From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,HTML_MESSAGE, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (minnie.tuhs.org [45.79.103.53]) by inbox.vuxu.org (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 7a0ed8ac for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 17:07:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id E90799BFD4; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 03:07:11 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BE6B9BD9B; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 03:06:45 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ccc.com header.i=@ccc.com header.b="TzJN82QQ"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id C73709BD9B; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 03:06:41 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-wr1-f44.google.com (mail-wr1-f44.google.com [209.85.221.44]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DFAD69BD84 for ; Fri, 28 Jun 2019 03:06:40 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-wr1-f44.google.com with SMTP id n4so3381321wrw.13 for ; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 10:06:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ccc.com; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=pGUa5h8UrLsDQNEiOrkqoqgu2gSZmd5ZnwkYD8Jb0lk=; b=TzJN82QQAuwVkfgIOP0eRefJM6cTNYzLdzI0/Fvv+bVRrN3ikytX1S2/soi9pBKXpP Pe+WNa9C9orEv9GI7KDMzyaaEdfE1T5TYsPcAydX7C2nZLrnrCmABNFdH8l+bwwdmHEF ygQiD8GWCZPaCaV+SjNgNXbJ+Zvcyayyu6XFI= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=pGUa5h8UrLsDQNEiOrkqoqgu2gSZmd5ZnwkYD8Jb0lk=; b=NT5Ai+jYJPD9P7UO5koK4yqJ/xbCyPas/gCtks4TGK2Nlz94+dtz/hu0zIdiyOQgMs c1L27nsuN+hfAO13LuChTU3SZ2SY4ChXLa/yoH5yyJvG9grlcoYZc+ZLHHB19bh2RfOH Y50UJ2SaYj8TybMux1k5Os1hsSXucukaTJb+EdZ8nxnMZmbsYg3OE5Wi7MRo+cqmfez7 3ivlUy50g1gS2GzMNmhaiyCzBYzZE70HBeBC+KEqtt/X6LmmGf5/OB2oRWDAStVLvPY8 xxu35ZEbPXLN8W1+XcEf8OSscHQEMhH74wHFwfbdMlXsBOb57i+ofNIxmTLXwUQoOCzP LkDg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVMcL19QszFdvDLqmk9brnvdmDcGc532yRgiRiZRfSO22SIIrLR 1eLiPXextXwhNQwWJx2hTCAMPMDs162m4eYJ2de5CQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzzzhhBK+/AFOEarTD39eGutcRH1bxLqWnvb0CuJU6BnpgZepYw8v7KyIJn5hz1sOs6uEh3K0SBijKFHBVeEEY= X-Received: by 2002:a5d:5189:: with SMTP id k9mr4305923wrv.45.1561655199037; Thu, 27 Jun 2019 10:06:39 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <8D0B5B0D-9956-47D7-8D36-1729BB1E1DA9@eschatologist.net> <5df8c6f6-2768-4bfb-9c47-3345098078a7@PU1APC01FT048.eop-APC01.prod.protection.outlook.com> <20190625000630.GA7655@mcvoy.com> <20190625003120.GA28608@mit.edu> <20190625004523.GB7655@mcvoy.com> <20190625005528.GA11929@wopr> <20190625041806.GL7655@mcvoy.com> <20190626231926.EF38A156E40C@mail.bitblocks.com> <5db5af7f-d11b-2d87-edd9-fa5aae855fb5@neophilic.com> In-Reply-To: <5db5af7f-d11b-2d87-edd9-fa5aae855fb5@neophilic.com> From: Clem Cole Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2019 13:06:12 -0400 Message-ID: To: tuhs@eric.allman.name Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000668bf3058c512ff2" Subject: Re: [TUHS] Craft vs Research (Re: CMU Mach sources? X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org" Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --000000000000668bf3058c512ff2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 9:12 PM wrote: > I think Larry is right, but also wrong. I think I can speak from > experience. > +1 > > The goal of research is not to produce consumer-ready code, but to > explore ideas. Nasty things sometimes happen in that environment. > > But that doesn't mean that code doesn't have to work. And BTW, Mach is an example of something that did work. And it worked "good enough" -- I think Ted's comments follow exactly these ideas. > My introduction to coding on a research project was INGRES, at the time > the competitor to System R (now DB/2, better known as "anything SQL") > from IBM Research. By the very nature of the problem, the main complaint > was that "Relational Databases Cannot Work" --- so proving that they could was > a major part of the research agenda. > > At one point (pre-commercial) INGRES stored the telecom wiring diagram of > New York City. It wasn't always a pleasant experience, but we learned a > lot, mostly happy, most of the time. A lot of our motivationwas because > real people were using our code to do real work. Had we hung them out in > the wind to dry, we wouldn't have gotten that feedback, and frankly I > think RDBMS wouldn't have progressed so far and so fast. > > But when I left INGRES I talked with Mike Stonebraker, who asked me > where I thought the project should be going. At that point I thought it > was clear that the research objectives had been satisfied, and there was the > beginnings of a commercial company to move it forward, so I advised that > the old code base (which at that point I had written or > substantially modified well over 50%) should be abandoned. Do a new system > from scratch, in any language, (and I quote) "even in LISP if that's the > right decision." Unfortunately the first version of Postgres > was written in LISP --- my breed of humor was apparently unappreciated at > that time. But from a research perspective the goal was no longer to produce > something that actually worked in the real world, but to explore new > ideas, including bad ones. I wasn't involved with Postgres personally, > but I think Larry's analysis was essentially correct as I know it. > > I was extraordinarily lucky to have ended up at Berkeley in the mid-70s when > UNIX was just becoming a "thing", and I can assure you that while there > were a lot of people who just wanted to get their degrees, there was also > a large cadre wanting to produce good stuff that could make peoples' > lives better. > Well said thanks, Clem --000000000000668bf3058c512ff2 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Wed, Jun 26, 2019 at 9:12= PM <tuhs@eric.allman.name&= gt; wrote:
I thi= nk Larry is right, but also wrong.=C2=A0 I think I can speak from
experience.
+1=C2=A0
= =C2=A0

