They are open-core. The offline-write feature (libsql::Builder::new_synced_database) basically does not work with the bare `sqld` server on their `libsql` github repository.
In fairness though their `libsql::Builder::new_remote_replica` works with the bare `sqld`
For me it was gradual build up. Also I forgot to mention that I never put that much time into learning music theory. I was too busy with programming (that's why we're here right? haha)
It took me around 10yrs to be able to identify the notes immediately just by listening.
I didn't really had to study it to learn ... it just came naturally for me.
It correlates easily to the music theory that you know, which is the main foundation that you need to get acquainted with.
I play a lot of instruments but bass is my main instrument.
Hey hn folks. I purchased a mini pc from lazada with N4200 as processor.
The seller basically sent me a downgraded version (N3450) and quickly changed the description in their store after taking my order.
Obviously I returned the item with the reason stated. But they declined.
Here's the important part.
If lazada stored the history of the updates (description/etc), it would be pretty easy to catch the fraudsters who are basically doing bait-n-switch.
Based on what data? Even hazelcast had that same claim before they got exposed?
I've only seen 2 systems that did rigorous in-house fault-tolerant testing (foundationdb and cockroachdb) and later when "jepsen-verified", they actually backed their claim or had few modifications to uphold their claim.
```
booking.com: 'talk to the hotel for a refund'
hotel: 'talk to booking.com for a refund'
```
Yea I experienced this last March. Charegbacks are not easy for regular consumers. Their customer service are trained to never give refunds (based on first-hand experience).
You'd have to be a valued client of your bank to have a successful dispute. And it is the only way I believe.
Both parties (booking.com and hotel) simply won't budge.
For the non-pingpong benchmark [1], c++ (300k rps) looks to be around 2x faster than java (150k rps), while the latter is around 2x faster than go (75k rps).
It looks like go's non-compacting/non-generational gc is at play here.
Even csharp is faster than go on that benchmark.
The one you posted has no deserialization overhead since its just ping/pong.
In fairness though their `libsql::Builder::new_remote_replica` works with the bare `sqld`