[The following repost of "legacy" yafla content is preparation for the long awaited publishing of part III, which will be published through this medium. To give consistency, I'm reposting Pt I and II in this format]

def. Enterprise

adj. Terminology often used to excuse terribly inefficient software designs, and to justify massive hardware overkills for trivial solutions. e.g. Enterprise solution.

Introduction

Inefficiency is a gluttonous thief. It burglarizes your server rooms at all hours of the day and night, demanding virtually limitless hardware sacrifices to satiate its endless thirst for clock cycles and disk rotations. In return it punishes your users with reduced performance and reduced satisfaction, and devastates your solution's scalability.

This inefficiency, materialized in the form of slow performance, is one of the primary causes of system abandonment. This is particularly troublesome in the SQL Server world where many systems servicing large user bases often run on low cost server boxes that leave little margin for performance waste. Many organizations have tossed out their SQL Server solution running on a $3000 PC because the performance wasn't satisfactory (not achieving so-called 'Enterprise' performance), to replace it with a multi-million dollar mainframe solution, overcoming embarrassing inefficiency with brute force.

Reward

Several years back, in a moment of nerdish bravado, I made a foolish blanket statement that I could reduce the runtime of virtually any element of a non-trivial SQL Server database solution by 95% (thus improving the performance by about 20x), doing so through some rudimentary changes requiring nothing more than some analysis, minor code changes (changing the underlying code, but not the functionality), indexing, and file group changes. To my surprise, and even greater dismay, this number actually proved to be remarkably accurate: From giant multi-hour organization wide reports, to simple security procedures run hundreds of times a minute, the obvious low hanging fruit alone often improved performance by 10x or more. With a little bit of elbow grease it has proven extraordinarily common to improve performance by 20x or more, significantly improving responsiveness and load handling of the respective systems at minimal cost.

The remarkable thing is that these weren't systems implemented by bad developers - many of them were extraordinary developers who implemented a lot of tricks and techniques that I've co-opted and added to my own bag of techniques. Instead there seems to be a dearth of real information on developing for performance in SQL Server, leaving many to guess about the best approach, not to mention that there isn't enough attention paid to performance efficiency in enterprise solutions. Many seem to be under the false impression that gross inefficiency requiring massive clusters to perform trivial tasks merits a capital-E Enterprise designation.

Motivation

In software development there's an oft-referenced vice known as 'premature optimization'. This is the tendency to prematurely focus on code performance while code is still young and awkwardly growing, before the critical performance weaknesses have been identified and measured. The end result of this misguided effort is often convoluted code that is difficult to understand and maintain (for instance code including inline assembly or using specialized system hacks in seldom called edge functions). This is often a mistake of inexperienced programmers that haven't had the perfectionist engineering streak beaten out of them.

Consider also that performance truly isn't a concern for the vast majority of code in most client-side applications - it likely doesn't matter if the code that validates an input box in a Windows Forms application takes 3ms or 70ms to complete. As the processing is decentralized and isn't impacting other users who might be running the application elsewhere on the planet, it is basically making use of 'free' clock cycles available on the client PC, and generally is imperceptible to the user. If one thousand different users were running the application simultaneously, they're running it on a thousand powerful PCs, effectively throwing a massive 'cluster' at the problem. In other words, you can overcome application inefficiency on the client side through massive computational excess and a endless ability to scale-out. Even in cases where there is worthwhile performance issues identified, for example an image processing algorithms that takes several seconds to perform an operation, it's often best to wait until the project nears a release and the code has settled, at which point you can send a commando performance team to profile and then selectively improve the slowest sections of code that will have the most beneficial impact, focusing on the lowest hanging fruit, yielding a bounty of quick wins. (Taking one for the team because there's no I in team, and no cliche unworthy)

Enterprise databases, or any centralized system for that matter, are entirely different beasts - performance is one of the critical elements of these systems, and performance problems are one of the primary reasons why solutions are abandoned or re-architected. Consider that every clock cycle wasted on a shared resource, such as a database server, impacts the performance of the overall system and every other user. In most environments there is a massive asymmetry between the computational capability of client machines, and the computational capability of a shared system, such as a database server. There are usually some fixed financial and technological limits to the amount of hardware that a system can scale to, so your database server running on a lowly Dell two-way server is desperately trying to keep up with the demands of 500 user workstations pounding away at it. Even though Google is clustered on purportedly thousands of machines, they still have to develop efficiently to be able to economically service millions of users in a timely manner.

