antipaucity

fighting the lack of good ideas

volvo moving towards waze-like functionality

Shared a TechCrunch story recently in a G+ group I’m in on Volvo debuting a new service to upload live traffic data from its vehicles to be sent to other Volvos so they can avoid problem areas.

Or…a self-built and -hosted Waze.

You may recall that I wrote some about these kinds of things starting back in 2010.

Why, exactly, Volvo thinks it not only should do this, but expects its customers to want the manufacturer to be doing this is something I don’t understand right now.

Sure, it’s an interesting technical challenge – but it’s not exactly novel…except in the sense of the vehicle doing this for you instead of you doing it via some mobile app or other.

If this is something drivers must opt-in to use, that’s OK. If you can opt-out, it’s OK, too.

But if it’s not optional – this is a major privacy concern: one I’m sure many people would do without even stopping to take a breath, but a major privacy concern nonetheless.

splunk oddity #17681 – stats vs table

It’s fairly common to want to table the data you’ve found in a search in Splunk – heck, if you’re not prettying the data up somewhy, why are you bothering with the tool?

But I digress.

There are two (at least) ways of making a table – you can use the |table <field(s)> syntax, or you can use |stats <some function> <field(s)> approach.

Interestingly, in my testing in both test and production environments, using the |stats... approach is consistently 10-15% faster than the |table... option.

Why? I don’t know. He’s on third. And I don’t give a darn!

This is another case of technical intricacies mattering … but I don’t know what is going on under the hood that makes the apparently-more-complex option run faster than the apparently-simler option.

Maybe someday someone in Splunk engineering will be able to enlighten me to that.

This reminds me a bit of an optimization I was able to help a friend with upwards of 12 years ago – they had queries running in MySQL that were taking forever to complete (and by “forever”, I mean they were running sometimes 4-5 times a long as the interval between running them (they ran every 5 mintues, but could take 20+ minutes to finish!)).

What I found, at least back in the dark days of MySQL 3.x was that using IN(...) was loads faster than using OR statements.

So a query that had a clause WHERE name IN("bob","sarah","mike","terry","sue") would run anywhere from 20-90% quicker than the logically-equivalent WHERE name="bob" OR name="sarah" OR name="mike" OR name="terry" OR name="sue" (given a large enough dataset overwhich it was running … on small [enough] tables (say up to a couplefew thousand records), the OR version would run equally, or occasionally faster).

In their case, by switching to the IN(...) form, queries went from taking 20+ minutes to finishing in ~20 seconds!

Bonus tidbit:

It is well-known in Splunkland that using dedup is an “expensive” operation. Want a clever way around it (that is much faster)? Instead of doing something like index=myndx | fields ip host | dedup host, run index=myndx | fields ip host | stats count by host | fields -count. The |stats .. |fields -count trick seems to run anywhere from 15-30% faster than dedup.

the death of the “car analogy”

With the rise of the “sharing economy”, and companies like Lyft proudly declaring 250,000 people ditched cars in favor of ride-sharing, what will be the fate of the venerable “car analogy“?

Heck, what was the common analogy before cars?

How will language and colloquial usage change with the [eventual] death of the car as the most common means of transportation (presuming, of course, it actually will die)?

I wonder if the death of the car will prove to be, in the historical view, something like the loss of the shared social experience that TV used to be.

what if

you blogged as often as you tweeted, facebooked, linkedinned, instagrammed, plogged, pinterested, google plussed, mastodonned, etc?

For many of us, that would be 4, 10, 20, 100, or even more blog posts per day.

Wonder how differently we would view/utilize social media if we took that approach?

Just a thought.

you can make anything online – even grave markers

Knock yourself out.

the jetsons used cash

They had flying cars. That would fold-up into a briefcase.

They had magic bubbles that’d pop out from their fingers to shroud themselves on their floaty-seats that delivered them to school or the mall.

But they used cash. Really? With all the crazy futuristic stuff they tried to wedge into that program, the creators thought we’d still be using cash in a flying-car future?

Maybe they were onto something. Cash does have the value of being tangible, and not being tracked.

it’s not a better apple tv

But the HomePod is an interesting take on my suggestion of making the Apple TV better.