PugJr

Yes. I forgot what google was, fortunately my memories came back to me.

I do not fully understand what it means. I know it means that everyone has the ability to read, write, and execute, but what does everyone mean? Do you have to be logged into the linux computer to be considered a someone? Lets say for instance I have file: /var/www/777.php The 777.php file permission is set to 777. Can everyone modify that file? So even you the casual browser, could? Or must you still be logged into the linux computer? Then lets have another example where its not on the internet. Lets say I have /var/777/777.php . Now that files permission is also set to 777 but it can't be viewed unlike /var/www/777.php which can be by domainname/777.php . Are both/neither/one of them safe from outside modification? Thanks.

I was using IE8, but after it kept crashing and proved to be no better than IE7, I reverted. (Personal experince.) So the following things that have been compromised do not normally come with Apache2, correct? (Excuse my ignorance. :-\)

Page won't load in IE7. Someone got lazy on their browser support!

(I'm jumping on the bandwagon )

D.shankar, if he wanted to pay for something, he would have went to the free-lance section.

Ignace, with all that information you're wanting, are you sure you aren't apart of the Belgium Secret Police Force?

MySQL: Showing rows 0 - 0 (1 total, Query took 0.0276 sec) SELECT * FROM `test2` WHERE `id` =56555 LIMIT 0 , 30 0.02 seconds...For that? Really? This is the table settings: Now please do tell me if there is something wrong with my settings, but thats a pretty basic table. ID that auto-increments and a random number per row. I do realize that its KEY and not INDEX, but with auto increment it has to be. My database has the same values as the one above (Well, except the index is assumed, so I only have a number column, and my number column is 4 bytes as well, random like I did for MySQL. My DB only has 200k rows VS MySQL with 900k, but I was getting bored of waiting for the DB to fill up to 800k. It does not matter the size in a proper database. I could have a million rows and still have the same result and if you don't believe me, I'll go through with it.) MySQL - 13333 writes a second. My DB - 1250 writes a second. (I know its not very good) 1 query below... MySQL - 0.02 My DB - 0.0004 Okay, so I'll be honest. I rigged it here. The time MySQL called for the row, it wasn't cached. But what happens once you run out of RAM? Game over. Heres the cached version with 1 query below: MySQL - 0.0002 My DB - 0.0004 Okay, so fine, MySQL is faster, if it has RAM. I spent about 3 days working on my DB and its no where near maximum optimization. I'm sure people who made MySQL have gone over it and over again making sure its at the fastest it can be. My whole point here isn't that my DB is good or anything along those lines, but that if mine is faster than MySQL (Assuming no RAM, which would happen if you had a 100million row table for instance), MySQL can't be very good. Now it might raise the question why its so popular, and that can be answered by that its easy. Very, very, easy. Anyways, I'm not even sure if the fastest database you want is in PHP or not, but if you can choose any language, PHP is defintely not your best choice. This language is intended for ease, not speed.