Thus, while it might seem irrelevant when taken alone that your stored procedure saturates the resource, taking 200ms to return a simple list of values to populate a drop list for Joe User, imagine 100 users all opening that form at the same time putting a shared demand on the database system. The performance impact starts to become significant and adversely affects the usability (and credibility) of the system. This is exacerbated by the fact that simultaneous performance demands aren't merely additive on shared resources, but rather contention and task sharing often means that these issues snowball into much more than the sum of the parts.

Wisdom

You should consider the performance of your database from day one with every table you add, every index you create, every trigger you concoct, and every relationship you define. While the misguided will argue that this amounts to premature optimization (as Ralph Waldo Emerson observed, a foolish consistency is the hobgolbin of little minds, and the belief that any performance concerns are premature is just such a foolish consistency), the reality is that the performance of a database system is largely defined by the fundamental design of the system, and as the system grows it becomes much more difficult and costly to solve fundamental performance problems. Furthermore, once an enterprise system reaches production even the simplest performance change, such as adding an index, requires complex analysis to determine how it impacts other parts of the system, or that it satisfies what could be hundreds of procedures accessing the object.

The cynical will wonder how one can predict the future when designing a database system, but the reality is that the access patterns are usually obvious by the time you're starting designing tables - you know how the tables relate, what data will be searched, how often you'll be selecting the records versus modifying them, and how big the fields and records should be. Use this information effectively when developing the tables to choose the appropriate clustered and secondary indexes, to minimize the size of each record, and to write efficient SQL. Don't leave it for a maintenance programmer to reverse engineer the system and apply best guesses in a moment of crisis in the future.

Agenda

Part II and III will introduce a variety of common performance pitfalls and panaceas in the SQL Server world, touching upon (but not limited to) the following:

• Indexes - clustered and non-clustered
• Fundamental table designs
• Filegroups
• Cursors
• Materialized views, computed columns
• Common Performance Problems
• Surprizing SQL Server behaviours

Tagged: [SQL Server], [SQL-Server]

I've received some great feedback regarding the entry on setting up a MediaWiki install on Windows. Many of the comments were kind words of thanks (which I really appreciate. Knowing that it helps people is my greatest motivation), and others helpfully suggested improvements to the instructions.

As an example of comment-driven improvements, my instructions have you installing the GNU diff utilities, in particular for the diff3.exe utility, however the MediaWiki setup scripts don't properly find it (e.g. as the instructions are currently written the GNU diff utilities are completely unused, although they can still be useful in your day-to-day travails). This is because a prior revision included fairly involved changes to the MediaWiki config/index.php script so it would properly locate diff3 on the Windows platform, as it is currently Unix-centric and doesn't look for the proper executable, not to mention that it parses the PATH environment variable incorrectly . After receiving two comments that those steps were a little too complex, however, I removed that section.

My goal was to get people experimenting with MediaWiki, or even just wikis in general, so diff3 functionality really wasn't critical. I pared the instructions accordingly. Similarly one early draft included the building and installation of a PHP memory cache to improve performance, but that too is unnecessary to simply try out the product.

Another line of comments involved asking:

• Why would I give instructions for Windows. People should just set it up on Linux and go with its native home.
• -or- Why would I recommend a wiki product that largely caters to the open source crowd. Instead I should be pushing Sharepoint, or something properly anointed by the Microsoft camp, enabled with all of the latest Microsoft buzzwords.

To answer this I really need to describe the philosophy of this blog, along with my resistance to "technology alliances".

