News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:I was wrong about spreadsheets (2017) by mirimir on Friday July 12, 2019 @12:58AM (#20418305)
On the same hardware, with the same table, Excel in Windows 7 does a cross-tab faster than MySQL in Ubuntu does. Indeed, MySQL chokes if there are more than a few hundred columns, but Excel just keeps going. And it uses all CPU cores.

Edit: In case anyone is wondering why I did that, I wanted a simple visualization of ping-location results for thousands of IPv4 from several hundred ping-probe locations. So that meant aggregating (getting minimum rtt for) millions of observations, and displaying min(rtt) in a IPv4 by probe location cross-tab. MySQL did a great job at the aggregation, but choked (as in, errored out) with several hundred numeric columns. Even if I converted them all to SMALLINT.

Re:I was wrong about spreadsheets (2017) by kyllo on Friday July 12, 2019 @01:19AM (#20418408)
The other thing people don't realize about Excel is that it has a compressed, in-memory, columnstore analytics database built into it. It was called Power Pivot then Power Query, not sure if it changed names again, but it's actually a SQL Server Analysis Services Tabular Model, the same thing that's in Power BI as well. It's going to perform much better than a row-oriented RDBMS at aggregating columns because that's all it was designed to do.
Re:I was wrong about spreadsheets (2017) by d__k on Friday July 12, 2019 @03:16AM (#20418891)
It was a separate data processing engine within Excel developed by another team (SQL server) for the purposes of self service BI (Power Pivot/Query). Most probably, this engine is not used for normal (traditional) calculations.
Re:I was wrong about spreadsheets (2017) by kyllo on Friday July 12, 2019 @06:50AM (#20419683)
You mean if you create the pivot table from data in a sheet? It's not needed for that because you'll run out of memory trying to fit any more than about a couple million rows in a sheet first. Meanwhile you can easily load 10s and possibly 100s of millions of rows into Power Query.
Re:I was wrong about spreadsheets (2017) by MooMooMilkParty on Friday July 12, 2019 @01:13AM (#20418380)
You're blowing my mind here a little bit. I don't use MySQL but do use Excel and the R/Python data science stacks quite a bit. I regularly open data with tens or even hundreds of thousands of columns in the latter by using lazy computations. Is this not the case with database approaches? What kind of hardware are we talking? Presumably Excel has to load everything into memory at once since it's immediately viewable, right?
Re:I was wrong about spreadsheets (2017) by mirimir on Friday July 12, 2019 @02:00AM (#20418598)
In MySQL, maximum row size for non-text columns is 65,535 bytes. MySQL is limited to 4096 columns per table, and 1017 columns per table if the InnoDB engine is being used.

Excel's limits are 16384 columns and 1048576 rows.

I'm talking wimpy hardware here, I admit. Basically, VirtualBox VMs on a quad-core i5 box with SSD and 8GB RAM. With the VM having three cores and 6GB RAM. But it was the same wimpy hardware for Windows 7 and Ubuntu.

Re:I was wrong about spreadsheets (2017) by hef19898 on Friday July 12, 2019 @03:06AM (#20418853)
Oh, the day Excel got rid of the 64k line limit! Was a very sweet day!
Re:I was wrong about spreadsheets (2017) by michaelper22 on Friday July 12, 2019 @01:21PM (#20422419)
Notwithstanding the row length and column count limits, did you also give MySQL more memory? Setting InnoDB buffer pool size to 3 or 4 GB might help; its default is about 134 MB.
Re:I was wrong about spreadsheets (2017) by mirimir on Friday July 12, 2019 @07:55PM (#20425580)
I think so, but don't remember for sure.
Re:I was wrong about spreadsheets (2017) by sheetjs on Friday July 12, 2019 @01:18AM (#20418406)
> Presumably Excel has to load everything into memory at once since it's immediately viewable, right?

Depends on the file format. An XLS or XLSB file can contain special markers for where each logical row starts, so it can randomly access rows; Both also can persist "calculation chains, which are a simplified dependency graph. The binary formats also store formulae in a parsed representation allowing easy scans to see what cells have to be inspected if a file needs to be recalculated.

Re:I was wrong about spreadsheets (2017) by MooMooMilkParty on Friday July 12, 2019 @01:32AM (#20418465)
Aha! As far as persisting calculations, this makes sense. I guess in my head I was thinking "pure" data where everything opened was precomputed. Forgive my ignorance about database solutions, but do they not implement something similar?

But now you've got me thinking, it would be nice if libraries like Dask could allow for flagging of symbolic operations like this to be written to disk for quickly saving metadata where intermediate steps don't explicitly need to be saved.

