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