In the byline of this blog I describe my philosophy as "pragmatic software development", and this really drives my recommendations. In this case there are a lot of development shops that are Windows-centric, with little or no UNIX/Linux experience, yet MediaWiki is one of the best, most featurer rich, "standard" wiki products out there. Choosing a solution that leveraged what shops already know with the best solution is a pragmatic approach.

Which brings me to my general philosophy towards Microsoft, as comments indicating that I'm either a Microsoft hater, or a Microsoft drone parroting the corporate line, have hit my inbox over the short history of this blog.

I am not subservient to Microsoft.

Unlike many Microsoft technology advocates (I truly love both SQL Server, and .NET, and I think they're remarkable solutions), I have no desire to ever work for Microsoft (Microsoft has some top notch, world-class talent, and I've met and worked with a lot of great talent from there, but they also have their share of both jerks and duds). I'm not going to praise their every move in hopes that I'll get noticed. yafla, my consulting/ISV company, has chosen to avoid any partnerships or tying to the Microsoft brand because we don't want to become another drone "consulting" company single-mindedly acting as a third-party sales force for Microsoft, desperately racking up Microsoft partner points by pushing less-than-optimal solutions on customers. We didn't choose to use .NET for our software because we're hoping to nestle into the Microsoft family -- we chose it on technical merit, and a pragmatic analysis of our current and prospective clients.

We work for our clients and ourselves, not Microsoft. This is a very important mantra for our services, and for the technology of our software, and if Microsoft wants their products to get recommended to our clients, and their technology to the foundation of our software, they need to make great products at competitive prices. No sales gladhanding, or sad career dreaming, is going to change that.

Am I saying that Microsoft solutions are second rate? Of course there are examples of Microsoft products that are terrible, and customers are being misled into buying buzzword-laden atrocities because a Microsoft partner is hoping to get invited to the next Microsoft dinner party. Yet there are also Microsoft solutions that are extraordinary. Windows 2003R2 is a superlative operating system, and where you need the breadth of its functionality, it can be well worth the money. Microsoft Small Business Server can be an amazing package of value for some small organizations, within the constraints of the product. Other times, however, if you have the appropriate skills, a Linux machine is the best choice, along with a stack of the many available free or close to free server products on that platform. Sometimes IIS 6 is the superior solution for a problem, while other times Apache would be your best bet. Sometimes PHP and MySQL is a great solution, and other times C#/ASP.NET with SQL Server is the perfect combo.

I don't blindly assume the Microsoft product to be the best, but neither do I automatically presume it to be second rate. Instead I evaluate on merit, and propose solutions based upon the customer and their needs.

To do otherwise would be just biased noise, and wouldn't be to the service of clients and peers.

Tagged: [Software Development], [Programming], [Software-Development]

Dale Begg-Smith, a Canadian-born moguls skier who emigrated to Australia several years back (becoming a citizen there), purportedly to take advantage of their much more relaxed national ski program, won a gold medal at the Olympics yesterday. Congratulations to Mr. Begg-Smith on the uncontestably extraordinary performance.

What makes Mr. Begg-Smith more interesting to those of us in this profession, however, is his off-the-slopes career path.

If reports are true, he somehow managed to bag tens of millions of dollars of net worth in the internet game over the past several years -- the sort of things that get every other technology worker's spouse asking "Why can't you do that?" Much like the .com bubble, it gives the perception to some that there's a tremendous wad of easy money just floating around, waiting to be grabbed from the ether.

What really draws one's attention, however, is how vague Mr. Begg-Smith is about what, financially at least, was a very successful business venture. At 21 years old he appears to have accumulated more wealth than most will in their lifetime, and he's pursuing his dreams and darting around in Lamborghinis. I've seen him described as a whiz-kid (he apparently dropped out of school at 14 [!]), an internet mogul, an internet tycoon, an internet genius, and virtually every other "gee whiz!" descriptor that the media pulls out when someone does well (by skill, or by luck) with technology. Yet he's entirely secretive about what his business did, what its current state is, how big it is/was, and so on.

In the same situation most of us would be bragging unstoppably to all that could hear about our business prowess.

