By IO heavy I meant db operations or other external requests. When the request handler starts, it waits for the IO to be completed. While it waits, it can accept other requests and so on, so the bottleneck is the IO in my case, not the request parsing.
I imagine it like this (imaginary numbers):
DB operation: 20ms
Express request handler: 1ms
Brhama request handler: 0.5ms
Which case, it wouldn't matter which http framework to use. However, there are probably other use-cases.
How much overhead does a simple request handler have with Brhama and with Express in ms?
It matters because most of my endpoints are IO heavy. I assume the framework cost is negligible compared to that, and if it is negligible for typical use-case, then what use-cases do you see where it matters most?
With SQL you scale it when it is required by sharding, read replicas, cache layers, and denormalization.
With NoSQL afaik, we have to deal with the scaling from the beginning by keeping the consistency of denormalized data, that has additional code overhead. Is mongoDB different in this regard?
That's not the point of JSONB. Use normalized tables whenever you can. JSONB allows you to store a document with unknown structure, and it allows you to access that data within SQL.
I have been to Brussels, and it was frustrating to see “Free Gaza” graffiti ruining the view. The city felt neglected, almost like garbage. I was disappointed to see the capital of Europe in such poor condition. Graffiti was only part of the problem though, trash bags were left on the pavements instead of being placed in bins. One of the ULB university buildings had a broken glass entrance, and when I visited the following year, it was still unrepaired. I also heard the subway’s alert system multiple times; apparently, people trigger it so they can enter for free. And so on. Overall, it was a very disappointing experience. The beer, however, was exceptional.
It's hard to find such learning data though, but e.g. claude already uses intermediary steps. It preprocesses your input multiple times. It writes code, runs code to process your input, and that's still not the final response. Unfortunately, it's already smarter than some junior developers, and its consequence is worrying.
But LLMs are not simply probabilistic machines. They are neural nets. For sure, they haven’t seen the world. They didn’t learn the way we learn. What they mean by a caterpillar is just a vector. For humans, that’s a 3D, colorful, soft object with some traits.
You can’t expect that a being that sees chars and produces chars knows what we mean by a caterpillar. Their job is to figure out the next char. But you could expect them to understand some grammar rules. Although, we can’t expect them to explain the grammar.
For another example, I wrote a simple neural net, and with 6 neurons it could learn XOR. I think we can say that it understands XOR. Can’t we? Or would you say then that an XOR gate understands XOR better? I would not use the word understand for something that cannot learn. But why wouldn't we use it for a NN?
Any explanation? If they can write text, I assume they understand grammar. They are definetly skilled in a way. If you do snowboarding, do you understand snowboarding? The word "understand" can be misleading. That's why I'm asking what's understanding?
What's understanding? Isn't understanding just a consequence of neurons communicating with each other? This case LLMs with deep learning can understand things.
What I meant is that you cannot turn any existing webpages to a basic page with some simple tricks like disabling js. That would be a never-ending fight.
You are the one adding extra complexity
I'm not the one defining the business requirement. I could build a site with true progressive enhancement. It's just extra work, because the requirement is a modern page with actions, modals, notifications, etc.
There are two ways I can fulfill this. SSR with scripts that feel like hacks. Or CSR. I choose CSR, but then progressive enhancement is now an extra work.
Why is it "impossible to do them reliably" - without js presumably?
What I meant is that you cannot turn any existing webpages to a basic page with some simple tricks like disabling js. That would be a never-ending fight.
It suggests using minimal js, I use react the same way, whatever I can do with css, I do it with css. But I am not going to footgun myself. I start the app with react because at some point I will need react.
Keep your secrets:
alias npm="docker run -it --rm -v $(pwd):/app -w /app node:latest npm"Not enough, but better than nothing.