I’ve been working with what I used to call “utility computing” tools for about 6-9 months. However, for about the past 2 months, I’ve been seeing the term “cloud computing” all over the place, and there is so much buzz surrounding it that it’s reaching that magical point best described using Alan Greenspan’s words: “Irrational Exuberance”.

When Alan Greenspan used those words to describe the attitudes of investors toward the markets, what he was basically saying was that there were people who didn’t really know what they were doing, putting more money than they ought, into things they knew relatively little about. Further, he was saying that the decisions people were making with regards to where to put their money were a) bad, or at least b) not based on sound reasoning, or the ‘facts on the ground’.

This, I think, is where we are at with “cloud computing”. The blog post that put me over the edge is …

If there’s one thing that bothers me about using a ready-made solution like wordpress for my blog, it’s plug-ins. I hate software plug-ins. The first question every support engineer for any software product that supports plugins asks in response to a trouble report is “are you using any plugins?” And when you say “yep, I’m using plugins!” the reply from support is to disable them immediately and see if the trouble goes away. That’s a problem.

What’s worse, if the plugins are maintained by a third party (often the case), there’s no telling whether or not they’ll exist when the next version of the base software is released, or whether they’ll be supported in future versions of the software.

Two examples that touch my daily life are Firefox, and …

I was writing a utility in Python (using boto) to test/play with Amazon’s SQS service. As boto isn’t particularly well documented where SQS specifically is concerned, I also plan to post some examples (either here or on Linuxlaboratory.org, or both). When I had some trouble getting a message that was sent to a queue, I went to the Amazon documentation, and found this little gem in the Amazon Web Services FAQ

I am sure that my queue has messages, but a call to ReceiveMessage returned none. What could be the problem?

Due to the distributed nature of the queue, a weighted random set of machines is sampled on a ReceiveMessage call. That means only the messages on the sampled machines are returned. If the number of messages in the queue is small (less than 1000), it is …

UPDATE - 2008-06-23 - A member of O’Reilly’s editing team commented that this privilege has *NOT* been discontinued, and all O’Reilly authors should receive a free Safari account. Thanks a bunch, Mary, for the clarification (see comments for more).

I learned from one of the authors of the recently released second (read: first, squared) edition of High Performance MySQL that O’Reilly apparently did away with the idea of giving O’Reilly book authors free Safari accounts. Lame.

I do not know why in the world they would discontinue this offering for authors. Perhaps they’re not aware, but a great many of the O’Reilly authors are also bloggers. Tech bloggers. Some of them write on the O’Reilly blogs themselves, but …

All right! In the past, some books seem to be delayed in getting into O’Reilly’s Safari site, but on the day that Baron announces the book’s arrival, I find that I’m able to access it in Safari right now! Sweet!

I’m going to OSCON in July, and I know that just about everyone I know who is a participant in this crazy life we call IT (or web 2.0, or whatever it’s called now), is flying to a conference or something in 2008. I’m starting to notice more and more posts like this one, so if you can avoid it, don’t put anything in a checked bag that you can’t afford to lose, and avoid US Airways, and pass it on, because when you see the list of things they don’t cover in their lost baggage policy, you’ll suddenly feel like you’re lucky to still have anything you ever checked with your bags.

This rocks. It’s not complete, but Pyshards is the closest thing I’ve seen to a real attempt at making a more or less generic sharding toolkit, written in Python. This is not just great because it’s written in Python or because it helps people who need sharding capabilities in MySQL. It’s great because having a toolkit to use for this benefits the community by creating a point of reference for how to get things done, and can help unite those who are treading into this territory and help them all get a leg up on this beast that is “sharding”.

I, for one, have found ways (so far) to avoid having to do this. It’s a good bit of complexity for data that would otherwise be very simple, and an infrastructure architecture that would otherwise also be simple (by design). But one of the things that makes sharding seem complex is that there aren’t any …

Contrary to what I said earlier, Falcon has decided to deliberately disable statement-based replication using the same capabilities mechanism that InnoDB uses.

The reason is that isolation between concurrent transactions cannot be guaranteed, meaning that two concurrent transactions are not guaranteed to be serializable (the result of a concurrent transaction that has committed can "leak" into an ongoing transaction). Since they are not serializable, it means they cannot be written to the binary log in an order that produce the same result on the slave as on the master.

However, when using row-based replication they are serializable, because whatever values are written to the tables are also written to the binary log, so if data "leaks" into an ongoing transaction, this is what is written to the binary log as …

I know that this was talked a lot and recently Mark Callaghan also gave a session in MySQL user conference 2008 about the real bottlenecks.

Other day I was testing my thread pool stuff with MySQL 5.1.24 + InnoDB plugin 1.0.1 along with other miscellaneous benchmark tests by making them CPU bound by keep the working set completely in memory to gauge the performance of threads overhead; and on 8-core box InnoDB seems to be doing better than 4-core. And then immediately I started few tests with mysqlslap by keeping complete data set in the buffer pool to get the proper timing on locking overhead.

Here is the comparison of performance on 8-core box with innodb_thread_concurrency is set to 32 and 0 for variable threads on 64-bit Redhat Linux 4 . The same box is used as …

Hi. My name is Brian, and I’m a tech bibliophile.

I have owned more books covering more technologies than I care to admit. Some of my more technical friends have stood in awe of the number of tech books I own. I am also constantly rotating old books that almost *can’t* be useful anymore out of my collection because there’s just no room to keep them all, and it would be an almost embarrassingly large collection if not for the fact that I have no shame or guilt associated with my need for dead trees.

If you need further proof:

• I have, on more than one occasion, suggested to my wife that we take a walk around our local mall so I could browse the computer section of the book store, not to buy, but just to keep up with the new titles and stuff.
• Ok, I usually buy.
• I also go into book stores whenever I’m out of town to get a comparison of what seems to be popular in different areas of the …