The reason for the secrecy, apparently, is the nature of the business. If reports are true, Mr. Begg-Smith and his brother made their fortune through the less savoury side of the net. The side that most of us would never consider (which is why spammers and adware/spyware perpetrators manage to make so much money: There's a lot of demand for their services, but very few who are willing to provide it), technical capacity or not.

In any case, a lot of the backlash seems to be founded in envy, which is sad. The guy financially did very well for himself, and is demonstratably a world class athlete. All in all a pretty remarkable accomplishment for 21.

Introduction

This article describes the wonder and curiosity that many developers start out with, whether it's when they entered their first Compute! type-in program on their Atari 400, picked up their first JavaScript in 1 Hour book, when they started toying with the gcc compiler for the first time, or when they began towards their first Computer Science degree in university.

It also describes how that natural enthusiasm can be crushed, and how it can hopefully be regained or maintained.

This is written for the developer, whether a new recruit or a veteran, motivated or unmotivated, spirited or crushed, yet it's also written for software development managers (who might identify how to make the workplace more enjoyable and more rewarding).

Like most entries of this genre (see also Optimal Software Development Processes and Practices) I selected a small list of widely applicable, but often overlooked, factors. This most certainly isn't exhaustive, but hopefully it leads to a bit of reflection.

The Enjoyable Profession of Software Development

Software development can be a tremendously rewarding, enjoyable career.

Few careers offer comparable opportunities to weave intricate, complex structures that, while virtual, have such a positive impact on the world around them. Few offer the freedom and creativity that software development does, or the very real potential for entrepreneurial riches.

Whether it's building a new peer-to-peer application, control software for a massive power generator, or improving the workflow of the corporate scorecard system, done right this can be a very fulfilling, enjoyable, challenging pursuit.

A Passion for Software Development

Does your mind race at all hours, abuzz with potential solutions for vexing software development challenges? Do you lie awake at night -- anxious like a preschooler on Christmas Eve -- eager for morning to arrive so you can implement the crafty coding structures you just thought up? Do you frequently find yourself powering up your system in the twilight hours to implement the fruits of an epiphany?

Or do you put in just enough face time and superficial effort that sacrifice makes up for undelivered results? Do you purge your mind of software development the moment the virtual end-of-day whistle goes off, sliding off your Aeron dinosaur satisfied that it's one day closer to the weekend? Do you dread Mondays, motivating yourself to keep going with the dream of a far off vacation?

Do you eagerly embrace new technologies, seeing it as a challenging opportunity to learn something new when a solution calls for a new skill? Would you voluntarily dive into the innards of the Firefox web browser if a solution demanded it and you'd never touched it before? Do you swim through documentation, thirstily absorbing new APIs, tools, and languages to expand your skill-set, eagerly embracing industry advances?

Or do you dread anything different, praying that you're tasked with challenges that require only the skills you've long held, allowing you to apply them in a mechanical, repetitious fashion? Do you hope every project is an echo of a prior project? Do you put off any task requiring research, and show disdain towards new languages, techniques and practices, hoping that they don't gain traction?

Are you really passionate about software development? Be honest with yourself.

A desire to outshine a teammate isn't passion. Nor is a motivation to impress the boss. Neither is a combination of the two worn as a magic defensive cloak against downsizing spells. These are second-rate, artificial passion substitutes: Mixed into the recipe, they yield sub par results, often leaving a nasty aftertaste of burnout and dissatisfaction.

Instead I'm talking about a bona fide interest and enjoyment of the craft and challenge of software development, even outside of career or job security issues (though it benefits the same). This isn't a job ad demanding that you're "passionate about business reports!", but rather is just a moment for sober reflection on whether you're over-clocking life, or running idle instructions in a tight loop.

If you're like many software developers in the industry today, a feeling of enthusiasm and enjoyment for the pursuit is just a distant memory (often during the happy days of university and your first job). Instead it has become a career, and is just something you do from 9-5 (or more when passion is replaced by sacrifice). Skills have likely stagnated, moving just enough to compete with coworkers, or to avoid obsolescence.

