Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | btb's comments login

Inertia, or lack of real reason to upgrade. Personally I'm still on a CPU from 2013(Intel Core i5-4570S). Havent really felt the need to upgrade. And pretty happy that I went with 16GB ram back then, since its still enough for me today(browsing/light gaming/coding). I've probably spent 10 times what that CPU cost on SSDs since then, so its not a cost issue for me. And more recently a Geforce 1070 TI. I've been thinking about upgrading, but I really need to see significant IPC lift to bother. So maybe a Zen3 or Intel next-gen sometime in 2021. If they manage to raise IPC.


I used to go for boards with a physical TPM as well(the Qxxx) and had the same driver issues you mentioned. But I've been reading recently that it might not be needed, since some of the newer intel chipsets(like z390) now have builtin Intel® Platform Trust Technology (Intel® PTT) which supposedly is a sort of firmware based TPM. I plan to give it a shot and see if it works for bitlocker hardware encryption when I buy my next motherboard.


Similar to the current charge in Denmark which is around 3.75 DKK(€0.5) per large plastic bag


I always carry an eastpak backpack when I bike to work. Those things are pretty much indestructible; on my second one since highschool. Then I usually shop on my way back from work. Obviously I probably have to shop more often than most people because of the limited capacity. I usually keep a spare plastic bag(that i re-use) in there as well if I need to buy more than can fit in the eastpak.


Actually sony compacts were some of the phones I was considering when I upgraded from iphone 4, to iphone SE. But the iphone se was just a tad smaller and I liked the look and feel of it. Had there been no iphone SE i would most likely be an android user now. And if apple stops producing a small model like iphone SE, that will probably be the thing that pushes me towards some sort of android phone.


I had a yubikey. It died after a few months of simply lying on the shelf behind me. No idea why, but havent exactly been a fan after that.


Did you get it replaced? Seems like it should have still been under warranty after only a few months.


My guess would be a dev that knew that something was wrong with the performance of their old system, but for whatever reason it wasnt something that anyone higher up prioritized. If thats the case, I can see why one might come up with an idea of trying to solve it outside the bounds of the normal production/SQL environment. At least in my company, the only time we devs ever get to specifically look at the performance of our website is when we have "hackathon" days where we choose our own projects. I often times feel like my regular time would be much better spent trying to optimize our 2 second+ initial pageload times, instead of all the other small tasks/tweaks/bugfixes that gets sent my way. But performance is something very few people higher up seems to care about. Or maybe its a case of users and managers becoming so accustomed to something being slow they dont notice anymore.


Hopefully that limitation can be relaxed over time. Having to stuff all my logic in one big script sounds a bit annoying. At minimum having access to a second worker script route would be welcome for testing/development purposes, so one doesn't muck up a working production script.


> Having to stuff all my logic in one big script sounds a bit annoying.

Keep in mind that you can write your code as a bunch of modules and then use a tool like webpack to bundle it into one script, before you upload it to Cloudflare.

> for testing/development purposes

I agree with this, we definitely plan to add better ways to test script changes. Currently there is the online preview that shows next to the code editor, but it's true that there are some limits to what you can test with it.


Are there any extra costs related to outbound requests one might make from a worker?


Nope!


Will every request to a worker-enabled site, pass through the worker v8 engine and charged at the going rate, even requests for static ressources like favicons, or jpgs etc? Or is there some way to limit the worker engine request matching to a specific area of your site(like /service)?


You can specify URL patterns where the worker should be enabled or disabled, under "routes" in the config UI. You won't be billed for requests to routes where the worker is disabled.


I wish routing and page rules had rudimentary regex support like VCL or most other location matching route libraries/servers.


Yeah, trouble is, it's depressingly easy to create a regex that performs very poorly, so if we allowed that, people could easily break the service.

However! One of the neat things about Workers is that you totally can use regexes in JavaScript, and our sandbox prevents runaway CPU usage. So if you really wanted regex-based page rules before, you can probably get that with a Worker.

We've exposed an API for controlling Cloudflare features from a Worker, including many things commonly controlled via page rules:

https://developers.cloudflare.com/workers/reference/cloudfla...

We'll be adding more in the future.


> a regex that performs very poorly

Would that still be true if you limited the regex support to DFAs instead of NFAs? I can’t think of a single use-case for backreferences in routing patterns. :)


Good idea; a nit on terminology:

NFAs and DFAs have equivalent expressive power[1]. For this application, you probably want a determinized DFA (one without epsilon transitions); that's constant time on the input string. (It's still not as fast as Boyer-Moore.)

Backrefs let you write PDAs, which are more powerful than either NFAs or DFAs.

PCRE2[2] implements DFA-based matching. The cited page says it's slower than the NFA algorithm (although presumably a lower complexity order); I think because of lookaheads and capturing.

[1] Michael Sipser, _Introduction to the Theory of Computation_.

[2] http://www.pcre.org/current/doc/html/pcre2matching.html


> determinized DFA

Yep, that's the thing I was thinking of. Thanks!

Question, since you seem like you might know: is there an alternative regex library—or a plain Yacc parsing grammar that you could stick as a validator in front of PCRE's parser—that would allow through only the regexes which parse out to constant-time (determinized) DFAs?


Not an expert in this, but I'm thinking this is usually handled by switching to a non-backtracking regexp engine. Otherwise, any such validator would depend on details of the regexp engine's implementation.


Consider applying for YC's W25 batch! Applications are open till Nov 12.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: