Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:Problem is true waste is hidden (Score 1) 249

I misspoke. It is not built around military SPENDING specifically. It is built around the military, and the preferred access to resources that our military provides.

We have the largest military in the world, and military bases in more countries than any other nation on earth. We also have the largest and most powerful navy, and with it the implicit control of the seas.

All of that military power assures that foreign countries need to hold US dollars. Specifically the petro dollar underpins our economy. Just look at whatever happens when the leader of another country tries to stop selling oil in dollars.

To understand how the military supports the economy, you have to stop thinking in paper currency and look at resources. Look at how many resources are being dedicated to maintaining a military footprint around the world, and how many resources are not being allocated to maintain basic infrastructure at home.

It has been almost a century since Smedley Butler declared that "war is a racket" and not much has changed since then.


Only instead of bananas and sugar in the Caribbean, it is uranium and lithium in Afghanistan



Comment Re:Problem is true waste is hidden (Score 1) 249

You have started to address the reality of the American economy. By and large, our entire economic system is built around military spending. It is almost impossible to have a real discussion about reducing military spending in any meaningful way because there are so many jobs tied up in it.

This has so many add on effects. When all you have is a military, every challenge looks like a potential conflict.

Comment Re:History repeating itself (Score 1) 121

I believe that it does not matter with Linux. I am as certain as I can be based on nothing but observation and a modicum of understanding about operating systems that it has to do with MS DLLs being optimized. It probably has something to do with how they are compiled, and the compiler being designed to leverage optimizations for the Intel architecture. If the optimizations are not there, the code branches to the 'other' execution pipeline for 'generic x86 instruction set' or whatever.

Comment Re:The more cores the better (Score 1) 121

You don't read it from disk. You put it into memory. As was suggested, you should be investigating indexing strategies. If you need both OLTP and OLAP from the same set of data, you are likely going to have to partition out multiple copies. I do not know of any use cases where organizations are doing both, at large scale, from the same database. You should also setup views if possible so that you can hone in on the specific portions of the table that you need, or the relationships that are relevant to the application.

FWIW - Where I work, we are dealing with 5TB+ SQL databases running on servers with 1.5TB of RAM. (SQL 2012 R2). Our DBAs are getting decent enough query performance that most of the transactions are completing in under 10 seconds. Even the largest tables have no more than 5 indexes, and they are reorganized nightly. TempDB is 80GB (8 x 10GB) and both data and logs are on EMC XtremIO.

Comment Re:History repeating itself (Score 1) 121

Agreed. On the GPU side, it is slightly more cut and dried. The hardware vendors implement specific effects and then work with the studios who want to leverage those effects. The CPUs are decidedly more complex because at some point the high level object code needs to be broken down into machine code. Without compiler optimizations at the low level, or structural changes at the higher level in terms of functions or what have you, it is difficult to make the most of any CPU architectural enhancements.

Comment Re:History repeating itself (Score 1) 121

I was going to make a similar comment, so I will add it in here.

Just because AMD can work with game developers to optimize code for the CPU does not necessarily mean that the game developers want to, or can even afford to, optimize their code for two different platforms.

Where do things go from here?

Do we see a fragmentation in the market, where the chip manufacturers try to woo AAA studios to provide "exclusive optimizations" targeted at a specific platform?

Do the developers of the game engines themselves (FrostBite, Unreal, Unity, etc.) have to shoulder the burden of writing a "universal" platform that ultimately optimizes for both CPU architectures? Is such a thing even possible? Would it result in in two different installers, each targeted at a different architecture? Sort of like we still have 32 and 64 bit installers for most applications?

I have been building my own computers since the 1990s, and I have given a couple of AMD chips a chance over the years. My anecdotal experience, sample size of one experience has been that the AMD chips never "feel" as fast. The OS (Windows) is not as responsive. Applications are not as snappy. I am sure that has gotten better and may even be negligible at this point. I hope that is the case. But the impression that I have been left with is that there is an inherent bias towards Intel baked in at this point. Whether it is at the compiler level where the defaults are configured in such a way as to leverage Intel specific instructions, or maybe it's at the application layer where key OS DLLs are similarly optimized for proprietary Intel instruction sets. But there is definitely /something/ going on. The term WinTel was coined for a reason.

Comment Re:That's right. (Score 1) 253

I grew up in Orange. I lived in Long Beach for 15 years and consulted with clients everywhere from northern Orange county, out to Sun Valley at one extreme, the San Fernando Valley, Ventura. Downtown Los Angeles, Vernon. There are very few cities in southern California that I have not been to, multiple times. Hollywood, the ultimate cluster fuck.

I lived in Long Beach exactly because I had to know how to get around. From that city alone you have the 405, 605, 22, 710 and 91 freeways. You can skirt across the port and hit the 110. The 710 is by far one of the best north south freeways in the region. East west sucks no matter what, up until you hit the 210 but that's just because the 210 goes where nobody wants to go. The 10? Blows. 60? Blows. Your precious 105? Hahahaha, blows. Where are you going to take that freeway? Nickerson Gardens? Downey?

That entire metropolitan area is a shit show. There is no "knowing how to get around it" that alleviates the fact that its a parking lot for most of the day and night. Unless you are on the road before 5am, lots of luck driving for more than 20 minutes without dealing with some sort of slowing.

My best commute was from Costa Mesa to Irvine, and that still took about 25 minutes to go less than 10 miles most times of the day.

Comment Re:Thanks, I'll pass on all of them (Score 1) 253

I agree. I live in the Pacific Northwest and previously lived in Irvine, California. I brought my job with me when I moved to my town of ~18,000 people. It is great to be making a California salary with a "small" town cost of living.

I am close enough (20-30 minute drive) to the nearest big city that I can go do all of that nonsense when I feel the urge to. The rest of the time, I have a nice house, a good sized yard and mellow neighbors.

Comment Re:Good (Score 1) 312

There was an interesting article in Vanity Fair recently that echoes what you are saying. In the context of the article, the author made the point that all of the studios are asking television show writers to include a "mystery". They are hoping that the mystery will hook the viewers and keep them engaged for the whole season.

Slashdot Top Deals

The decision doesn't have to be logical; it was unanimous.