今日已更新 84 条资讯 | 累计 37635 条内容
关于我们

标签:#RAM

找到 2549 篇相关文章

AI 资讯

Latest Benchmark

104 ?- PERFORMANCE LOG: MAIN DASHBOARD VIEW - NATIVE RAM CACHE RAM CACHE HIT Successfully compiled interface tree from core brain. BENCHMARK Total dashboard rendering time : 0.7344 seconds. Pipeline processed around 505987 total data rows. Core view stream finished. >> PERFORMANCE LOG: SALES FINANCIAL LEDGER - NATIVE RAM CACHE RAM CACHE HIT: Transaction Cache retrieved 0 sorted invoices. BENCHMARK: Financial decoration formatting time: 0.0000 seconds. SUMMARY: Rendered 0 financial rows out of 0. Pipeline finished in 0.0001 seconds. RAM CACHE HIT Invoice aggregate metrics retrieved without recalculation. SUMMARY: Aggregation Finished in 0.0000 seconds. >> PERFORMANCE LOG: SALES FINANCIAL LEDGER - NATIVE RAM CACHE BENCHMARK: Financial findall time (149909 invoices) : 0.2276 seconds. BENCHMARK: Financial decoration formatting time: 0.0012 seconds. SUMMARY: Rendered 100 financial rows out of 149909. Pipeline finished in 0.2998 seconds. AGGREGATION: Invoice Pipeline Data collection time 1.0562 seconds. AGGREGATION: Invoice Pure TCO calculation 0.0913 seconds. SUMMARY: Aggregation Finished in 1.1476 seconds. submitted by /u/lokinpendawa [link] [留言]

2026-08-13 原文 →
AI 资讯

Brazil's PL 2338: the Status of Its AI Bill

Brazil’s AI bill is described in a great deal of writing as though it were in force. It is not, and the distinction is not pedantic: the risk tiers, the prohibitions and the regulator that summaries attribute to Brazilian law exist only in a text that one chamber of Congress has approved. Where the bill stands PL 2338/2023 was introduced in the Federal Senate in May 2023 by the then-President of the Senate, building on the report of a commission of jurists that had been convened to draft a substitute for earlier and much thinner AI bills. After committee work through 2024, the Senate plenary approved the bill on 10 December 2024 and sent it to the Chamber of Deputies, where it has been examined by a special committee rather than passed straight to a floor vote. As at the date on this page, the bill has not been enacted. It has been approved by one chamber and remains before the other. This is a status page about a live legislative process and it is written to be checked, not relied on. It is not legal advice. Before making any decision that depends on whether Brazil has an AI statute, verify the current stage on the official tracking pages linked below—a page written at any date can be overtaken the following week. How a Brazilian bill becomes law The reason “approved by the Senate” is so frequently misreported as “passed” is that the remaining route is substantial and can change the text materially. A bill originating in the Senate goes to the Chamber of Deputies as the revising chamber. If the Chamber amends it, the amended text returns to the Senate, which decides between its own text and the Chamber’s. Only when both chambers have settled on one text does it go to the President, who may sanction it in whole, or veto provisions in part, with vetoes subject to being overridden by Congress. Each of those stages has changed the substance of comparable Brazilian technology legislation. The LGPD itself, Brazil’s data protection statute, was enacted in 2018 and then am

2026-08-13 原文 →
AI 资讯

How Azure OpenAI's Global Standard Deployment Type Works

Global Standard is the default for a reason and the reason is not performance. It is a routing behaviour with quota consequences, and both halves surprise people who chose it because it was preselected. What the type does The SKU name in code is GlobalStandard . Microsoft describes it as using Azure’s global infrastructure to dynamically route traffic to available datacenters, and lists three concrete consequences: it provides the highest default quota , it eliminates the need to load balance across multiple resources for throughput purposes, and it is the type new models arrive on first. The launch order is documented and it is a planning input. New deployment types become available Global first, then Data Zone, then single region — and single-region types arrive last, have no guaranteed availability date , and depend on capacity that frees up as older models retire. A design that requires a model pinned to one region is a design that may wait indefinitely for that model. Microsoft, Understanding deployment types in Foundry Models . Global Standard also supports priority processing on a pay-as-you-go basis, which is a separate rate for faster responses on the same deployment. Routing and data residency The distinction Microsoft draws is between data at rest and data in flight, and only the second one varies by deployment type. Data stored at rest remains in the designated Azure geography for every type. Inferencing data is processed differently: Global types: may be processed in any Azure region . Data Zone types: processed only within the Microsoft-specified data zone — US, EU or Asia Pacific. The EU zone follows the Azure EU Data Boundary, which can include EFTA countries such as Norway and Switzerland in addition to member states. Standard (single region): processed in the deployment region. “Any Azure region” is the phrase to take to a compliance conversation before you deploy rather than after. Microsoft also notes it can add regions to a data zone without pri

