Comments on: Yes, More and More and Moore… but Different! http://www.pythian.com/news/361/yes-more-and-more-and-moore-but-different/ News and views from Pythian DBAs Fri, 10 Feb 2012 13:01:25 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: Alex Gorbachev http://www.pythian.com/news/361/yes-more-and-more-and-moore-but-different/#comment-15085 Alex Gorbachev Tue, 16 Jan 2007 14:17:29 +0000 http://www.pythian.com/blogs/361/yes-more-and-more-and-moore-but-different#comment-15085 Thanks for comment Noons. Picking further ahead, bitwise computer logic might be the dead-end technology. Perhaps, <a href="http://www.cogs.susx.ac.uk/users/ronc/quantum3/node5.html" rel="nofollow">this</a> is our future? Thanks for comment Noons.
Picking further ahead, bitwise computer logic might be the dead-end technology. Perhaps, this is our future?

]]> By: Noons http://www.pythian.com/news/361/yes-more-and-more-and-moore-but-different/#comment-14932 Noons Tue, 16 Jan 2007 09:01:49 +0000 http://www.pythian.com/blogs/361/yes-more-and-more-and-moore-but-different#comment-14932 Hmmm, yeah. I think I see your point and it is very valid. I'll add-on here, the best I can. Yes, the "fuzzyness" will be there. But not necessarily in the actual results. I think we'll see something along these lines: 1- The widespread use of what I call the "MV timewarp". Users will accept a tradeoff between timeliness and speed of result. They'll accept that the actual result will not include the latest, whitest and brightest RFID data but will be a precise result as of some time in the past. How far back is an unknown at this stage. 2- The fuzzyness you note will go into CBO stats gathering and its effect. For this scale of problem, the nuances between for example "very large" and "bloody huge" will be moot: after a few TB, it's all "freakin humongous!" as far as 100MB/s is concerned! or words to that effect!... ;-) still: yes, there is indeed an argument for fuzzyness. But don't forget this: the end user is still armed with that annoying Excel and used to seeing large precision... Hmmm, yeah. I think I see your point and it is very valid. I’ll add-on here, the best I can.

Yes, the “fuzzyness” will be there. But not necessarily in the actual results.

I think we’ll see something along these lines:

1- The widespread use of what I call the “MV timewarp”. Users will accept a tradeoff between timeliness and speed of result. They’ll accept that the actual result will not include the latest, whitest and brightest RFID data but will be a precise result as of some time in the past. How far back is an unknown at this stage.

2- The fuzzyness you note will go into CBO stats gathering and its effect. For this scale of problem, the nuances between for example “very large” and “bloody huge” will be moot: after a few TB, it’s all “freakin humongous!” as far as 100MB/s is concerned!

or words to that effect!… ;-)

still: yes, there is indeed an argument for fuzzyness. But don’t forget this: the end user is still armed with that annoying Excel and used to seeing large precision…

]]>