Of course there are those who've never enjoyed this career, and they probably will never enjoy it -- it just isn't their thing. The only advice I can offer to those people is a suggestion that life is too fleeting to spend so much time doing something you don't enjoy.

Many others, however, remember the passion, and sporadically get a fleeting taste of it again. For those people I propose some personal habits that, coupled with workplace practices (for managers, as well as people who rightfully manage up), will help recapture and maintain that passion.

Software developers who truly love what they are doing are the ones creating the most innovative code. They're the ones with productivity rates multiples of their peers. They're the ones that feel a little guilty getting paid to do something they enjoy so much.

The Top 5 Habits of Productive, Happy Software Developers

1. Be Marketable - Keep Up To Date Skills and Network Contacts

Most of us will work for over a dozen different firms over our careers.

We'll leave for better salaries and working conditions. We'll relocate to accommodate a spouse's career. We'll be laid off during corporate mergers and spin-offs, or even when the company goes bankrupt. We'll get turfed out because we're over-skilled, and thus overpaid, relative to the needs of the position. We'll be downsized because we aren't compatible with the new boss' empire building schemes. Maybe we'll get bored of a position and seek out something new.

This is the employment reality of most careers in the 21st century.

To some professionals this represents an exciting journey, and each transition is met with anticipation and enthusiasm. These people feel confident in their abilities, have a network of peers in the industry communicating interesting opportunities, and their skillset is up-to-date and marketable (they have the appropriate laundry list of abilities, credentials and certifications, and upgrade as needed), and while the possibility of their current employer closing shop tomorrow is something they'd prefer not happen, and they probably love the great group of people that they work with, it isn't something that they fear.

To less prepared professionals, however, the idea of losing their cushy job hangs over them like a black cloud. Their lack of apparent opportunities, and the feeling that they couldn't find an equivalent job, is enormously destructive of both motivation and job satisfaction. Paradoxically, job protectionism (such as making one "indispensable" through obscurity, by denigrating coworkers, and so on) often becomes a more likely activity of people in such positions than legitimate contributions.

This is incredibly destructive to morale, not just for the individual in question, but for everyone on their team: Often the malcontent, contagiously demotivated member of the team is the least employable, and it can be debated which condition led to the other.

SUMMARY:  No matter how much you love your current job, you should keep your CV current, and you should always keep up-to-date on industry opportunities. Know what skills are in demand, and try to gain experience in them (even if it means pursuing formal or self-training during your own time), and attain a level of comfort that you could transition to a different opportunity with minimal discomfort.

MANAGER SUMMARY: You should do everything in your power to make your group feel confident in their abilities -- ensure that everyone gets a chance with marketable technologies; encourage the pursuit of desirable certifications; and build skills through internal resources, workshops, and seminars. Unless you're running a sweatshop, this is unlikely to lead to a feared exodus of employees, but instead will empower and motivate your group to more openly contribute, and to demand more of each other.

2. Be The Master of Your Domain

The control we have over our environment can have a tremendous impact on our happiness. 

Something as simple as a sporadically malfunctioning key on our keyboard can ruin an entire day, for instance. Similarly, when you're nearing a deadline and your network connection starts flaking out, it can make an enjoyable jog to the finish line a frustrating exercise of physical restraint (in this case restraining yourself from tearing the wiring out of the wall). At least we have optical mice now, eliminating one of the primary causes of environmental control frustration.

Many times our work habits inevitably bring a feeling of "lack of control" into our work lives: By failing to fully read the documentation for our tools, investigating their behaviour, APIs, and nuances, we often create a situation where much of our development is basically crap-shoot trial and error, reacting as things don't work as planned.

I've witnessed development groups, not to mention that I've demonstrated this unsavoury trait myself, unhappily fighting with perceived technology deficiencies (usually as a deadline rapidly approaches), moaning and complaining about what seems to be faults in the language, technology, or platform, forever building workarounds under a fog of uncertainty, when in reality it was actually a fault in the understanding of the same. 

