So it seems like exposure to microbial loads from farm animals help prevent allergies. But humans have not always kept lifestock - what kind of microbial exposure do pre-agrarian peoples receive?
The previous policy uses weighted round robin (WRR), which is described as:
> weight wi is calculated as qi/ui, where qi and ui represent the recent query-per-second (QPS) rate and CPU utilization of replica i.
The pathological case describes a situation where antagonist loads are soaking up CPU on some on the machines, but WRR equally distributes the load because weight formula prioritizes the utilization of the individual tenant, not of the entire machine. Wouldn't including the the machine utilization (probably downweighted) into the WRR formula also solve the issue?
"After the asset sale to Qoo10 closed on April 19th, ContextLogic had approximately $2.7 billion of NOL carryforwards and approximately $161 million in cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities, which consist of government securities. Combined, this represents the net proceeds from the sale. We have no debt.
We have gone from nearly 500 employees worldwide at December 31st to 12 full-time and part-time employees, including some temporary or contract employees. We are no longer liable for any of our old leases, including our former corporate headquarters in San Francisco."
Ive used Memray and it works great locally. But when I deployed my application over long running processes (i.e. in production) because I want to see memory usage over a long period of time, the profiler outputs get really large, like hundreds of gbs. They cause disk outages and also take forever to download and visualize with the flamegraphs. What do people use to understand memory usage of long running workloads in production?
Ive used Memray and it works great locally. But when I deployed my application over long running processes (i.e. in production) because I want to see memory usage over a long period of time, the profiler outputs get really large, like hundreds of gbs. They cause disk outages and also take forever to download and visualize with the flamegraphs. What do people use to understand memory usage of long running workloads in production?
It's been a while since I read up on this, but my understanding is that with OS threads, during a context switch it has to pop the entire process stack, which in Java is 1MB by default. This is expensive. Virtual threads "context switches" have much more lightweight stacks because the JVM knows exactly what kind of state needs to be associated with the virtual thread and thats where the difference lies.
There was a scene in The Northman (2022) which is based on Ibn Fadlan. After seeing the movie I read the account [0] which I found very interesting. This describes the scene in the movie:
> The men came with shields and sticks. She was given a cup of intoxicating drink; she sang at taking it and drank. The interpreter told me that she in this fashion bade farewell to all her girl companions. Then she was given another cup; she took it and sang for a long time while the old woman incited her to drink up and go into the pavillion where her master lay. I saw that she was distracted; she wanted to enter the pavillion but put her head between it and the boat. Then the old woman siezed her head and made her enter the pavillion and entered with her. Thereupon the men began to strike with the sticks on the shields so that her cries could not be heard and the other slave girls would not seek to escape death with their masters. Then six men went into the pavillion and each had intercourse with the girl. Then they laid her at the side of her master; two held her feet and two her hands; the old woman known as the Angel of Death re-entered and looped a cord around her neck and gave the crossed ends to the two men for them to pull. Then she approached her with a broad-bladed dagger, which she plunged between her ribs repeatedly, and the men strangled her with the cord until she was dead.
At my programming job I find that when I communicate, my sentences are too long and have too much detail to the point where people probably skim over what I write and don't really read it. Looking at other coworkers who seem to be effective communicators, they seem to be more economical with their words with the use of jargon (in a good way) that encapsulates more complex ideas into a word or term. For example, I would write "when the thing we use is shared by many other things" and the shorter term would be "multi-tenant". When "one of the things uses too many resources and disrupts the other things in the shared environment" the shorter term is "noisy neighbors problem". So I find that finding the right word or jargon is really helpful for making writing easy to read.
"98.47% of Twitter contributions" is a totally valid statement. The percentage of the dollars contributed is 98.47%.
Your argument is totally dishonest. It's infuriating. What are you saying? That because it's possible 14,137 Twitter employees donated $1 each to the republicans and 1 person donated the other 900K, we can ignore this 98.47% figure entirely?
Second of all, the dollar measurement is not a useless one. It is a measure of wealth, influence, and conviction in the cause. Those Republicans donating $1 probably aren't in charge of censorship. The guy who donated $900K though...
Third, this is Twitter we're talking about. They are headquartered in San Francisco, a very blue city in a very blue state. Their employees are young educated techies. I have friends who work there and have visited their office several times.
Point is, you're not fooling anybody but yourself. Enjoy your motivated reasoning.
I just double checked whether or not Joe Biden was a Vice President and it turns out I'm not crazy and that he was. So looks like my Civics education is fine thanks. What is your point?
Uh-uh. 98.47% of $$ went to Dems in 2020. But _obviously_ magnitude of dollars has nothing to do with number of people, influence, or power. Or rather, you're saying, there's no way to know, so we should just move along right?
Just because you don't feel the need the discuss morality doesn't mean the rest of us shouldn't? For some of us the "spirit of the constitution" is just as important. And IMO if you're into this whole liberalism thing and you don't think it's important then you're just being dishonest.
What you see is a non-government person asking a non-government business to censor something. What I see is a former Vice President, Congressman, and Presidential candidate, backed by the DNC, asking a major communications channel to censor something.