The goal of research is not to produce consumer-ready code, but to
explore ideas.=C2=A0 Nasty things sometimes happen in that environment.

But that doesn't mean that code doesn't have to work.=C2=A0
And BTW, Mach is an example of something that did work.=C2=A0 = And it worked "good enough" -- I think Ted's comments follow = exactly these ideas.


=C2=A0
My introduction=C2=A0to coding on a research project was INGRES, at the time the competitor= to System R (now DB/2, better known as "anything SQL") fr= om IBM Research.=C2=A0 By the very nature of the problem, the ma= in complaint was that "Relational Databases Cannot Work&quo= t; --- so proving that they could was a major part of the resear= ch agenda.

At one point (pre-commercial) INGRES stored the telecom wiring diagram = of New York City.=C2=A0 It wasn't always a pleasant experience, = but we learned a lot, mostly happy, most of the time.=C2=A0 A lo= t of our motivationwas because real people were using our code to do real w= ork.=C2=A0 Had we hung them out in the wind to dry, we wouldn= 9;t have gotten that feedback, and frankly I think RDBMS wouldn&= #39;t have progressed so far and so fast.

But when I left INGRES I talked with Mike Stonebraker, who asked me
where I thought the project should be going.=C2=A0 At that point I thought = it
was clear that the research objectives had been satisfied, and there was the beginnings of a commercial company to move it forward, so I ad= vised that the old code base (which at that point I had written = or
substantially modified well over 50%) should be abandoned.=C2=A0 Do a new system from scratch, in any language, (and I quote) "even in= LISP if that's the right decision."=C2=A0 Unfortunatel= y the first version of Postgres
was written in LISP --- my breed of humor was apparently unappreciated = at that time.=C2=A0 But from a research perspective the goal was no = longer to produce something that actually worked in the real wor= ld, but to explore new ideas, including bad ones.=C2=A0 I wasn&#= 39;t involved with Postgres personally, but I think Larry's = analysis was essentially correct as I know it.

I was extraordinarily lucky to have ended up at Berkeley in the mid-70s= when UNIX was just becoming a "thing", and I can assure y= ou that while there were a lot of people who just wanted to get = their degrees, there was also a large cadre wanting to produce g= ood stuff that could make peoples' lives better.
Well said thanks,
Clem=C2=A0
--000000000000668bf3058c512ff2--