lol

can they provide the RNG and seed value that produces the poem? thought not

Okay let's learn: Windows is a Microkernel and Linux is a Monolithic kernel - fundamentally different approaches to OS architecture. Which one do you think has less code in the kernel and therefor less chance of bugs and vulnerabilities?

"Jumping the gun"
"Jumping the shark"

My workstation is a TYAN server board. It takes about 5 minutes to boot. Most of that is waiting for the RAID controllers.

The thing I like about firefox is that you can completely rearrange the interface. For me every version has looked the same.. I don't really care what they do with the default settings.

just disable addon compatibility checking

Ceglia invested $1,000 in 2003 and is now expecting a 25,000,000% return on his investment. Get in line, Ceg even expecting your $1,000 back would be unreasonable.

You'll want to check out the clustering systems, anything stating to provide write-scaling is probably multi-master. PG-XC describes itself as a "write-scalable synchronous multi-master postgresql cluster". Interestingly 'synchronous' implies that this system scales out without sacrificing consistency. I haven't used it so I can't say for sure. My experience is with commercial RDBMSs and the eventual consistency model.

Data & Reality looks like an interesting read for sure, I will add it to my queue thanks!

If you've modeled your information well and not let specifics of your application creep in then changes in your application need not be a problem at all. Even if you do need to refactor your information any modern RDBMS has great tools to help. I really do wonder what people with very large object stores are doing when their objects change.

PostgreSQL supports all manner of replication, I imagine it's not as easy as something called "easy replication" but would count on it being more flexible. Or use one of the many clustering systems to trade some flexibility for ease of use.

BigTable is 15 year old technology that has been completely surpassed by modern relational systems. Many Googlers complain about it and would rather not use it.

The object/relational impedance mismatch is often cited by people who think they should not have to model information to persist information (they mistake their object model for an information model). While it's almost always worth your while to design an information model behind your objects, in the case that it's not you don't have to. Either way a modern relational system has you covered.

If you're persisting the objects from your oo app then you're already doing it wrong. ORM libraries, etc. are just further down the hole. If you can't be bothered to think about what information describes your objects then you don't have persistence, you have persistent cache which is all hibernate is supposed to be. If your app is boxed software or a game or something then that's probably good enough. But if your app is online and expected to scale and evolve over time then choosing to persist objects rather than information is shooting yourself in the foot.

I'm curious, what happens to all the objects in your object store when the application changes?

I'm sorry but the use of auto-incrementing columns as primary keys is considered very good practice these days for anything beyond first normal form. Of course they can be abused/misused and wreak all sorts of havoc but that's no reason to make blanket statements. It reminds me of the greybeards that vehemently reject NULL/3VL as anything but nonsense and refuse to use nullable columns even when the situation calls for it.

The value is in the higher quality driver software

with these social products it's more like a war over land than doing business. think of social community as a place that's currently occupied by facebook. the fixed quantity resource are all the eyeballs using the product and the data they generate.