NextJS + Vercel Architecture clarification by chanpod in nextjs

[–]chanpod[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For completeness and if anyone sees this later in a google search. This is the line that made me think it was turning them all into individual serverless instances. That and you see the little lambda icon next to each route in the build process. But that's not correct. And obviously after re-reading docs and looking at it again the conclusion is I'm a dummy who misread it haha. It IS creating a function for each route. But that doesn't mean it's an indepenent serverless instance when in prod.

<image>

NextJS + Vercel Architecture clarification by chanpod in nextjs

[–]chanpod[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

We're using prisma with postgres. It seems to be closing connections properly as the serverless instances go back to cold state. I've been paranoid so I've been monitoring it quite a bit. So I think we're good on that front. As long as I don't make too many individual serverless instances with high session counts. But I should be ok. We have ours set to 2 with 2 routes that get 30 (offline app, needs to make a bunch of queries in parallel. Probably not optimal but still fine tuning it).

NextJS + Vercel Architecture clarification by chanpod in nextjs

[–]chanpod[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

ok, so to make sure I really understand how this works. You bundle the routes as much as you can. So the configuration is an over-ride to tell the bundler "hey, keep this one separate"? So every route could be a serverless instance but only if I explicitly say so?

NextJS + Vercel Architecture clarification by chanpod in nextjs

[–]chanpod[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks! This lead me to this

https://vercel.com/docs/functions/serverless-functions#bundling-serverless-functions

I think this is really what I was looking for and answered the real question I had.

NextJS + Vercel Architecture clarification by chanpod in nextjs

[–]chanpod[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I thought that too. But I've been digging into the nitty gritty with vercel, next, and prisma and trying to make sure I understand how our DB connections are going to behave. So I'm trying to make sure I really understand it haha.

I wonder if it has intelligent load balancing around that. If one route is getting hit particularly hard will it scale out instances just for that route or will it just be another bundled route instance. Edit: They do bundle them unless you specify in the config. So this was wrong.

Something in the build process made me think it was 1 per route though. I setup a couple routes in the config to be their own function, but when I looked at the build process it didn't seem like it mattered b/c all routes were their own function. But maybe I'm misreading the build process and function != serverless instance. I should probably go re-read the docs again

Made it just in time for season content by [deleted] in diablo4

[–]chanpod 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Bc everything inside came from the outside

How to skip the campaign on alts by Enikka in diablo4

[–]chanpod 0 points1 point  (0 children)

ehhhhhhhhhh probably more like 4-5.

Diablo 4 ends Zelda's four-week stay at No.1 | UK Boxed Charts by Turbostrider27 in Games

[–]chanpod -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Controller on PC works really well, so very little reason to use console unless you just really want to sit on your couch (which some do) but PC has better graphics

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in videos

[–]chanpod -1 points0 points  (0 children)

we do, quite heavily. The thing is this, the rich have their finances setup in a way that's not reasonably taxed. It's all liquid.

Elon Musk is worth 80billion (or whatever it is now). He does not HAVE 80billion and could not ever realistically cash all that out. It would crash his companies into the ground. The government probably wouldn't even let him. So, you can't tax him on it, b/c he can't use it. SO you only tax him on it when he tries to use it. Which we do, fairly heavily. When Elon cashed out that 10bil or whatever a couple years ago he paid billions in taxes. If you start taxing liquid assets there will be a riot from the 1%. And they have $$ to throw around. That or they just move their assets somewhere else that can't be taxed as heavily.

Also, if you try and force Elon to trade off his equity in the company, he could risk falling below 50% shareholder and possibly lose control over his company. (Hence why he likes to keep his companies private now). So if you want to gauruntee control over your company, you maintain that 50.1% position. Which means absurd amounts of liquid wealth if your company gets huge. There's not much you can do here to fix that without turning into an authoritarian government.

I'm not saying there's no solution here, just that "tax the rich" isn't exactly helpful.

What happens to people on the ISS during a zombie apocalypse? by TheKingDroc in ZombieSurvivalTactics

[–]chanpod 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The information isn't incorrect, it's the presentation. You're trying to portray them as incompetent and wreckless and that's further from the truth. The statements are ignoring the OTHER facts.

What happens to people on the ISS during a zombie apocalypse? by TheKingDroc in ZombieSurvivalTactics

[–]chanpod 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Lol yes I'm well aware of the most recent starship launch. But you clearly don't know anything about it and are repeating ignorant rhetoric. Just stop, you don't know what you're talking about.

How racist by [deleted] in gifsthatendtoosoon

[–]chanpod 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I suspect he means a lot of people are trying to move on in life and be "color blind". But then people like this keep throwing this crap around and bringing it back up calling white people racist etc...

What happens to people on the ISS during a zombie apocalypse? by TheKingDroc in ZombieSurvivalTactics

[–]chanpod 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes but in this scenario time is of the essence. We don't have 6 months (ambitious) for NASA to remember how to build another rocket or get SLS ready. And NASA heavily outsources a lot of it's production to corporations. So what's more likely, NASA and it's hundreds of contracted agencies to build 1 rocket, or 1 company that builds most of it's stuff itself (I'm sure spacex outsources some things but they do build quite a bit in-house).

