• 1 Post
  • 268 Comments
Joined 10 months ago
cake
Cake day: January 17th, 2024

help-circle








  • Yes and no; you left out part of my quote. Stuff that can be put in a reminder is up to me (especially if I tell them “I’ll handle it”). But if for whatever reason that’s not possible and I tell them “you might have to remind me again next week” and they are fine with that, then they shouldn’t be pissed if I indeed needed a reminder. That’s what I meant with “I warned them”.


  • This doesn’t seem reasonable… If you accept some responsibility

    But … that was the point. “Telling them your boundaries” implies not accepting something you are not up to. My managers know that I am not a good manager myself. I have a lot of qualities, at being a driving force in a project is not among them. So they don’t utilize me for that. Which is good.

    Yes, it would be on me if I constantly tell them “sure, just let me handle it” and then not handle it. But that would be the opposite of what I wrote above.


  • I mostly agree, but (what else ^^):

    No one has the right to make their internal turmoil everyone else’s problem, even if it may be particularly burdensome. The world should be far more sympathetic and empathetic, but at some point you have to take responsibility for you.

    IMO you do take responsibility when you tell others about your boundaries and how they can work around them. If they don’t want to because it also costs them a little bit of energy and disrupts their typical workflows they have (again: IMO) no right to blame it all on you. If I tell them “I can’t do X” or something and they again and again expect me to do X, it’s also on them.

    Simple example: I tell colleagues, family, whatever to please remind me again if they feel I missed something they expected of me. If they do, all is good. If they later are pissed that I missed something and immediately blame me … sorry my friend, I warned you. (If I had the ability to set a reminder, sure that’s on me for not doing that. But it doesn’t always work that way.)




  • glibc’s malloc increases the stacksize of threads depending on the number of cpu cores you have. The JVM might spawn a shitload of threads. That can increase the memory usage outside of the JVMs heap considerably. You could try to run the jvm with tcmalloc (which will replace malloc calls for the spawned process). Also different JVMs bundle different memory allocators. I think Zulu could also improve the situation out of the box. tcmalloc might still help additionally.




  • aksdb@lemmy.worldtoADHD@lemmy.worldWhat's your job?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    Software/Staff Engineer, as Architect and Solver. So I help design our system (from the technical side), I assist and to a degree coordinate teams, I jump in when know how or man power is needed, I rework or rebuild systems that have no clear ownership of a team, and so on. Oh and I always have an opinion no matter which (technical) topic.


  • Its not said that they need devs to target home machines, it says they need to give the resources so people can host it themselves, period.

    Before attacking me with such an arrogant rant, maybe read what I wrote.

    I said:

    Once they release the source, people can refactor or reengineer it to run on smaller scale, replace proprietary databases with free ones, etc.

    So of course it’s about releasing anything (!) at all.

    I simply said that you can’t compare a small fan project like a WoW self hosted server with Blizzards infrastructure and the requirements to have a high available setup for millions of players.

    ArenaNet is quite open about their infrastructure and you can see that this is far from trivial, but also allows them to have zero downtime updates. That is a huge feat, but also means that self hosting that thing will be a pain in the ass. Yet I would not want them to not do this just so it could be easily (!) self hosted some time in the distant future.