←back to thread

174 points Philpax | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.434s | source
Show context
codingwagie ◴[] No.43719845[source]
I just used o3 to design a distributed scheduler that scales to 1M+ sxchedules a day. It was perfect, and did better than two weeks of thought around the best way to build this.
replies(8): >>43719906 #>>43720086 #>>43720092 #>>43721143 #>>43721297 #>>43722293 #>>43723047 #>>43727685 #
csto12 ◴[] No.43719906[source]
You just asked it to design or implement?

If o3 can design it, that means it’s using open source schedulers as reference. Did you think about opening up a few open source projects to see how they were doing things in those two weeks you were designing?

replies(2): >>43720057 #>>43720965 #
codingwagie ◴[] No.43720965[source]
why would I do that kind of research if it can identify the problem I am trying to solve, and spit out the exact solution. also, it was a rough implementation adapted to my exact tech stack
replies(5): >>43721294 #>>43721501 #>>43721779 #>>43721872 #>>43723076 #
margalabargala ◴[] No.43721872[source]
Because as far as you know, the "rough implementation" only works in the happy path and there are really bad edge cases that you won't catch until they bite you, and then you won't even know where to look.

An open source project wouldn't have those issues (someone at least understands all the code, and most edge cases have likely been ironed out) plus then you get maintenance updates for free.

replies(1): >>43721946 #
codingwagie ◴[] No.43721946[source]
ive got ten years at faang in distributed systems, I know a good solution when i see one. and o3 is bang on
replies(3): >>43722022 #>>43722522 #>>43722533 #
1. margalabargala ◴[] No.43722022[source]
If you thought about it for two weeks beforehand and came up with nothing, I have trouble lending much credence to that.
replies(1): >>43723134 #
2. qt31415926 ◴[] No.43723134[source]
the commenter never said they came up with nothing, they said o3 came up with something better.