Tons of crumbs, soda cans, ashes, hot sauce bottles, trash, and in general it's just digusting

@JaredBusch said:

@nadnerB said:

We told Mini-nadnerB that the Easter Bunny isn't real. Which is a very good thing as rabbits are an introduced pest here. No love for introduced pests in my house.

But the easter bunny is Australian. At least according to the movie, "The Guardians"

Impossible, his name isn't Bruce

@nadnerB said:

@tonyshowoff said:

uniform state of entropy

Isn't that an oxymoron?

No

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy#Reversible_process

@scottalanmiller said:

The Communist rabbit or the Nazi rabbit?

I won't stand for all of these intense questions! I am out of here!

@scottalanmiller said:

A friend of mine hitchhiking across England rescued a bunny trapped in a pond over here.

My friend was a rabbit in Watership Down

@scottalanmiller said:

Very interesting. Hard to truly compare, though, as there are many potential factors. You may have connected to different servers, for example, with the different connections. You would need to test this many times to get good info.

The best way to test would be to download a very large file over your LAN from another machine, but even then I'm betting the write speed for both browsers is probably almost the same. I can't imagine either wrap too much around it.

One of us, one of us, gooble-gabble, gooble-gabble

@scottalanmiller said:

We told our girls that in Spain they had an Easter Bull (Toro) instead of an Easter Bunny. That made them happy since we went to see it.

So they're pretty gullibull? or just gullicalf?

Just kidding, I just wanted to use that. I mean my youngest daughter thought the easter bunny broke into the house so..

@thecreativeone91 said:

Not a web developer but, if I can't right click on the links on your site and either copy them or click open in new tab. I consider your website to be poorly developed.

I agree with that, that was what I was talking about with pushState and people using onclick for navigation. I've always hated that, and hilarious I've even seen people do things like:

<a href="#" onclick="document.location='/otherpage.html'">click here</a>

And I think, seriously?! SERIOUSLY!?

Keep in mind though, I think most programmers are terrible, especially web developers.

@JaredBusch said:

@tonyshowoff said:

Using anything but UTF-8 is a crime!

True, and even old WP installs used it without the actually making sure the DB was configured that way. So odd.

That kind of ineptitude seems par for the course for WordPress. UTF-8 issues can't be blamed just on them though, consider the absolutely bizarre issue of utf8 vs utf8mb4 for MySQL, why the hell wasn't it implemented completely the first time?

Last year my kids were invited to some big Easter egg hunt and they had a great time, however this year they've come to expect us to celebrate Easter, at least the candy related part of it. Some of my fellow Hebrews also celebrate Easter and a couple I know get all weird about it and make a point to crap on the fun.

However, once I realised I could create a complex, confusing, almost sadistic puzzle of finding all of the Easter eggs, I decided we're not just going to do an Easter egg hunt, we have to do an Easter egg hunt.

I realise today is Sunday, but we had to do it yesterday because the kids are doing some thing over at my wife's parents house.

Anyway, here we go:

I was already up at about 5am and my wife and I had put together about 350 of those plastic eggs from Wal-Mart with a piece of candy or tiny little rubber frog, ball, or some random thing like that, in all the whole thing cost $24, so not bad, considering I also ate a lot of that candy too. Some eggs also contained clues about where some other eggs were, however all of the clues were lies.

I made a trail of eggs from where my kids bed rooms are all the way outside, and I managed to hide eggs in places very difficult for them to get. I had to climb a couple of trees, get on the roof of the garage, make my way into their tree house which I thought I might break, and essentially every weird little place I could find around the property.

Almost all of them are fairly hard to find and I had a total number of the ones hidden outside so we could make sure they got them all.

After they woke up they were pretty surprised, they didn't even pick up the eggs down the hall, instead they ran down to my office and almost pounded the door down, and my youngest was yelling that the "Easter bunny broke into our house."

I took advantage of the situation and said that I had caught him also trying to steal our car and that I think he said something antisemitic. My eldest daughter knew it was a joke, but that's what's great about having young kids, you can lie to them and tell them insane stories and they believe it.

tl;dr: it took them almost 8 hours to find all of the eggs, and of course I had to help the with the ones I hid on the roof, in hindsight that was a bad idea.