More often than not it's simply that they haven't spent the upfront time to understand the language (I remain amazed at the number of C# developers who have no idea what the using keyword is for, or why seemingly out-of-scope file objects are still locking files until some magical, indeterminate time in the future. Or the Delphi developers who needlessly nulled variables at the end of scope in a futile misguided attempt to fight mystery bugs), the technology, or the platform. Their frustration is created out of ignorance, and a small up-front investment would have sped up development, increasing the sense of control that the developers have over their domain.

SUMMARY: The next time something seems mysterious or unknown, take the time to properly investigate it. Classic lack-of-control approaches such as hacked workarounds or "reset the server daily" lead to a feeling of losing control, reducing job satisfaction and adding to the natural daily frustrations. And get your keyboard replaced if it starts malfunctioning.

MANAGER SUMMARY: Identify and investigate "easy-outs" proposed by your development team. While most software has faults, and products and technologies often work differently than we might imagine, many times such excuses are due to a lack of investigation and analysis. Even when things don't work as advertised, which is frequently the case, formally investigating and empirically determining behaviours is vastly superior to each developer endlessly fighting with and then hashing out strategies on a need basis. And make sure your developers have functioning keyboards.

3. Accommodate Your Financial Needs

I've worked in some great positions at the wrong times in my life, sapping my motivation until eventually I moved on. These positions were for great firms, with great working conditions and great coworkers and management, but it couldn't realistically adapt to accommodate my evolving financial needs. I invented dissatisfactions with the situation, turning an ideal situation into a daily torture.

After getting married and planning for our first child, for instance, the financial risk/reward that worked when I was living alone in a $600 apartment eating Ramen noodles was no longer satisfactory. Demands of owning a home, a car with infant carseats, education funds, daycare (for two children costing more than it would cost to lease two (2) BMW 750i's), and boxes and boxes of diapers, required more financial returns than I needed years before.

I moved on.

While the resulting role superficially wasn't as satisfactory, from a life perspective my mood brightened dramatically, and my day was much more enjoyable.

Of course this seems like cheap advice: Make more money! And Fast! Yet the reality is that developers often do make choices to the detriment of their financial condition, and if they go too far they will hate their job no matter how perfect it otherwise is. Working for equity of a start-up is great when you're just out of university, but it is destined for failure when you're more established.

SUMMARY: If your financials are out of balance, it will unavoidably sour your mood during the workday, making you resent your employer and your workplace. When life goals exceed the income of your position, immediately begin investigating alternatives (be it asking for a raise, looking for a more senior role in your organization, or seeking employment elsewhere). No motivational boost or cool company games room will overcome this basic life need.

MANAGEMENT SUMMARY: Be aware of the goals and needs of your group. Sometimes someone's needs grow beyond the possible return of a position, and it is important to appropriately communicate this (rather than giving vague hints of unseen raises and super-bonuses at some future point).

4. Have A Life Outside of Work

This is a rule that works for all professions -- having accomplishments providing satisfaction outside of work will smooth the inevitable downs of our professional lives, often providing one with a much better perspective. Without this, often minor workplace failures can explode into seemingly momentous events.

These accomplishments can even be in the same domain: A professional coder by day, and an open-source coder by night, for instance.

SUMMARY: There will be periods when everything seems to go wrong in the workplace. Having the cushion of achievements outside of work can avoid it spiraling into a workplace disaster, keeping spirits up through the tough times. Often non-work experiences benefit the workplace as well, whether it's techniques learned from nighttime projects, or delicious coffee courtesy of the nighttime barista classes.

MANAGER SUMMARY: There is a world outside of work.

5. Properly Manage Expectations

Developers, as a general rule, are terrible at managing expectations: Many of us are prone to overpromising deliverables, assuring stakeholders that we'll deliver these amazing results sooner than is reasonable. I've fallen victim to this syndrome myself, and I've seen it occur rampantly across the industry.

When D-day comes we convince ourselves into believing that the users built their own unrealistic expectations, and managers forced us into untenable timelines. While often that is the case, just as frequently the developers were the origin of misinformation. 

