 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/That-Wouldve-Been-an-Option-Too.aspx
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Helpful housekeeping hints:
Check your feather pillows for holes
before putting them in the washing machine.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/That-Wouldve-Been-an-Option-Too.aspx
WTF?
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo on Fri, 18 Jul 2008 05:25:55 +0100, Darren New <dne### [at] san rrcom>
did spake, saying:
> http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/That-Wouldve-Been-an-Option-Too.aspx
"a developer had to step in and restart the site to release resources"
Wouldn't that suggest that bunging some more memory in would only increase
the time it took to fill up?
--
Phil Cook
--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Phil Cook <phi### [at] nospamrocainfreeservecouk> wrote:
> And lo on Fri, 18 Jul 2008 05:25:55 +0100, Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom>
> did spake, saying:
> > http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/That-Wouldve-Been-an-Option-Too.aspx
> "a developer had to step in and restart the site to release resources"
> Wouldn't that suggest that bunging some more memory in would only increase
> the time it took to fill up?
You have a very good point. If the memory was filling up slowly, it means
there was some kind of leak. Buying more memory doesn't fix any memory leaks,
it only delays the symptoms.
Leaks also often go hand-in-hand with other bugs in the software, so
fixing the leaks not only make the program stabler, but other bugs may
be caught in the process.
Unless more "WTF" details are given about this story, I'd have to say
this is a "false WTF". It might sound like a WTF at first, but isn't.
The priorities should be "fix bugs first, then buy more hardware", not
the other way around.
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Unless more "WTF" details are given about this story, I'd have to say
> this is a "false WTF". It might sound like a WTF at first, but isn't.
> The priorities should be "fix bugs first, then buy more hardware", not
> the other way around.
For me, the WTF moment is that everybody else thought that just throwing
more hardware at the problem would somehow be a "better" solution than
actually fixing the underlying problem. But maybe that's just me...
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
>
> > Unless more "WTF" details are given about this story, I'd have to say
> > this is a "false WTF". It might sound like a WTF at first, but isn't.
> > The priorities should be "fix bugs first, then buy more hardware", not
> > the other way around.
>
> For me, the WTF moment is that everybody else thought that just throwing
> more hardware at the problem would somehow be a "better" solution than
> actually fixing the underlying problem. But maybe that's just me...
>
> --
> http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
> http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
My first thought was the new employee came from Microsoft.
Isaac
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Clarence1898 wrote:
> My first thought was the new employee came from Microsoft.
I am fairly confident that using more hardware resources is an explicit
*design goal* for M$. (After all, who are their main customers?)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Phil Cook wrote:
> Wouldn't that suggest that bunging some more memory in would only
> increase the time it took to fill up?
Not necessarily. Sure, if you have a leak, you need to fix it. But it's
entirely possible to have problems from not having enough memory that
are solved by adding memory. The linux OOM killer won't kick in, you
won't thrash, you won't have race conditions caused by thrashing, you
won't have exceptions causing you to fail to release resources because
you are thrashing, etc.
"Had to restart the system to free up resources" could mean "we're
thrashing because we have 5000 connections open to the server at once,
because they're not closing, because we're thrashing." For example.
But sure, if there's a leak, you'll eventually fill up memory. If 2 gig
changes it from being "restart the server once every day" to "restart
the server more rarely than we upgrade the software anyway", it's a win.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Helpful housekeeping hints:
Check your feather pillows for holes
before putting them in the washing machine.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Clarence1898 wrote:
>
>> My first thought was the new employee came from Microsoft.
>
> I am fairly confident that using more hardware resources is an explicit
> *design goal* for M$. (After all, who are their main customers?)
>
End users?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mike Raiford wrote:
> Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>> Clarence1898 wrote:
>>
>>> My first thought was the new employee came from Microsoft.
>>
>> I am fairly confident that using more hardware resources is an
>> explicit *design goal* for M$. (After all, who are their main customers?)
>>
>
> End users?
That's the mistake everyone makes.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Helpful housekeeping hints:
Check your feather pillows for holes
before putting them in the washing machine.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
