Why is there a 200 limit on appending names?
Limits in systems like these are generally good. They mention the reasoning around it explicitly. It just seems like the handling of that limit is what failed and was missed in review.
Readit Newsnickmonad commented on Cloudflare outage on November 18, 2025 post mortem blog.cloudflare.com/18-no... · Posted by u/eastdakota
nickmonad commented on Multiple Digital Ocean services down status.digitalocean.com/i... · Posted by u/inanothertime
If they are small projects, why are they behind a load balancer to begin with?
Usually because of SSL termination. It's generally "easier" to just let DO manage getting the cert installed. Of course, there are tradeoffs.
nickmonad commented on Building a high-performance ticketing system with TigerBeetle renerocks.ai/blog/2025-11... · Posted by u/jorangreef
I recently did performance testing of Tigerbeetle for a financial transactions company. The key thing to understand about Tigerbeetle's speed is that it achieves very high speeds through batching transactions.
----
In our testing:
For batch transactions, Tigerbeetle delivered truly impressive speeds: ~250,000 writes/sec.
For processing transactions one-by-one individually, we found a large slowdown: ~105 writes/sec.
This is much slower than PostgreSQL, which row updates at ~5495 sec. (However, in practice PostgreSQL row updates will be way lower in real world OLTP workloads due to hot fee accounts and aggregate accounts for sub-accounts.)
One way to keep those faster speeds in Tigerbeetle for real-time workloads is microbatching incoming real-time transactions to Tigerbeetle at an interval of every second or lower, to take advantage of Tigerbeetle's blazing fast batch processing speeds. Nonetheless, this remains an important caveat to understand about its speed.
Did the company end up using it?
nickmonad commented on Building a high-performance ticketing system with TigerBeetle renerocks.ai/blog/2025-11... · Posted by u/jorangreef
It seems to me that, in practice, you'd want the "LiveBatcher" to have some durability as well. Is there a scenario where a customer could lose their place because of a horribly timed server shutdown, where those transfers hadn't even been sent to TigerBeetle as pending yet? Or am I misunderstanding the architecture here?
Edit: Yes, I think I misunderstood something here. The user wouldn't even see their request as having returned a valid "pending" ticket sale since the batcher would be active as the request is active. The request won't return until its own transfer had been sent off to TigerBeetle as pending.
nickmonad commented on Tangled, a Git collaboration platform built on atproto blog.tangled.org/intro... · Posted by u/mjbellantoni
I really like the idea of more decentralized git collaboration. What do people think are the biggest blockers to adoption in this space? Having to run a server or manage some kind of private keys? Is it purely network effect?
(doesn't rely on libc btw)
Just kidding of course, very cool stuff!
nickmonad commented on Show HN: Zedis – A Redis clone I'm writing in Zig github.com/barddoo/zedis... · Posted by u/barddoo
What's the problem with the mascot? PostgreSQL has an elephant and MySQL a dolphin. Is the bug too detailed for database software?
Why would we want a literal BUG as a mascot?? /s
nickmonad commented on Yoke: Infrastructure as code, but actually xeiaso.net/blog/2025/yoke... · Posted by u/xena
I feel that writing out infrastructure templates through a "proper programming language" (for the lack of a better term) comes with some sharp tradeoffs that many don't recognize.
A big feature of most IaC tools is that they are relatively logic-less and therefore can be easily understood at a glance, allowing for easier reasoning about what resources can be created, and this ability is diminished by introducing logic, and debugging issues in them becomes a nightmare. A large company I used to work for had a system just like that, and while I thankfully never had to work with said system, hearing statements like you can "debug your templates with pry[1]" being touted as a feature is something I hope to never hear again.
Yeah, I've always felt like defining infrastructure in a full-on language fell nicely into that category of "just because you can doesn't mean you should."
I've only recently started to see this play out with a sufficiently large infrastructure setup and nothing is more infuriating than having to keep multiple layers of logic in your head when you're trying to figure out why some value got set on a task definition.
Too many to name really. One of the most influential for me though was The Mom Test. Teaches you how to validate before you build.