition of sponsors has come together to fund ongoing development. Their support means the project is no longer reliant on a single sponsor, giving pgBackRest the stability it needs for the long term. "

AI bots (or clients claiming to be one) appear quite fast on new sites, at least that's what I saw recently in few places. They probably monitor Certificate Transparency logs - you won't hide by avoiding linking. Unless you are ok with staying in the shadow of naked http.

https://notes.aflukasz.pl - some writing about software plus experimenting with https://indieweb.org/POSSE . Main site at https://aflukasz.pl .

However, they absolutely also lower the barrier to entry and dethrone “pure single tech” (ie backend only, frontend only, “I don’t know Kubernetes”, or other limited scope) software engineers who’ve previously benefited from super specialized knowledge guarding their place in the business.

This argument gets repeated frequently, but to me it seems to be missing final, actionable conclusion.

If one "doesn't know Kubernetes", what exactly are they supposed to do now, having LLM at hand, in a professional setting? They still "can't" asses the quality of the output, after all. They can't just ask the model, as they can't know if the answer is not misleading.

Assuming we are not expecting people to operate with implicit delegation of responsibility to the LLM (something that is ultimately not possible anyway - taking blame is a privilege human will keep for a foreseeable future), I guess the argument in the form as above collapses to "it's easier to learn new things now"?

But this does not eliminate (or reduce) a need for specialization of knowledge on the employee side, and there is only so much you can specialize in.

The bottleneck maybe shifted right somewhat (from time/effort of the learning stage to the cognition and the memory limits of an individual), but the output on the other side of the funnel (of learn->understand->operate->take-responsibility-for) didn't necessary widen that much, one could argue.

But that moves the burden of maintenance from the provider of the service to its users (and/or partially to intermediary in form of "skills registry" of sorts, which apparently is a thing now).

So maybe a hybrid approach would make more sense? Something like /.well-known/skills/README.md exposed and owned by the providers?

That is assuming that the whole idea of "skills" makes sense in practice.

Anyone here use this testing in the wild? Where's it most useful? Do you have the issue I described? Is there an easy way to overcome it?

One example would be when you have a naive implementation of some algorithm and you want to introduce a second one, optimized but with much more complex implementation. Then this naive one will act as a model for comparisons.

Another case that comes to mind is when you have rather simple properties to test (like: does it finish without a crash, within a given time?, does not cross some boundaries on the output?), and want to easily run over a sensible set of varying inputs.

I do for some time now, on the scale of around 20 hosts in their cloud offering. No restarts or network outages. I do see "migrations" from time to time (vm migrating to a different hardware, I presume), but without impact on metrics.

You can decouple Postgres and surrounding userspace upgrade cycles from your host os, if this is something that you want. Or run multiple different PG versions (have independent upgrades schedule) without being tied to the host os specific mechanisms for that.

Ah, good point.

Yeah, but then you can just as well use http-01 with like same effort.

It's a lot more nuanced than that. If you use the free edition of Code Assist, your data can be used UNLESS you opt out,

Well... you are sending your data to a remote location that is not yours.

Truly a new breakthrough in home video marketing.

Fair point, but it's a place with some useful properties.

All the rest of the effect will depend on the specifics of your network. Observing the impact on localhost shows scale of the effect that does not come from the network (more or less) and puts a lower bound on its size one can expect in more realistic conditions.

For those interested - I've checked and observed a difference of 0.2ms on average across 1000 connection attempts on localhost.

And mostly if you are behind CISCO firewall during TLS Server Identity Discovery or some equivalent setup. 3 seconds mentioned in the article were coming mostly from that. From the text itself it's not clear how much gains come from sslnegotiation=direct itself (if we assume no other factors like those present in this case).

Some of you cite your favorite strips. I will too.

Dilbert comes down to the caves where trolls (accountants) reside and gets a tour. The guide points to a troll sitting behind a desk, and mumbling in a stupor: "nine, nine, nine...".

Guide: And this is our random numbers generator.

Dilbert: Are you sure those are random?

Guide: That's the problem with randomness - you can never be sure.

Edit: Found it here: https://www.americanscientist.org/article/the-quest-for-rand....

And thank you, Scott - many laughs thanks to you.

AWS Aurora Postgres Serverless v2 has that capability

Was just about to react to someone being wrong on the internet and say that this is not true. Instead, TIL that this is, in fact, the case. Since 2024Q4.

Thanks for invalidating my stale cache.

FWIW seems open to me right now.

I find consumer vs producer to be very interesting and useful distinction. Sometimes very enlightening and somewhat scary when applied to personal time spending.

In this particular case cloudinit presence in the story is incidental, delivery mechanism of said config file could have been different.

It's useful for initializing state that could not have been initialized before booting in the target environment. Canonical example, I guess, being ssh server and client keys management, but the list of modules it implements is long.

Yes. Run this as a validation step during base os image creation, if such image is intended to start system with sshd. That way you can verify that distro you use did not pull the carpet from under your feet by changing something with base sshd config that you implicitly rely on.

For example, if you're designing GPUs and/or GPU drivers? If your next-generation product has the aim of providing 25% more frames per second in "Baldur's Gate 3" and "Call of Duty 6" while maintaining the same quality - that would be a good objective for the team, as it's closely aligned with what your customers want.

I can get selection of particular gaming titles, but how do you come up with 25% goal? How is this closely aligned? Your users tell you they want ~30% gains?

This seems to be completely ignoring a constant feedback loop between general aspirations for the product, operated timeframes, and conclusions from ongoing engineering R&D.

I like your argument about implicit index.

But is an article an index to the attached media? Not even "just", but "at all"? Is this the right abstraction? Or do we have a better one, achievable by simply removing the trailing slash?

We discuss this in the context of cruft, user friendliness, and selecting proper forms of expression, which the original article seems to be all about, by the way.

I do parse it that way. My position is that it's not the proper form for the function.

Note that both trailing slash variant examples you have provided (HN and Google) do redirect to non slash ones.

In fact, personally, I don't expect leading slashes for main pages.

Nice read.

I wish there was one more paragraph though:

"I don't use trailing slashes in article URLs. Blog post is a file, not an index of a directory, so why pretend otherwise?"

But then it's http://rachelbythebay.com/w/2025/01/04/cruft/ , so I guess they don't agree.

We could already colonize Antarctica, or the sea-- those are easier to reach, supply and colonize than other planets, but we are not trying.

On the other hand - we were and still are present on the Antarctica, have a permanent base on the South Pole etc.

I wonder if constant work pattern would be a good choice for this setup. That is always send all the logs from logfwdr to logpush and only at this stage take all the data that was not actually requested by the client and send it to the local /dev/null.

Fun take.

I suggest countering it with a concept of "day reusability". You know, just as with rockets...

Yes, it's a balancing act. I think it's better to have safer defaults here, not prioritizing extra performance. People who are concerned with performance to the degree where checksums would matter need to consult configuration anyway (in many aspects, not only this one) and can disable this specific thing easily.

For the reference, change is in https://github.com/postgres/postgres/commit/04bec894a04cb0d3... (so should land in PostgreSQL 18 in a year, unless it will get reverted for some reason).