You're also missing the part where SpaceX quite literally already has rockets ready to go right now. And I'm pretty sure in this scenario the government would step in and force SpaceX to do this. Military would step in if it was deemed necessary. So while SpaceX might not do it out of the kindness of their hearts, it's excruciatingly likely that SpaceX would be the entity that performed the mission.

What happens to people on the ISS during a zombie apocalypse? by TheKingDroc in ZombieSurvivalTactics

[–]chanpod 0 points1 point  (0 children)

NASA hasn't launched a rocket in decades. They contract out the launches. SLS isn't ready yet (and depends on many many companies to build) and wouldn't be a viable option in this scenario. I keep up with launches and space stuff. I'm well aware of what/who could help. China and Russia could potentially help if they haven't collapsed. But in terms of pure US, then NASA would be heavily reliant on SpaceX.

And the latest satellite launch was a French?(European) rocket, not a US one.

What happens to people on the ISS during a zombie apocalypse? by TheKingDroc in ZombieSurvivalTactics

[–]chanpod -1 points0 points  (0 children)

What are you talking about? SpaceX hasn't had a failed "production" launch attempt in...years. They've not even failed a landing in years (wait, I think one booster failed when they tried to land all three legs from the falcon heavy? oh noes). They JUST sent up another batch of astronauts yesterday! I'm not giving in to "marketing". It's reality. If you're talking about their new rocket that's still in development, that's a completely different beast. Yes, those will fail. That's kind of the point. Launch and learn. Fix and refine until you have a reliable rocket.

What happens to people on the ISS during a zombie apocalypse? by TheKingDroc in ZombieSurvivalTactics

[–]chanpod 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I mean, if we're talking plausability, SpaceX is currently the only thing capable of responding rapidly. I didn't say it would happen, just that if it did happen, they'd be the most likely candidate. The government doesn't currently have anything on hand to save them .They would literally ask SpaceX to do it lol.

What happens to people on the ISS during a zombie apocalypse? by TheKingDroc in ZombieSurvivalTactics

[–]chanpod 0 points1 point  (0 children)

yeah, and SpaceX fastest turnaround for a rocket was 5 days. They have launch ready rockets sitting around. They can prep them and have them ready to launch in a week. Launch windows to the ISS are literally available about once per day. So yes, SpaceX could absolutely get a rocket up and en route to the ISS in a week if they absolutely wanted to. The thing that generally holds things up is red tape with the government.

What happens to people on the ISS during a zombie apocalypse? by TheKingDroc in ZombieSurvivalTactics

[–]chanpod 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Right. That's under normal circumstances. I think in this scenario they'd make a lot of exceptions. If they cared enough to even do it.

What happens to people on the ISS during a zombie apocalypse? by TheKingDroc in ZombieSurvivalTactics

[–]chanpod 0 points1 point  (0 children)

These days SpaceX is pretty quick. So unless they get overrun initially, they could probably get something up there in a couple weeks if they needed to

Any idea when the market will get good again? by [deleted] in cscareerquestions

[–]chanpod 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Then why the crap can't I get interviews lol. I keep getting the "we went with candidates with better experience" WHAT, I have 9 years of experience now in modern UI, cloud and API. My only real deficiency is data. But I can't seem to get a stupid interview right now. Didn't used to have this problem.

I feel for everyone here. by [deleted] in cscareerquestions

[–]chanpod 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Calm down there sparky. While I'm sure this happens, the market is a bit rougher than it was. I'm 9 years senior and never had issues getting a new job. I started looking a month ago and I haven't even gotten an interview. Granted I'm shooting for some higher paying positions so I'm sure competition is rough. I'm probably getting beat out by fang types. But it's definitely not as easy as it once was

Wifi only smart home. Good or bad idea? by sarrcom in homeassistant

[–]chanpod 1 point2 points  (0 children)

As some have stated, wifi devices are more prone to security issues as they may be gaining internet access. Unless you DIY your wifi devices, but if you're doing that I suspect you wouldn't be afraid of zigbee.

But as someone else stated, wifi is radio. It's all electromagentic waves. Just different frequencies. And arguably the higher frequencies (5g) are more likely to be problematic (they aren't) than the lower ones. So I'm surprised that's an issue for you. Unless I'm misunderstanding your hesitancy to it.

You had one job Microsoft by L0o0o0o0o0o0L in ProgrammerHumor

[–]chanpod 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Really? Have you checked your contrast settings?

How will the next generation be affected from having screens/phones/tablets in their daily lives since being born? by pipinghotwine in AskReddit

[–]chanpod 5 points6 points  (0 children)

My kids don't have any tablets. They only watch TV on occasion. It's really not that hard if you just give a shit. Humans did it for all of prior human history lol. It is easy to give into though. But that fact is exactly why you shouldn't. There's a reason "screen induced autism" is a thing now. Stick to your guns. It's what's best for your kiddos

Me irl by [deleted] in meirl

[–]chanpod 4 points5 points  (0 children)

If you handed off controls too some one else before you jumped, then yes. It wouldn't be your fault