|
I didnt mean it quite like it seems to have been taken, but in a lot of respects you're correct, there's no reason why persistent messages can't be logged to a seperate message file using standard logging constructs
|
|
|
|
|
If your service is stopped it shouldn't attempt to process outstanding messages. When you stop or start a service your service has a set time to respond, beyond that time the OS regards it as being out of control. If you processed outstanding messages when the service is stopped it could push you beyond the time your service has to stop. Beyond that it's semantically correct too; when I push the brake to stop my car I don't care what it is doing, I want to it stop now.
|
|
|
|
|
That would be ok for simple web sites, who cares there to refresh several times. _Never_ applicable in a production environement.
Only my 2 cents.
It does not solve my Problem, but it answers my question
Chemists have exactly one rule: there are only exceptions
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
honey the codewitch wrote: Right now I'm thinking if it's paused it should, and if it's stopped it shouldn't.
At a minimum you need an easy way to flush messages without using the service if it defaults to retrying on startup. If not, it only takes one message triggering a crash bug early enough in the processing to trigger a DOS fault otherwise. "Early enough" is defined as "before anything in the service can decrement a retry count/etc to prevent this from happening".
Did you ever see history portrayed as an old man with a wise brow and pulseless heart, weighing all things in the balance of reason?
Is not rather the genius of history like an eternal, imploring maiden, full of fire, with a burning heart and flaming soul, humanly warm and humanly beautiful?
--Zachris Topelius
Training a telescope on one’s own belly button will only reveal lint. You like that? You go right on staring at it. I prefer looking at galaxies.
-- Sarah Hoyt
|
|
|
|
|
It depends on what the service does and on what each message is.
|
|
|
|
|
Due to the Covid situation, some have suggested that you should not be allowed to walk around with an infectious disease. Seems reasonable. However, there have always been and there always will be infectious diseases (I presume) so what is the answer? And 99% of the time we carry such a disease we don't even know it.
Do we make masks in public required forever? No more handshakes ever again? (Sports athletes will have to get much more creative). Social distance forever? Lysol everything? (Might have to buy their stock.)
Our company is not enforcing masks. Is yours? How do you deal/cope with it? No big deal? Uncomfortable? I see so many people wearing masks even when they are alone that I think they have become a fashionable item.
Just curious if people think any of these changes will or even should become the normal forever.
My opinion is that none of these things should become the normal. I could do away with the handshakes, that would be fine. Most people are just fist bumping now anyway. But I definitely do not want masks forever (can't hardly breathe in them and the world misses out on my handsomeness). Social distancing I could live with since I was already practicing that anyway, but as a norm I still think would be silly.
Thoughts?
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
As in introvert I feel like I've been training my whole life for this moment. 
Stay out of my bubble! 
Real programmers use butterflies
|
|
|
|
|
We use our faces for communication, just as much as our mouths. Wearing masks as other than an emergency measure would cut of this important channel of communication. Bad Idea.
As for handshakes, much of the world never had the custom of handshaking; they use bows (which also indicate respective social standing), etc. Even in the parts of the world that have adopted it as a social ritual, it was not always so. I suspect that it could disappear with little effect.
As for social distancing, cultures have differing ideas of a comfortable social distance. One of the funniest things to watch is an Englishman and a South American trying to have a conversation. The Englishman's comfortable social distance is much larger than that of the South American, so the Englishman is trying to step back, while the South American is trying to step closer. I expect that we'll all become English in this regard.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
Interesting points. Thanks. 
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
Disclaimer: My viewpoint is from the US.
My thoughts are that these "should we" conversations make one giant assumption: that you will have the reasonable option to choose. I believe modern medicine will eventually handle the situation despite all the self-preservationally-challenged people but that's no guarantee. In the general sense, I hope people will feel less socially awkward wearing a mask in the future if they believe they are sick with something. It's just a nice thing to do for anyone around you.
|
|
|
|
|
Jon McKee wrote: that you will have the reasonable option to choose
I sure hope so. But interesting points. Thanks.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
I do too. Unfortunately this pandemic is a group issue requiring group responsibility and it's clear to see that that has never been our strength. Somehow concert permits are still being granted, "corona parties" are a thing, tourist destinations just don't care (see: beach cities), and an uncomfortably large number of people think it's all a hoax because their two brain cells have never collided and produced a critical thought in their entire lives.
