Yes, and on one request I saw a message like "Restarting server - this won't take long", and soon after it's back up.
Readit Newsashf023 commented on Tell HN: HN was down · Posted by u/uyzstvqs
ashf023 commented on Golang optimizations for high‑volume services packagemain.tech/p/golang... · Posted by u/der_gopher
What are the options? Repeated allocations are a huge performance sink.
I mean, do it if it's worth it. But the parent seemed to imply everyone should be doing this kind of thing. Engineering is about tradeoffs, and sometimes the best tradeoff is to keep it simple.
ashf023 commented on Golang optimizations for high‑volume services packagemain.tech/p/golang... · Posted by u/der_gopher
My first thought: Controlling allocations and minding constraints... honestly, that's engineering stuff all services should care about. Not only "high-volume" services.
I'm definitely in favor of not pessimizing code and assuming you can just hotspot optimize later, but I would say to avoid reusing objects and using sync.pool if it's really not necessary. Go doesn't provide any protections around this, so it does increase the chance of bugs, even if it's not too difficult to do right.
paranoid schizophrenia is an increasingly reasonable reaction to the modern world
ashf023 commented on The state of SIMD in Rust in 2025 shnatsel.medium.com/the-s... · Posted by u/ashvardanian
C# is blessed on that front. Java’s SIMD state is still sad, and golang is not as great either.
Yeah, golang is a particular nightmare for SIMD. You have to write plan 9 assembly, look up what they renamed every instruction to, and then sometimes find that the compiler doesn't actually support that instruction, even though it's part of an ISA they broadly support. Go assembly functions are also not allowed to use the register-based calling convention, so all arguments are passed on the stack, and the compiler will never inline it. So without compiler support I don't believe there's any way to do something like intrinsics even. Fortunately compiler support for intrinsics seems to be on its way! https://github.com/golang/go/issues/73787
care to clarify?
> Henriks true penalty would be living in a country of 6 million people that all know his face and that he is a pedophile.
This is what I object to, not really your comment. Is this factored into the sentencing? If he weren't a public figure would he have a harsher sentence?
> You don’t have to worry about him doing anything in Politics again
Sure, if everyone in Denmark remembers this guy then he won't be popular. But really we don't have to worry about him? 4 months later is he just free to go back to collecting CP, maybe leave Denmark, etc?
The judge noted that given the publicity of the case, Henriks true penalty would be living in a country of 6 million people that all know his face and that he is a pedophile.
You don’t have to worry about him doing anything in Politics again. This isn’t the US after all…
What an absolutely absurd statement
ashf023 commented on LLM-Deflate: Extracting LLMs into Datasets scalarlm.com/blog/llm-def... · Posted by u/gdiamos
The transformation function in jpeg (DCT) is generally well defined math. While lossy, most of the information is reprocudable.
An LLM is layers and layers of non-linear transformations. It's hard to say exactly how information is accumulated. You can inspect activations from tokens but it's really not clear how to define what the function is exactly doing. Therefore error is poorly understood.
JPEG is similar actually. The DCT is invertible, but the result of the DCT is quantized, which is where some of the compression happens (DCT -> quantization -> IDCT), so the end to end process is not truly invertible. Maybe an analogy to the non-linearities in between the linear steps in deep learning
ashf023 commented on I solved a distributed queue problem after 15 years dbos.dev/blog/durable-que... · Posted by u/Bogdanp
Reading it I imagine it's roughly because they started with the problem of "we have to async writes to postgres for scale" and then solved it with "we synchronously write checkpoints with enough performance and guarantees to postgres to solve scale". The middle bit was likely quite hard.
Agreed it's missing that detail. I think it makes sense though that the durable queues shouldn't need strong consistency and transaction isolation, just durability, so the DBs can probably be sharded pretty arbitrarily, maybe operate in lower isolation modes, etc, whereas the DB they need to async writes to probably does need transaction isolation and all that. I'd appreciate if the article would confirm or deny my guess here!
ashf023 commented on Python has had async for 10 years – why isn't it more popular? tonybaloney.github.io/pos... · Posted by u/willm
I can't speak to the more technical aspects you bring up b/c I'm not that well versed in the underlying implementations and tradeoffs.
> and also too little too late.
I think it very likely that Python will still be around and popular 10 years from now. Probably 20 years from now. And maybe 30 years from now. I think that's plenty of time for a new and good idea that addresses significant pain points to take root and become a predominant paradigm in the ecosystem.
So I don't agree that it's too little too late. But whether or not a Virtual Threads implementation can/will be developed and be good enough to gain wide adoption, I just can't speak to. If it's possible to create a better devx than async and get multi-core performance and usage, I'm all for the effort.
Fair enough, I was a little too negative. It is good they're thinking about improvements