TechTakes

1438 readers

40 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

dgerard@awful.systems

using GitHub CoPilot leads to the obvious consequence (archive.is)

submitted 5 months ago by dgerard@awful.systems to c/techtakes@awful.systems

66 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] froztbyte@awful.systems 10 points 5 months ago (22 children)

You’re missing the entire point of the post you replied to

[–] Imacat@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 5 months ago (21 children)

I was reading it as an endorsement for autoincrementing int primary keys and a condemnation of uuids in general which is a genuine stance I’ve known people to take. Is that not it?

[–] JackbyDev@programming.dev 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (10 children)

Everything after this is so pointlessly condescending and confusing. Even if someone knows what monotonic ids are it doesn't automatically mean they're going to have any clue about what that means with regards to index performance. In the spirit of not being an asshole, I'll write it out here based on my research since everyone else just seems interested in putting others down rather than being helpful.

"Monotonic" implies something that is always increasing (or decreasing). You'll never get a result that's lower than one you've gotten before (or higher if you're dealing with monotonically decreasing stuff).
Random UUIDs are not monotonic because they're random.
Even time based UUIDs are not monotonic because of the format. Rather than being store high, medium, low, they're stored low, medium, high. Think of it like storing numbers like "1 20 300" for 321. 322 would be "2 20 300". To make it worse, the end of them is "random" (a MAC address). So, not monotonic at all because MAC addresses can change. (See here for proposed new formats, where they mention this as a problem https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-peabody-dispatch-new-uuid-format-04.html)
Monotonic primary keys are useful because they're more easily inserted into an index because you're always inserting into one specific part of the index rather.

[–] ebu@awful.systems 10 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

putting my 2¢ forward: this is a forum for making fun of overconfident techbros. i work in tech, and it is maddening to watch a massively overvalued industry buy into yet another hype bubble, kept inflated by seemingly endless amounts of money from investors and VCs. and as a result it's rather cathartic to watch (and sneer at) said industry's golden goose shit itself to death over and over again due to entirely foreseeable consequences of the technology they're blindly putting billions of dollars into. this isn't r/programming, this is Mystery Science Theater 3000.

i do not care if someone does or does not understand the nuances of database administration, schema design, indexing and performance, and different candidates for the types of primary keys. hell, i barely know just enough SQL to shoot myself in the foot, which is why i don't try to write my own databases, in the hypothetical situation where i try to engineer a startup that "extracts web data at scale with multimodal codegen", whatever that means.

if someone doesn't understand, and they come in expressing confusion or asking for clarification? that's perfectly fine -- hell, if anything, i'd welcome bringing people up to speed so they can join in the laughter.

but do not come in here clueless and confidently (in)correct the people doing the sneering and expect to walk away without a couple rotten tomatoes chucked at you. if you want to do that, reddit and hacker news are thataway.

load more comments (9 replies)

load more comments (19 replies)