The point is, Easter can be fun, especially if it involves keeping your kids occupied most of the day, regardless of one's faith. They loved it and asked if we're going to do it next year, so I gotta step up my game.

I also just realised that the colour of this forum is brown, fitting for a water closet.

@scottalanmiller You just don't get it, I need GigE for my ancient refurbished Dell machines with Windows XP.

@scottalanmiller said:

Exactly. I am pretty sure that an entire generation of IT actually doesn't know what databases are, what relational databases are, relational theory, the difference between just a database and a DBMS.

You said it all right there. I see the questions similar to the OP's question fairly often, typically it's "which is better?" and it's sort of odd to me that they didn't first ask themselves "well, does it need to be relational?" instead it's a question of speed, which isn't even applicable for 99% of people. I think this is because databases aren't seen as anything other than places to store things, and their actual power is taken for granted. I blame the MTV!

@scottalanmiller said:

One of the most important things about NoSQL is that they are adding variety and forcing everyone to look at databases in a fresh light. We had a lot of this stuff back in the 1980s, heck I was doing NoSQL for Eastman Kodak in 1989, but everyone on the IT side seemed to have literally forgotten about non-relational databases since the mid-1990s.

Yeah you know when this stuff started taking off, it seemed a little weird to me, because I had dealt with similar databases years ago, and an unnamed large "ISP" I worked for used essentially a NoSQL key-value store for buddies, statuses, etc and this was in the late 90s. People were acting as if nobody had thought of this stuff before.

@scottalanmiller said:

One thing that is interesting is that PostgreSQL now talks in native JSON like MongoDB does. This is a case of the NoSQL world pushing the relational world to change how they think and do new things.

Definitely, I think that's a pretty kick ass feature.

@scottalanmiller said:

Blogs would be the same way. Many, many things work well without tight relationships. Accounts and financial data are very common and major exceptions.

When it comes to building financial reports it's definitely superior to use relational databases, but I think most things can probably just be in NoSQL databases, but the difference is that databases like MySQL, Microsoft SQL Server, etc come with long, tested histories and a reliability/availability you can't usually get out of a NoSQL database without a ton of effort, but we've noticed Cassandra sort of breaks that mould.

Having said the above though, we do keep transaction histories, payment histories, etc in Cassandra as well, and we simply cache harder to generate things that need to use that information (very rare that things do) and also we track, for example, the amount changes so we don't need to do anything like SUM(10,000 rows) like I've seen people do for some reason.

@scottalanmiller said:

Other things that are ideal for NoSQL include...... discussions in online communities! Think about it - we don't need tight atomic commits for posts, but they include a lot of data. So this type of data is very expensive for a relational database to handle and very efficient for a document database (a la MongoDB) to handle. We don't need the whole thread locked while someone is posting, if two people post at once and there isn't a really tight "who posted first" it doesn't really matter.

Sure, we use NoSQL for video/photo/etc comments and also messaging as well.

When you're public these issues are important to worry about and also obviously government sites need to be available without a bunch of crazy bells and whistles.

One issue I've noticed is people using onclick or some busted stuff to navigate instead of just regular hypertext references which work better, especially from a browser navigation point of view, and with pushState we don't need to play these idiotic games anymore.

Having said that, even by the article's own admission, about 1% of people have issue with JavaScript, and to me there's no reason to support people that don't have it (unless you're a government site) and I think things like graceful degradation or progressive enhancement are just ways to waste one's time and have a user experience behind others. It's really an approach for the web that is best left in the last decade. You're coding everything twice and at the same time limiting the speed/ability of your web app to please people who almost certainly aren't going to click your ads or make you money.

Things we have which the public sees do work modestly well without JavaScript, though you can't really watch video and other things with it disabled anyway. Our web apps on the other hand only work if someone has JS, though for the sake of proper approaches, easier linking, browser history, etc we do use pushState. We've had one complaint about it, but not from someone who had JS disabled ,rather someone who was trying to be a "consultant" (we didn't ask them to), suggesting that people without JS won't be able to use our site, so we should spend hundreds of hours of extra work making the site function for people stuck in 1997.