What is an undefined data type? An undefined data type is a data without a precise data amount. Varchar, text, etc. Of course I'm talking about on disk. I didn't even know people put databases on RAM. (Guess I'm more ignorant than I thought, but facts are facts even if I am unaware of this one.) Choosing an ordering beforehand is logical. Perhaps my vocabulary is confused as I thought that was pretty much what an index is. I suppose then why wouldn't MySQL allow an order beforehand option? (I just googled it and didn't find anything.) You say "Duh, yes. Being able to access information quickly has the tradeoff that it takes up more space. What did you expect?" and then say "Besides, hard disks are really cheap, so the disk space consumption is the least of your worries.". So why doesn't MySQL have a defined data type of greater than 255 when harddisk space is more than enough for most databases. Varchar and other undefined datatypes can bring your database speed to a snail for a little price of a bit more harddisk space. In my previous post I stated a 3D index that loaded at .3 seconds with 12 million rows. That doesn't even have undefined datatype. Here, I'll add one though. (Okay, my computer got faster or something, because the .3 seconds was based on from a couple weeks ago and I did not recently check, this is what the results are as of now:) Without Varchar(5) and Char(5): .13 seconds With Varchar(5): .18 seconds With Char(5): .13 seconds (Shocker!!!) My point being is that text and varchar are worthless as they can't be properly indexed (On harddisk). They might as well not exist in MySQL if you want a proper DB. So that limits you to /only/ Char which is limited to 255. Unless you scoff at an additional .05 seconds per request...You could argue "Well jeez, that .05 seconds isn't free! It costs a massive 60 MB!!!". Or you might think I'm just a cheat liar who is making numbers up. Why don't you try it and tell me your results since clearly I have no clue at all what I'm talking about? (Make sure the database is real big to see the difference. Bigger the database row count, the bigger the difference in speed.) Indexes don't require data. Heres an example. AAA BBB CCC DDD EFD SDF ABC That right there is indexed. All 21 characters (Pretend the spaces between them don't exist as its for the purpose of display so really its: AAABBBCCC...). What is row 0? It is 0 characters to the right and 3 characters long. AAA. What is row 5? It is (row id) * (length) which is 5 * 3 so 15 characters to the right and 3 characters long. which gives me 'SDF'. That right there is index without size and doing it that way is considerably faster than MYSQL ever did for me. If a DB was properly indexed like that, no matter how big the table is, 100 million or 1, it will keep giving me consistent results of very small query time. (Until the harddisk breaks) MySQL goes up and up and up as more rows are added. What do you mean by "The power of a DBMS is specifically that it has some metadata that makes it able to figure out how to get the information as fast as possible. If you want to consume the minimal amount of space then store it in a flat file with one row per line and no metadata."? Clearly MySQLs DBMS is awful if it takes .13 seconds to query something OR I just have no clue what the heck I'm doing with MySQL (Which sure could be it.). If something is properly indexed, it shouldn't take long at all and .13 seconds is a very, very, long time to query a row. Also MySQL is a RAM hog but MySQL gives a longer life to harddisks (Or I would hope so, I can't actually prove any of that but it makes sense.). Currently my server is using about 1GB of ram. Thankfully I had a spare 512 MB RAM stick laying around. (Total to 1.5GB of RAM). Ultimately the point is, like the topic said, fastest database for search is the question, and I can use my own DB (Which has flaws to it as well), you use MySQL, and we both have a huge database (Atleast 10 million or lets make it 1 billion...) and we then query some arbitrary ID. I would not be shocked at all if mine wins every time. (Even if your computer is faster which it surely is.). My DB is surely not the fastest in the world (Or even close), but its faster than MySQL. As well, with 1 billion rows, you would need 4 bytes per ID, which means MYSQL database would be 4 GBs greater than mine just in index. But like I said previously, maybe I have no clue about how to work a MySQL DB (But I wonder how many do then...).

Mchl, databases decide how smart the adminstrators are going to be. If you have a database where everything is strict and logical, and then you have the database that has bogus columns (Undefined), you'd expect more difficulties with the adminstrator in the latter (Which happens to be MySQL). Why in the world does MySQL have an undefined data type? How can you properly index that? You can't. To anyone who thinks you can I will explain how you can't: You have an undefined character row. AAA BBBB CCCC Now, what can I do to assume where row id 2 is? You simply can't. If row was defined though... AAA(Blank)(Blank) BBBB(Blank) CCCCC I know it starts exactly 10 characters from the left but this consumes 5 bytes per row, as the first example only consumed a total of 12 characters vs the 15. As well there are character limits for certain datatypes that you need. Take for example Char. Char limits to 255. Okay, well what happens if I want more than 255 characters? I've looked into text/varchar type, but that is undefined. Undefined doesn't work. Although I'm not an expert in MySQL but even still I have wasted a bit of time trying to figure things out, such as I couldn't find out how to index without consuming data. Theres the 'index' button, but it consumes data (I did index by id). So perhaps MySQL is really great, but if it can do all I want it to, why does it have to be so confusing and give non-logical options? (Stated previously). I do have to give it to MySQL to being newbie friendly. A 5 year old could make a database in MySQL. It is very effective when consuming alot of RAM, such as being able to 3D index a 12 million row table, and load rows as fast as .3 seconds but this isn't perfect and as the OP wants 'fastest database for search', MySQL surely doesn't win.

I defintely wouldn't use MySQL. I was so fed up with it that I just made a generic one myself to suit my needs. MySQL for whatever reason doesn't index properly. You have 10 million rows. It takes longer to get 1 from that than a table of 10. I did not use any undefined data types so whatever, done with it. Also 1 dimensional indexs cost data. 1D indexs should not cost any data. I haven't tried any other DBs though.

