Bad: "Do you think it;s a good idea?"
Fix: You might ask them to show you how they currently do their job. Talk about which parts they love and hate. Ask which other tools and
processes they tried before settling on this one. Are they actively searching
for a replacement? If so, what’s the sticking point? If not, why not? Where
are they losing money with their current tools? Is there a budget for better
| import { createHash } from "crypto"; | |
| import fs from "fs"; | |
| import fsp from "fs/promises"; | |
| import path from "path"; | |
| import https from "https"; | |
| import { PassThrough } from "stream"; | |
| import type { Readable } from "stream"; | |
| import type { LoaderFunction } from "remix"; | |
| import sharp from "sharp"; | |
| import type { Request as NodeRequest } from "@remix-run/node"; |
| export const CACHE_STALE_AT_HEADER = 'x-edge-cache-stale-at'; | |
| export const CACHE_STATUS_HEADER = 'x-edge-cache-status'; | |
| export const CACHE_CONTROL_HEADER = 'Cache-Control'; | |
| export const CLIENT_CACHE_CONTROL_HEADER = 'x-client-cache-control'; | |
| export const ORIGIN_CACHE_CONTROL_HEADER = 'x-edge-origin-cache-control'; | |
| enum CacheStatus { | |
| HIT = 'HIT', | |
| MISS = 'MISS', | |
| REVALIDATING = 'REVALIDATING', |
| sub vcl_recv { | |
| #FASTLY recv | |
| # We don't do other methods | |
| if (req.method != "GET") { | |
| return(error); | |
| } | |
| # Handle IPv4 or IPv6 provided in url path (nothing extraneous allowed, perform basic matching) | |
| if (req.url.path ~ "^/([a-f0-9:.]+)$") { | |
| set client.geo.ip_override = re.group.1; |
Fauna doesn't yet provide expiration/TTL for ABAC tokens, so we need to implement it ourselves.
3 javascript functions, each of which can be imported into your project or run from the command-line
using node path/to/script.js arg1 arg2 ... argN:
deploy-schema.js: a javascript function for creating supporting collections and indexes in your Fauna database.
I was at Amazon for about six and a half years, and now I've been at Google for that long. One thing that struck me immediately about the two companies -- an impression that has been reinforced almost daily -- is that Amazon does everything wrong, and Google does everything right. Sure, it's a sweeping generalization, but a surprisingly accurate one. It's pretty crazy. There are probably a hundred or even two hundred different ways you can compare the two companies, and Google is superior in all but three of them, if I recall correctly. I actually did a spreadsheet at one point but Legal wouldn't let me show it to anyone, even though recruiting loved it.
I mean, just to give you a very brief taste: Amazon's recruiting process is fundamentally flawed by having teams hire for themselves, so their hiring bar is incredibly inconsistent across teams, despite various efforts they've made to level it out. And their operations are a mess; they don't real