Re:I was wrong about spreadsheets (2017) by zaarn on Friday July 12, 2019 @03:20AM (#20418901)
Might be worth a try to look into Postgres. In case of the column problem, PG has a limit of 8 Kilobytes for Column Width (instead of a count of columns). You can circumvent some of the limits by using arrays, types, json or hstore. It also has pl/Python which lets you code up queries containing python fragments for data processing.
Re:I was wrong about spreadsheets (2017) by keyle on Friday July 12, 2019 @01:33AM (#20418472)
Meanwhile <side rant> open any document in Photoshop with a few layers and effects and the computer grinds to a halt, no matter the specs, no matter the year, through the ages. New hardware comes out? Booya, new Photoshop XYZ -> let's put your fancy hardware on its knees, begging for air.
Re:I was wrong about spreadsheets (2017) by coldtea on Friday July 12, 2019 @04:34AM (#20419205)
>Meanwhile <side rant> open any document in Photoshop with a few layers and effects and the computer grinds to a halt, no matter the specs, no matter the year, through the ages.

Hasn't been my experience ever. Photoshop is one of the speediest image manipulation programs out there...

Re:I was wrong about spreadsheets (2017) by piyush_soni on Friday July 12, 2019 @05:11AM (#20419344)
I'd agree, at least when compared to GIMP. It's also like 100 times more intuitive to use Photoshop than GIMP for a beginner.
Re:I was wrong about spreadsheets (2017) by JohnJamesRambo on Friday July 12, 2019 @02:07AM (#20418626)
while paying a monthly fee...
Re:I was wrong about spreadsheets (2017) by pidg on Friday July 12, 2019 @02:58AM (#20418822)
The monthly fee for Photoshop is around 1/100th of the old retail price. That works out at about 8 years of use before you have to 'buy' the software again. Seems fair to me.

And for those who don't like paying for Photoshop - which, given it's an astonishingly powerful piece of software, probably means "people who don't actually need Photoshop" - there's always cheap or free alternatives that provide about half the functionality.

Re:I was wrong about spreadsheets (2017) by coldtea on Friday July 12, 2019 @04:37AM (#20419217)
>The monthly fee for Photoshop is around 1/100th of the old retail price. That works out at about 8 years of use before you have to 'buy' the software again. Seems fair to me.

That's because you only think of yourself. Creatives are one of the most struggling professions, and can have widely different returns per year, and salaries in different parts of the world can be much lower.

People who could afford to buy Photoshop at some point (perhaps even a used copy), later down the road might not be able to pay the subscription for a few months, but in the new scheme they lose access to the program altogether.

8 years? There are creatives that use 10 and 20 year old versions of Photoshop on Windows.

Re:I was wrong about spreadsheets (2017) by notyourday on Friday July 12, 2019 @08:18AM (#20420107)
You pay per year. $120 gets you access to the photo bundle for one year. That's 30x cups of Starbucks drip coffee a year. Creative people who are 'struggling' blow more than that a month on weed, beer, coffee or Tinder. We all make choices that show what we prioritize.

Anyway, the subscription model for this kind of software works really well. Software keeps becoming better and so far Photoshop has been running circles around the limpy thing known as Gimp

P.S. I just got hit with the next year charge. I was annoyed so I tried installing CS 6. It's OK. It still beats Gimp but I would rather not drink coffee or smoke weed for a month to have money to pay for the yearly subscription for the photo bundle.

P.P.S. And if you are really really really struggling "creative" you are probably young and either go to school or have a friend that goes to school which can get you it under the EDU discount, which is peanuts.

Re:I was wrong about spreadsheets (2017) by mirimir on Friday July 12, 2019 @08:25PM (#20425733)
I see many versions of Adobe Photoshop CC on The Pirate Bay, versions 2017-2019. At least one on them must work.
Re:I was wrong about spreadsheets (2017) by Grumbledour on Friday July 12, 2019 @05:04AM (#20419322)
> And for those who don't like paying for Photoshop - which, given it's an astonishingly powerful piece of software, probably means "people who don't actually need Photoshop" - there's always cheap or free alternatives that provide about half the functionality.

Now? Absolutely! 20 years ago this was much harder. Adobe used to dominate the market so that you used Photoshop even if you often didn't really need all its complexity. But these days, there is so much competition that you can probably find something that works well enough. I would assume that hurts their bottom line, but as a consumer, I am happy.

Re:I was wrong about spreadsheets (2017) by TeMPOraL on Friday July 12, 2019 @06:08AM (#20419521)
> Adobe used to dominate the market so that you used Photoshop even if you often didn't really need all its complexity.

Still does. Part of the reason is that in the past, they turned a blind eye on people pirating Photoshop. Every kid with even passing interest in graphics or photography got themselves a bootleg copy of Adobe tools to work on; it was an easy guess what they'll be using later, as adult professionals.

Re:I was wrong about spreadsheets (2017) by craftinator on Friday July 12, 2019 @02:31AM (#20418728)
Haven't noticed this problem with GIMP on my Thinkpad X100e.
Re:I was wrong about spreadsheets (2017) by michaelcampbell on Friday July 12, 2019 @05:31AM (#20419414)
I wonder how something like python/pandas would do on that.