I've seen enough people who write JS so terribly that their web apps only work with IE (so weird, like they're using ActiveX, but they'er just really bad at what they do) and so I think we should be talking about writing cross-browser JS more than dealing with people who don't have it.

As long as the approach is correct (such as pushState) then I see no reason to not have a client-rendered site that pulls down JSON or whatever, it's 2015, the web is now the platform, and I don't want to move backward into black text, blue links, and everything plaintext with maybe JavaScript roll overs based on some backward notion that it's bad to be modern and use things almost every browser in use supports. This same approach, too, is the same sort of weird crap I see where people are saying to use margin-left: -999999999px and such instead of display: none because of screen readers, when that stuff isn't even true, and it's a desire to be compatible with people who almost certainly never come to your site.

Many of the people pushing for progressive enhancement don't even have web sites people want to go to, so I don't think they really need to worry about it. They spend so much time trying to find ways to work with 0.05% of visitors that they really provide nothing interesting, useful, or unique to the site, but hey at least the site looks ancient as hell and doesn't use any useful modern features of JavaScript so that's good, right?

Disabling or limiting JavaScript is like disabling HTML5, it's now a part of the web, it's better than it used to be, and to me bitching about JS is like when people say "the Internet is stupid, BBSes were real ways to communicate".

Search engines that matter (Google) are capable of navigating through single page sites and such as well as they know how to render and understand JavaScript.

So what's the reason to still promote this progressive enhancement stuff? It's the same kind of thing where we read about Richard Stallman reading the Internet by wget-ing plaintext then emailing it to himself to read later since the web is full of evil, or when he suggests that "whoever is using the computer should have complete control over it and it's wrong to do otherwise."

It's just ancient thinking that holds people back, but like I said, the people who really spend a lot of time worrying about it don't actually tend to matter anyway. I'm more than happy to provide a very fast user experience and upset 0.05% of people who don't like the fact I didn't waste my employees' time by making them rewrite an alternate version of the app that displays in basic HTML. If I can get one over just by looking slick and loading faster, I'll take it over wanting to follow a make-believe standard my competitors do.

Using anything but UTF-8 is a crime!

We deal with both MySQL and a few different NoSQL databases as well. It really depends on the scenario, but if you don't know, then you can just use a regular relational database.

In general though you don't need a lot of data to justify MongoDB or Cassandra (we use both, though we're slowly transitioning to only Cassandra), in the same way you don't need to be doing relational or financial things to justify MySQL or anything like that.

NoSQL works best for key-value store, as in you already know the information you want, it likely isn't directly related to anything else and so probably doesn't need to be joined (joins tend to be very expensive in NoSQL if supported at all), and you don't need to worry too much about the same level of consistency. So some examples:

• Sessions
• Logs or user activity
• Expensive but rarely rebuilt things from your relational database for permanent caching

There's also the issue of heavy writing, as NoSQL databases tend to be faster at writes than reads, which is why we use it for really write heavy things that either we do not need back right away or we allow the user to keep (when they make a comment, show it based on what they put, instead of getting it back, for example).

Relational databases can be used for all the same things as NoSQL databases and many actually do a fairly good job at it, and you don't really need to worry about the differences until you get hundreds of thousands or millions of requests (like us) per day.

Aside from that MySQL (and others) have been around for years, are highly tested in large environments, etc and anything which is relational, would need to be associated with things in other tables (foreign key scenario for example), dealing with financial information, etc.

When you don't know or don't have the environment or resources to test, then always just use your relational database, it's probably the right choice anyway.

If you are curious, in our environment for our adult content sites, we've got about 630 servers so and we use MySQL, MongoDB, Cassandra, and memcached (and Apache, nginx, and PHP), and our other products and services we use similar setups but usually either MongoDB or Cassandra, and like I said we're trying to transition to it as we've gotten more out of it and better performance for us. I've noticed a lot of issues with MongoDB and returning things in reverse order (even with a reverse index) and also paging this way, it's painfully slow compared to Cassandra (1 - 2 seconds compared to 400ms or so; doesn't seem like a lot, but keep in mind that's on top of other loading, so loading new comments or whatever on some of our older sites is up to 3 seconds, and most people start to feel things are "too slow" after about half a second.), so I suggest maybe not even bothering with MongoDB unless it fits some other scenario of yours.