2026-08-13 原文 →
AI 资讯

Distributed Tracing: Following a Request Across Microservices

Distributed Tracing: Following a Request Across Microservices A practical guide to distributed tracing as an architectural discipline — why single-service logging and metrics stop being sufficient once a request crosses many services, how a trace actually reconstructs a request's journey, trace analysis techniques for diagnosing latency and failures, and the specific propagation challenges microservice systems built from this series' REST, gRPC, and messaging guides need to solve. Table of Contents Introduction The Problem Distributed Tracing Solves Anatomy of a Distributed Trace Propagation Across Every Boundary a Request Crosses The Span Tree as a Diagnostic Tool Root Cause Analysis Using Traces Service Maps and Dependency Discovery Latency Analysis Patterns Sampling Strategy for Production Systems Tracing Across Synchronous and Asynchronous Boundaries Tracing Third-Party and Uninstrumented Dependencies Trace-Driven Testing and SLOs Common Pitfalls Quick Reference Table Conclusion Introduction Distributed tracing is the practice of reconstructing a single logical request's complete journey as it travels across every service, database call, and message it touches in a microservice system — not just observing one service in isolation, but stitching together a coherent, end-to-end picture of what actually happened, in what order, and how long each part took. This guide builds directly on this series' OpenTelemetry guide (which covers the mechanics of spans, trace context, and instrumentation) to focus specifically on distributed tracing as an architectural discipline: why it becomes necessary the moment a system splits into multiple services, and how to actually use traces to diagnose real production problems. Trace: "Checkout" (poor total latency: 1,840ms) ├── API Gateway (5ms) ├── OrderService.PlaceOrder (1,820ms) ← the vast majority of the time is HERE │ ├── SQL INSERT (12ms) │ ├── gRPC call to InventoryService (45ms) │ └── HTTP call to PaymentService (1,740ms) ←

2026-08-12 原文 →
AI 资讯

I Built a Concurrent Resource Scheduler in Go with Sharded Priority Heaps

Support on GitHub: github.com/phero20/concurrent-resource-scheduler (Give it a star if you find it useful!) View Docs: pkg.go.dev/github.com/phero20/concurrent-resource-scheduler What happens when thousands of concurrent requests compete for a small pool of reusable resources? You can put a mutex around a slice and hope for the best. Or you can design the scheduler around concurrency from the beginning. I chose the second option. I built Concurrent Resource Scheduler (CRS) , a domain-agnostic Go library for selecting, prioritizing, routing, and maintaining reusable resources under heavy concurrent load. It was designed from the ground up for production readiness. The core library supports Go 1.22+ and is intentionally built with zero third-party dependencies . Extended features like Prometheus telemetry are strictly separated into an optional nested Go module ( Go 1.25+ ) to keep the core scheduler dependency graph perfectly empty. The core idea is simple: MANY CONCURRENT REQUESTS │ ▼ ┌───────────────────┐ │ Resource Scheduler│ └─────────┬─────────┘ │ ┌──────────────┼──────────────┐ │ │ │ ▼ ▼ ▼ Priority Acquire State Heap Strategy Management │ │ │ └──────────────┼──────────────┘ │ ▼ BEST AVAILABLE RESOURCE But making that work correctly under concurrency is where things get interesting. CRS is designed for use cases such as: LLM/API gateways API key pools proxy rotation database replicas GPU workers backend pools worker resources connection pools rate-limited providers reusable compute resources The scheduler itself does not know what a resource means. It only knows: "I have resources. I need to safely maintain them, prioritize them, and return an appropriate one to a concurrent caller." Table of Contents The Problem The Naive Approach Why a Global Mutex Becomes a Problem The Core Idea Behind CRS Architecture at a Glance Sharded Priority Heaps Why Sharding Helps The O(1) Lookup Map Priority and Acquire Are Different Problems Acquire Strategies Round Robin Weighted A

