Checking off two sci-fi bingo boxes with the classic "airplane race with an alien you just met" and "computer gone rogue" in the same half hour! Quite clever and brave of Zero to take the pointy AI out like that.
By the way, did Gwyn refer to Zero as a he in the log? If true, it wouldn't be the first time a character's pronouns have changed after you met them. Just like real life - I like that.
P.S. Is this the first time in Star Trek we hear a log in voiceover that also includes someone else's voice?
I don’t have an answer to your pronoun question, but hearing somebody else’s voice in the log jumped out at me as well. If it has happened before, it is pretty rare.
If you can afford one, I would strongly recommend going with a dual-conversion UPS. A line-interactive UPS like the one you posted essentially acts as a pass-through for your mains power until it detects a power loss or a brown-out. This works most of the time, but there's a short delay during the switch from line to batteries (just guessing, but most likely on the order of milliseconds). This might not sound like much, but you're counting on the capacitors in your server's power supply to hold enough charge until the UPS kicks in.
The other thing to consider is that a dual-conversion UPS also supplies "clean" power to your equipment. It essentially acts as a DC power supply connected to an inverter, so regardless of how bad your input power is, you're always going to get the correct voltage and frequency out. I connected my old line-interactive UPS to a cheap generator at one point; the voltage and frequency regulation was so bad on the generator that my UPS continually switched on/off of battery (several times per second), and the equipment attached to it immediately shut down.
I can connect my dual-conversion UPS to the same generator, and it keeps humming along as if it was connected to mains voltage. According to the datasheet, anything from 60VAC to 150VAC, it's still going to output clean 120V/60hz power.
They're much more expensive. Mine is 1000VA, and if I remember correctly, I paid something like 600 or 700 USD for the UPS. An add-on rackmount battery pack was another $300 or so. It was well worth the cost, though.
Why is there a separate table for men and women in the first place? Shouldn't there be a person table with a many to many relationship with itself (because polyamory exists)?
To that point a person table with a relationship table. So this way you can reference relationship between two or more persons within the relationship table and that could be joined to the person table if needed. I don't think you'd really be able to keep it within one table while exploring multiple relationships unless you're storing a list of ids that is interpreted outside of sql. Also a relationship table would allow exploring other types of relationships such as exes, love interests, coworkers, family, friends, etc
Yeah it'd be a person table, and the relationship table indicating the ids of shipped couples. Do you think there'd need to be a status in the relationship table so we can tombstone exes? Or maybe started and ended date columns for each relationship so we can figure out whose cheating on who. But when about on-off relationships then? How would we model Ross and Rachel?
From there you don't need a rel.status because you're not updating this rel.id entry except for the rel.end. if they started dating again later it would be a whole new entry, and then you could query their entire dating history to see if they keep coming back to the same person, dating around, playing the field, etc. Separately there could be a friendship relationship that is tracked so you could if they ended being friends after a breakup.
Maybe it's supposed to imply that boyfriend is an attribute of the particular girl. Like saying she isn't someone's boyfriend. It's probably a holdover from the original data architecture and nobody ever bothered to modify the table later on in case there's a select somewhere that expects that field to exist.
That structure doesn't handle polyamorous and cheating relationships very well. It should probably have and (select top 1 1 from dbo.relationships r where r.partner_a != GIRLS.id or r.partner_b != GIRLS.id) which would handle also LGBT+ relationships or relationships that are better represented as a graph.
The relationships table should also have enum for relationship type. It might be friends, family, platonic relations etc.
Also might want to check sex_drive to handle ace gals and something to do with kinsey scale not to bother lesbians.
I would reject this pull request. Why is the indenting all over the place? Why is your keyword capitalisation all over the place? WHY YELLOW?!
Edit: the more I look at this the more it pisses me off. Wtf is going on with your kerning? Just random number and placement of spaces. Also, why is the table name in caps? Who does that? Select * is lazy. Do you really need every field about a girl? Really? Worst of all, not a limited request. I sware this is just the kind of thing that would return 30 million rows and brick the database for twenty seconds.
That's (part of) why it should be a separate table to map the relation "Relationship". People can have more than one (polyamory, infidelity), and you could track fields like the start, end, status (e.g. flirting, dating, committed, engaged, married, ended) in there.
kbin.pithyphrase.net
Newest