While there is a temporary sense of satisfaction wowing users and management with an exaggerated declaration of our abilities (we've likely even convinced ourselves), as time wears on this misinformation can be enormously destructive and debilitating. With every day closer to the deadline we get a little more desperate for a silver bullet, hoping that some magic technology or component will deliver us from damnation.

It seldom works out that way.

Users are unhappy. Management is dissatisfied. Employees are demoralized and devastated.

The best option is always to manage expectations, to ensure that we can reasonably deliver promised results without heroic effort.

SUMMARY: Plan for the long term, realizing that promises that aren't delivered on will cause you great workplace unhappiness later. Manage expectations to ensure that you can satisfy your "customers" with reasonable effort, and with a reasonably high probability of success.

MANAGER SUMMARY: Never demand unrealistic deadlines, and question employees when provided with the same. Encourage your troops to be more reasonable with their promises, especially to stakeholders outside of the group, and they'll have a much greater probability of meeting external expectations, leading to increased motivation for everyone.

Conclusion

This is an amazing, expansive career full of incredible innovation and endless opportunity. Ensure that you don't diminish your enjoyment through simple mistakes, such as pigeon-holing into a position, or endlessly setting up yourself for failure.

Control your destiny.

Tagged: [Software Development], [Programming], [Software-Development]

I've been doing this as a somewhat regularly updated blog for just over half a year now, and the results have been extremely satisfying: I get about ~2500 direct unique visitors on an average day (increasing 2-6x when something ends up being a meme-of-the-day on sites like Reddit or Digg, and of course many read via aggregators), search engine referrals are up to 200 or so a day, and viewing the "who's on" list is a laundry list of influential corporations and locations across the globe.

It does feed my ego a little bit seeing visitors from various governments, the CIA, nuclear research labs, just about every large financial company, and visitors from every end of the globe. My numbers aren't huge, but it's a perfect composite of influential and knowledgeable readers.

The most popular entries thus far are as follows (I'm providing the static version links where possible):

Effectively Integrating Into Software Development Teams
Optimal Software Development Processes and Practices
Spelling Matters
Everyone Is Above Average - The Overpopulated Top 2%

I've tried to minimize the number of entries (outside of the personal category, though this anniversary one being an exception) to keep the noise as low as possible -- if you're using a reader it won't constantly pretend there's new content when I'm just adding a peanut gallery comment about someone else's blog -- though on the flip side that means that I've delayed various .NET and SQL entries until they're "perfect". 

Perhaps I might have to find a compromise somewhere in between.

Messrs (the plural form of both Mr. and Monsieur) is a rather odd little word, and was previously relegated to only fringe legal text. Now, at least here in Canada, it is everywhere -- across every newspaper, in letters to the editor, in blog entries, and so on.

I find this fascinating, as I first saw this outside of academic texts about two years ago in one column of the National Post. Slowly it took root, appearing in more and more columns, until now it appears to be in their standard style text: Somehow every article must talk about multiple men, if only to fit a Messrs in there.

Quickly it spread: to the Globe and Mail, and then the Toronto Star, and I've even seen it appearing in the Toronto Sun.

Fascinating how a piece of language is so by example, which was sort of the point of my prior spelling matters entry.

I once worked for RBC, and still have a lot of their branded material around. It was an okay employer for the time.

However I simply have to get something off my chest about RBC's sponsorship of the Canadian Olympic team: Do they have to milk it so much?

So far watching the Olympics I have been subjected to probably 200 RBC ads (in the FIRST DAY) where they glowingly talk about how selfless and important they are to the Olympic team. In one particularly vile ad they give a mock-up of a 1947 event when the hockey team needed funding to get to the Olympics and an RBC rep, upon being asked, replies "I think we can do something" (which was nebulous enough to make me wonder if they fully paid...or they partly paid, or if they only offered a line of credit).

I am curious to know how much RBC actually gave the Olympic team compared to how much they've spent telling everyone about how much they've given. I suspect (completely baseless speculation) that the latter represents a much, much larger number.

Sort of like the tobacco company that gave $100K of food to a foodbank, and then spent tens of millions telling everyone about it.