It's bad.
|
|
|
|
|
Jon McKee wrote: and an uncomfortably large number of people think it's all a hoax because their two brain cells have never collided and produced a critical thought in their entire lives.
To be fair, scientists have never been able to get on board with whether masks work or not. (Not blaming them, just stating a fact.) Hospitals have been caught lying about how many infected they have so we know the numbers are not as many as reported. Out of all the people I know and the extended people only one person has gotten the virus. And she worked a whole day in an open office WITH THE SYMPTOMS (bonehead) and no one else got it. So, when you look at all of those facts they don't add up to the same panic and scare that others see. I'm not saying it's a hoax, but from where I am sitting and when I rub my brain cells together I don't see this thing nearly as bad as others do.
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
Jon McKee wrote: people will feel less socially awkward wearing a mask in the future if they believe they are sick with something
When I was in Japan (more than 25 years ago), people with colds walked around with masks. It seems that yet again the orient is ahead of the occident.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
It would be interesting to know the prevalence of colds in Japan.
Because if masks were effective you would expect to see a lower incidence of colds due to people wearing masks.
To take it to it's logically absurd conclusion - if masks prevented colds from being spread nobody would need to wear a mask.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
So far, in 6 months, in the US at least, Covid19 only killed 0.05% of the people (and hospitalised 1%), so you can always ignore all of that if you think it's not significant enough... The US being pretty representative of what happen when you do nothing, I think....
Up to you man!
However I do understand the 1% of hospitalised people being angry at willing blissful ignorance of the rest...
|
|
|
|
|
Super Lloyd wrote: Covid19 only killed 0.05% of the people (and hospitalised 1%)
According to the CDC, COVID-19 has killed 0.045% of the entire US population, and infected 1.29% of the US population.
A survey of states making up ~10% of the US population of laboratory-confirmed hospitalizations give the number of hospitalizations as 39,432 (as of the week ending 18-Jul-2020), or about 400,000 hospitalizations in the entire US. These make up 0.12% of the population.
A disclaimer on the CDC site notes that the number of hospitalized patients is an underestimate - depending on the hospital's procedures, not all patients exhibiting symptoms are necessarily tested for COVID-19. However, I strongly doubt that the CDC survey has missed 90% of the hospitalizations.
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.
-- 6079 Smith W.
|
|
|
|
|
Gotcha.
Killed 0.05%, Infected 1% and hospitalised 0.1%... in 6 months...
Interesting.. 50% of hospitalised died! 
As a side note, there is "hope" that you only need 20% of population to become resistant (by prior infection, for now) to get herd immunity... with those number that would mean 1% of US population dead...
Which, incidentally, is (a little bit more than) how many die of old age, roughly, every year...
|
|
|
|
|
Super Lloyd wrote: so you can always ignore all of that if you think it's not significant enough
No one is ignoring deaths by covid. In fact, hospitals are making them up to get more funding. So, the numbers are not even real. Not sure if they are off by much, but certainly not real. However, what EVERYONE ELSE IS IGNORING, are deaths by EVERYTHING ELSE that is treatable. Suicides, gun crime, cancer, flu, you name it. EVERYTHING ELSE is getting ignored so it seems a little weird that you'd be upset by someone supposedly ignoring one single source of death.
Super Lloyd wrote: The US being pretty representative of what happen when you do nothing
I don't know what media you are watching but the US has done lots of something, certainly not nothing. I wonder what you meant by doing nothing?
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
From afar it seems that the Covid issue is not an health issue but a political issue in the US. And, at the very least, all red states (about 50% of the US I guess, not quite sure) have been proactively ignoring it....
An I upset or something by it... I dunno why my dry numbers makes you think so... 0.05% of covid death in 6 months is much less that 1% death per years of old age... so it could be argued either way... if anything I was hoping my comment to be strangely provocative without taking any position...
|
|
|
|
|
Super Lloyd wrote: have been proactively ignoring it....
That is no where near true and since you have asserted that twice with no evidence I'm assuming you are now just trolling?
Social Media - A platform that makes it easier for the crazies to find each other.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oh no! I already exceeded my booze quotum yesterday
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