The link is right here, but its real, real, long, so I have to fit it in a tinyurl. http://tinyurl.com/y8ufsnp (P.S. April fools. )

Either luck can not exist in the form of rolling a dice or computers are truly random. Here I will explain: You throw a dice. It lands on a number. No! Thats not luck as someone could know the number before its even generated by looking at the physics of it. How hard was it thrown? Whats the gravity? Etc. etc. etc. OR You throw a dice. You do not care about what determines it to land on the number but accept it as random. Now the same exact thing can be applied to a computer. I process some code. I check how long it took to process the code. I use the 10th (Or some number to the right that can be 0-9 consistently random) digit to the right of the decimal. Now then, what determines how long it takes to process the code? Same thing (Just in a different form) as rolling a dice. Now how is this any farther from rolling a dice? Why is this considered not to be random? Actually, I believe that would be /more/ random than a dice as with our current knowledge, it wouldn't surprise me if we could figure out what number it will land on if we have all the variables needed (the dice). How do you determine it with the computer example I've given? Just one of those things I cant stand. Computers can randomize. (Unless there is something wrong in what I'm expressing.) As in reality, nothing is truly random, as everything must have to be predetermined by something to obtain that. You can not find anything completely random without any possiblity of being able to determine it prior.

Opium/Opiate. (You can keep the 20$ )

Alexa is not reliable and also how reliable are the claims of those with how much traffic they get? Lets say Web Owner A says: Hey, I get 500 people online at one time! Web Owner B says: Hey, I get 500 people online at one time! Owner B is based on always have 500 people online whereas Owner A bases it on one time. Such that you could say: PHPFreaks.com gets 3199 people online at one time! Even though its a total distortation of the truth, you can see what I mean.

Over my years of experince with keyboards, andlazor/ball/optical mice MS and Logitech do the same for keyboard(Quality), but not true with mice. Do NOT use a microsoft mice. I've been regretting it. All logitech mice I've used never lose control and put the mouse to the top-right of the screen but MS mice seem to have that problem. Do realize I buy cheap mice/keyboards. I never use wireless mice/keyboard as I don't see whats the benefit and you have to replace the batteries.

Whats so critical that you must have 5.3 over 5.2?

If his username gave you the idea that he is from Poland, think again. Tom Kazansky is the hero wraith from Starcraft.

Heh, thats probably my favorite considering how many times I've accidently done an infinite repeat.

The better browser is the browser that is increasing popularity. Such that in this order one declined while the next increased in popularity. Netscape Navigator, IE, and now FF. Look at any browser share statistics of the past 15 years and look at what they say. Wiki says Netscape reached 90%, IE reached 95%, and now FF is gonna reach some high number until the next browser makes that one obsolete. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_browser IE was better than Netscape navigator. Your fault for not using it since Win95. You could also use my logic and say its my fault for using IE instead of FF when there is evidence FF is better. But I'm stubborn just like you were.

1. The per capita of intelligence related to computers in each user relative to what there is to know has significantly went down from 25 years ago. (Take a look at Mac. 5% or so of the computer population use macs. I wouldn't be shocked at all if 95% of them were very limited on computer knowledge.) 2. My friend got his restrictied user virus. No. He wasn't on IE. He was on the 'indestructible' FF. Thankfully, he just deleted the account (And the virus went with it) and made a new one. The problem is not the browser, its Flash/Java. There are so many internet viruses made due to those. 3. Also, the security flaws is not within IE or FF, but ignorant users who go on the internet logged into an adminstrator/root are always proned to be virused no matter what the browser. 4. IE does crash once a day or so, but this isn't to say FF never crashes.

It may be possible that I accidently I.P. blocked myself. I have used the command "sudo iptables -L" to list the IPs that are blocked, but nothing was. Is there any other area where it would list blocked I.P.s?

I've been hosting for a couple months mostly without trouble, but today, out of the blue, my website has stopped responding on the internet. I do own the server computer. What I know: My port is open. I can connect locally and the port/lan i.p. does work. I can not connect to my I.P. (Not LAN I.P.) with the port. What I don't know: If my server is even getting any request at all from the internet I.P./port or if it just isn't responding but can read the request. I'm not sure how I would check this and if any of you would know how, that'd be great as it would probably give me a tip as to why its not working. Using Microsofts "diagnose connection problem" says my I.P. is online, but the server is blocking ports (My internet ports is opened) which would imply that somehow my server installed a firewall (Virus? ) or activated it for some reason. Does Ubuntu have a built in fire-wall? Its strange that this is to only happen now though. If it is a firewall, whats even stranger is that it doesn't block local I.P.s. Edit: I did make sure that ufw is disabled. If there is any other information that you need to determine what the problem is or could possibly be, please do ask.

[ot]Oh great, now instead of just IE and FF, we must also check if Chrome will work or not? [/ot]