2026-08-12 原文 →
AI 资讯

I Built a Notebook for Sharing Notes That Doesn't Ask You to Sign Up First

Someone asked me to share meeting notes in Slack yesterday. I pasted the markdown. Slack ate the table. The code block lost its indentation. The task list rendered as literal [ ] characters. I spent five minutes reformatting something that already looked perfect in my editor. So I sent a link instead. Not to Notion — they would have to sign up. Not to Google Docs — same problem, plus I did not want this living in someone's Drive forever. Not to a pastebin — those are single blobs of text with no structure, no pages, no way to come back and fix a typo tomorrow. I wanted: one link, multiple pages, markdown that actually renders, no account required, and a way for me to edit it later without the URL changing. I have built sharing tools before. FreeShare for files. NotePage for single-page text. SharePad is what I wished existed when I needed something in between a pastebin and a wiki — but without the signup wall. Live here: https://sharepad.in Source: https://github.com/Varshithvhegde/sharepad SharePad — Share notes with one link, no signup Write a notebook of markdown pages and share it with a single link. Password lock, expiry dates, comments and PDF export. Free, and no account needed. sharepad.in The Idea Most "share your notes" products follow the same playbook. Create an account. Verify your email. Create a workspace. Invite people. Configure permissions. By the time you are done, the meeting is over and nobody cares about the notes anymore. SharePad skips all of that. You write markdown. You get two links: View link — /n/kitchen-reno — hand this out freely Edit link — /e/{secret-token} — this is your ownership credential. Do not share it. No account. No password to create (unless you want to lock the view link). No "upgrade to share with more people." The edit token is your identity for that notebook. That one decision — token-based ownership instead of user accounts — simplified everything else. No auth flows. No session management. No "forgot password" for th

2026-08-12 原文 →
AI 资讯

AI Is Removing the Middle Class of Software Engineering

You can prompt an agent for three hours and ship a 25,000-line pull request. Nobody on your team can tell you why it works — or why it breaks at 2 AM. The New Workflow It's 2026. You're the senior engineer on a mid-size product team. Your job has always been the person who catches the architecture mistakes before they compound — the one who notices that a Kafka dependency was grafted onto a read-heavy query, or that someone denormalized the database because it was faster than fixing the ORM. This morning, you open your inbox. There are seven pull requests. The first one is 24,506 lines added, 3,938 removed, with a description that reads: "Implemented user analytics pipeline with event streaming." You pull the branch. It runs. The tests pass. When you ask the author where the data flows, they send you a link to a Claude conversation. Somewhere in that 47-turn exchange, between confident architectural recommendations and polite apologies when the model changed its mind, is the design decision. You read all 47 turns. You still don't know why they chose Kafka. This is not a hypothetical. This is what the post-AI-productivity era looks like for teams that adopted coding agents without updating their engineering discipline. The speed limit has been removed. And the people who built their careers on being the speed limit are now obsolete. What Changed Before AI coding assistants, there was a natural throughput cap on software output. A senior engineer could review perhaps three meaningful pull requests per day. A team of ten could ship maybe fifteen high-quality merges per sprint. This cap wasn't arbitrary — it was enforced by the time required to actually understand what you were merging. AI changed the cost structure, not the review requirement. A developer armed with a capable agent can now produce 25,000 lines of code in a morning. The agent writes the code. The agent writes the tests. The agent writes the documentation. The agent even writes the PR description, which

2026-08-12 原文 →
产品设计

NETO: Chat P2P local para equipos dev — sin nube, sin excusas

¿Tu equipo comparte credenciales por Slack? ¿Discuten arquitectura en plataformas que almacenan cada mensaje en servidores ajenos? Existe una alternativa que no depende de la nube: NETO . ¿Qué es NETO? NETO es un chat peer-to-peer diseñado para redes locales . No hay servidor central, no hay cuentas, no hay datos saliendo de tu oficina. Abres el navegador, y los compañeros de tu LAN aparecen automáticamente gracias a mDNS (Multicast DNS), el mismo protocolo que usa Bonjour para descubrir impresoras y servicios locales. Sin registro. Sin configuración. Sin fricción. Cifrado de extremo a extremo real Cada conexión entre peers se establece mediante WebRTC , creando canales de datos directos entre navegadores. Antes de intercambiar un solo mensaje, NETO realiza un intercambio de claves con X25519 (Curve25519 en

2026-08-12 原文 →
AI 资讯

Your publish pipeline is green. Nobody can install your plugin.

