postgressomethi

no profile record

comments

2 lata temudiscuss

I always thought there should be a two-arg overload of new, so you could write new(bool, true) or new(int, 20). Would solve the problem without any trickery.

postgressomethi

2 lata temudiscuss

A Nintendo Switch is a non-hardware decryption system?

postgressomethi

2 lata temudiscuss

Could "effectively controls access" be attacked here? The purpose of the hardware is not to control access.

postgressomethi

2 lata temudiscuss

> You might think adding a UNIQUE index would cause the "losing" xact to get constraint errors, but instead both xacts succeed and no longer have a race condition.

This is not true. What happens is that the (sub)transaction that loses the race to the index is aborted:

  =# INSERT INTO foo (bar) (SELECT max(bar) + 1 FROM foo);
  ERROR:  duplicate key value violates unique constraint "foo_bar_idx"
  DETAIL:  Key (bar)=(2) already exists.

postgressomethi

3 lata temudiscuss

> Imagine booting your computer and having to give an email to login offline.

As much as I hate what modern Windows has become, this is not actually true. If you know the correct sequence of clicks you can avoid this. Not defending this bullshit, though.

postgressomethi

3 lata temudiscuss

Ah, now I see I responded to the wrong message.

postgressomethi

3 lata temudiscuss

I'm sorry, I wasn't being clear. Any column meaning "this row is to be ignored for most applications" is an annoying pattern.

postgressomethi

3 lata temudiscuss

While that's kind of convenient in a lot of ways, it also makes querying the database really annoying, since you have to remember to add the filtering to every single query or you're screwed. Personally, I wish there was a database-implementation-acknowledged "deleted" flag, which could even expose a "history table"-like interface.