Yes, it is.

You're right on the replication. I think that's Postgres's obvious weak point. It's what you'd find that you didn't like. I assume that's why you ignored Red Shift. The rest of your arguments simply prove my point.

I recommend against MSSQL not because it's not a good DB (it is -- it was originaly Sybase) but because it's cumbersome to work with outside of the Microsoft ecosystem. You mainly interface with it using ODBC and that's a pain outside of Windows. You're stuck with windows boxes on the back end AND on the front end. You can add ODBC systems to the mid-layer/server boxes you'd rather have (Linux, usually) but now you're paying money to add a kludge. Furthermore, because it absolutely needs to run on Windows on the back end, you have to pay employees who are generally of the sort who are going to want more Microsoft tools, so you'll be creeping more and more away from free stuff which is easy to maintain to a bunch of licenses and a complex setup. (Had to get a bunch of Windows boxes set up with precisely this sort of issue just a few weeks ago -- man! was it painful.)

You could start your project with Postgres and find out why you're unhappy with it and plan for a migration to something which is better for you post-hoc: Don't write SQL procs, and don't weave your SQL through a whole lot of code. Though frankly, the suggestions for Red Shift seem right on the money. They use Postgres drivers, JDBC, and ODBC, so you're set on any platform you want to work on without any added cost. They have a two-month free trial. You could try that out first and figure out what you're unhappy with there as a first step. Same rules apply -- keep things simple.

DBs are not for chewing data -- they're for giving you just the data you need so you can chew on it. You use the right tool for the chewing job once you have the data. (Some DB pre-chew is fine in situations where it's efficient and easy -- group by's, mostly.) So it doesn't matter that much how long the feature set of your DB is. What matters is that it's fast and you can get data in and out of it just about anywhere you want to. I've seen shops where they do all their data chewing in SQL server. They write reams of ugly, ugly code. They do this because they know how, and don't realize that a little work learning other things would make them vastly more efficient. The thing to always remember is that you don't buy a hammer and assume everything is a nail. Buy something which works with lots of other tools and pick the right ones for your job.

I don't get it. Why are you denormalizing your tables?

If you're talking about denormalizing, you're talking about a relatively complicated data set, else there would be nothing to denormalize. Almost nothing you'll do in SAS on any resonably complex data requires all the fields. So any DB on the back end (postgres, mysql) should be able to join up what you need from a well-normalized dataset quickly.

Or do you mean you're just making a big text file (or SAS data blob) and using that in SAS? If that's the case, I'm still left with more confusion. SAS is a terible programming language -- truely ghastly. So adding even an SQL layer can be useful in fixing up data for SAS churning.

What's your general technique?

In your first statement, you make a false dichotomy. I'll take getting handed 2.5 million bucks in twenty-four Scooby-Doo lunch boxes over Germany invading Russia any day.

Your first statement is about "free market capitalism", then your second one is about something with a "democratic form" -- these two things are not related.

In your third statement, you're confusing Socialism with Communism.

No. You're right that if you end up in jail, you did it wrong. But if you end up bankrupt, well, that's normal and shows you're good at taking risks. Lots of entrepreneurs wind up going through several bankruptcies. When they do the bankruptcy right, they still come out rich, and have something else already lined up. I know this sounds insane, but it's really quite normal. Fiscal responsibility, the kind we normal wage earners have to maintain, is a sign of not taking risks. It's a negative attribute, as far as the VCs are concerned. (Until it's their money being lost.)

I use them, as do my friends.

Oh, I didn't realize it was Rahm knocking over my trash every night. Now that I know, I will put out some capsaicin treats for the cute little critter.

Stargoat, you are a hundred percent right, but I don't think any party but Green would change the behavior towards the positive. We just need someone who cares about the city and has some integrity. He/she could be a Democrat, but not one I've met, so far. I know, let's resurrect Harold.

I'm sorry, I really should let it go, but...

Terminator 2 was not empty. Aliens was not completely empty. The Abyss was classic start shooting before you have a script debacle. True Lies was just plain offensive. (Those movies are fundamentally about Fatherhood, Motherhood, Marriage, and Cameron not realizing that he's a dick, respectively.)

The LotR movies, including The Hobbit, all made my ass hurt. Here's a good rule of thumb: movies should not take as long to watch as it takes to read the book.

It's the budget (which you allude to above) which is the problem. For a given film-maker, pretty much the bigger the budget, the worse the movie. Peter Jackson made Meet the Feebles, for goodness, sake. When he had to scrape by, he made amazing things. Cameron and Lucas have basically the same problem.

In your comment above you say Lucas only directed one good film. This is wrong, because you've forgotten THX 1138 and American Graffiti -- neither as good as the first star wars movie, but neither as bad as anything he did after that.

Damn them.

This completely violates our historical treatment of the lakefront for the past 100 years and has been specifically forbidden since the 70's. They are putting it right between the only other two structures which do the same thing. We've had two mayors in a row who do not understand the lakefront and it's role in Chicago, or who just don't give a crap. Daniel Burnham would have reamed them a new one. If they want 7 stories, they're welcome to it, but only if they dig 5 stories down.

Furthermore, this placement of a major draw right between two other major draws is a great idea, because transit to the other two venues already doesn't work. Let's make it worse. Brilliant. They currently have one train which stops right nearby which isn't connected to the rest of the transit system, and another train which is connected but which doesn't come close enough for most people to consider taking it. There's parking all around and it all exits into a small area of road, so that traffic gets to be a nightmare around these two venues.

Yeah, let's add another. And let's make it so tall it blots out the lake.

Bastards.

Hopefully friends of the park will sue them into submission. Put this damn thing on the other side of the drive. It's so tall it won't matter where you put it anyway. Hell, it's so big you could run I55 right through it.

Yep, let's say he walks on water. He won't win.

Want to get him elected? Get him to say he's a Republican.

The system sucks, but that's the system.

There are only two parties. Get over it. You're fucked.

The libertarians can't win. The Greens can't win. The independents can't win. If we got rid of the Democrats and the Republicans, I we all know who'd win the next election: The Democrats and the Republicans.

You're putting words into his mouth and seeing a fight where there isn't one. Bush was a catastrophe. Obama is 8 more years of the same and worse.

You don't have to love Republicans to hate Democrats or vice versa.

It's the nature of American politics that, almost by definition, it wouldn't.

They'll take a second look, and the smart ones will go with chromebooks. The chromebook world is full of boxes which perform acceptably at a low cost. They have no recurring costs. They're disposable. When one is smashed, you can use can replace it with without any setup at all. Work is never lost due to a disk crash.

The kids can install Linux and mess with that on these things. It runs reasonably well.

You can still have some Windows or Macs around to do the hard-core crap (that wouldn't work on underpowered windows boxes either) but the massive bulk of the computing needs for the students should be chromebooks. It solves lots of problems and has both a low entry price and a low continuing price.

Hardly a political decision.