Silent failure For three weeks nobody could install your plugin. The publish job was green every single day. You find out when a user asks why the version is so old. Three weeks green, zero installs This happened to us. The publish job for our JetBrains plugin reported success on every run since the middle of July. The plugin was not in the marketplace at all. The registry API answered with a 404. A search for the product name returned nothing. Meanwhile the build was green, the release notes were written, and the changelog was up to date. Nobody noticed. Not the pipeline, not the dashboard, not us. The gap between the last good release and the discovery was three weeks. Your pipeline is not lying to you This is the part worth understanding, because it is why the same thing is probably waiting in your repository too. A release pipeline has one job: get the artifact somewhere a stranger can install it. Almost every pipeline checks something else. It checks that the upload command exited zero. Those two questions agree nearly always. Our publish step went further and did the sensible thing. It caught the failure, compared the error text against a list of known-harmless cases, and exited zero for those. One of those cases was pending moderation. A new version sits in review before it becomes visible. Failing the build for that would be noise, so it was allowed through. Here is the trap. A harmless transient state and a permanent block produce the same message. Once the plugin was stuck, every later run matched the same friendly pattern and reported success. The pipeline answered its question correctly. It was the wrong question. The check that catches it, in about two minutes Ask the store, not the pipeline. That is the whole idea, and you can add it today without changing anything else. One: after publishing, fetch the public listing the way a stranger would. No credentials, no internal API, no authenticated client. Seeing what an outsider sees is the entire point. Tw

2026-08-12 原文 →
AI 资讯

Designing Idempotent Decision Endpoints That Survive Real Retries

Retries are normal in distributed systems. A caller may time out after the server commits a decision, a queue may redeliver a message, or a webhook sender may repeat an event. A decision API that treats every request as new can double-charge, duplicate actions, or record conflicting outcomes. Give each business operation a stable key The idempotency key should identify the logical business request, not a network attempt. Store it with a normalized request fingerprint, processing state, outcome, rule version, and response. If the same key arrives with a different payload, reject it rather than returning an unrelated prior result. Handle concurrent duplicates atomically Two workers can receive the same key before either writes a result. Use a unique constraint, transaction, or compare-and-set operation so only one execution owns the request. Other attempts should wait, return an in-progress response, or read the completed outcome according to the API contract. Choose retention from business risk A short cache may stop immediate duplicates but fail when a delayed queue redelivers. A permanent record may create unnecessary storage or privacy burden. Document key expiry and what happens if a key is reused after that boundary. Put side effects behind the idempotent boundary If rule evaluation triggers a message or database write, use a transactional outbox or equivalent pattern so the decision and pending event are committed together. Consumers still need their own deduplication because downstream delivery is often at least once. Return decision provenance Include the decision ID, status, rule artifact version, timestamp, and whether the response was replayed. Do not regenerate a result under a newer rule version for a duplicate key unless the caller explicitly requests a new business operation. Test the failure modes, not only the happy path Cover concurrent duplicates, payload mismatch, worker crash after commit, delayed redelivery, key expiry, and downstream retry. Obs

2026-08-12 原文 →
AI 资讯

Crystal in 2026: a 7 MB binary, zero dependencies, and five traps

I spent a few days writing a satellite ground station daemon in Crystal, with an empty dependency list and a hard rule against third-party code. It works, it ships as one file, and it sits at 1.9 MB of memory at rest. This is what the language was like to use, and what it cost. The project is kozai : it reads orbital elements, propagates them with SGP4/SDP4, predicts passes over a ground station, serves a JSON API and an offline web interface, and drives a rotator and a radio through hamlib. About 9,000 lines of source and 6,400 lines of specs, on Crystal 1.21.0. None of that matters here except as the load under which the language was tested — this is a report on the tool, not on the satellites. What the language actually delivers The headline claim of a compiled language with a garbage collector is that you get Ruby's ergonomics and a binary at the end. In 2026 that claim holds, and the numbers are the part worth quoting: Docker image, FROM scratch 7.41 MB Static binary, musl, arm64 6.9 MB Dynamic binary, release 1.9 MB Memory at rest, 2 satellites 1.9 MB Memory at rest, 97 satellites 4.3 MB Memory after a day of serving, 97 satellites 19.3 MB, flat Build steps before crystal build none Runtime files outside the binary none The last two rows are the ones that changed how the project was built. There is no Node in this repository, no bundler, no asset pipeline, and no postinstall . The web interface — HTML, CSS, JavaScript, and a 66 KB SVG of the world's coastlines — is read at compile time by {{ read_file(...) }} and lives inside the executable ( src/assets.cr ). Deploying is scp . The standard library covered the whole surface of a network daemon with six imports: http/server , http/client , json , log , socket , option_parser . That list is not an aspiration; CI fails if a seventh appears. The type system earned its keep in the numerical core. Predicting a week of passes for a hundred satellites is on the order of ten million propagator calls, and the hot loop a

2026-08-12 原文 →