DEV Community: Lin Pengcheng

The unification of Microservice, DB, OOP, FP and Warehouse/Workshop Model

Lin Pengcheng — Sun, 05 May 2024 01:33:36 +0000

The unification of Microservice, DB, OOP, FP and Warehouse/Workshop Model

Programs = Algorithm + Data Structures
---- Niklaus Wirth, Turing Award (1984), Father of Pascal

It’s better to have 100 functions operate on one data structure than 10 functions on 10 data structures.

---- Alan Perlis
the first recipient of the Turing Award (1966)
A founding father of Computer Science as a separate discipline

Warehouse: Dataservice, Data Management, Object state, Data Structure, database. Obviously, the database should be as global and unique as possible.
Workshop: Microservices, Independent Systems, Object method, pure function (functional pipeline), Algorithms.

We can split a large system and evolve it into a microservice system.

Warehouse: Object state, dataservice, data management
Workshop: Object method, Microservice, Various independent systems.

We can integrate many independent systems and evolve it into an integrated system.

Many large enterprises have independent information systems produced by different manufacturers and need to integrate. We can integrate many independent systems and evolve it into an integrated system.:

Workshop: Object method, individual subsystems
Warehouse: Object state
- The information system integration layer acts as a individual system
- A unified abstraction layer (virtual database, virtual data warehouse) of enterprise global data, external data requests for any subsystem are requested from warehouse(virtual unified db) without knowing which other subsystem to obtain them from. Achieve the unity of the global system.
- The middle layer and data routing of system interconnection.

Reference

Traditional IT theory (OOP, FP and hardware architecture, etc.) are pseudoscience (by Math-based Warehouse/Workshop Model)

Lin Pengcheng — Tue, 30 Apr 2024 13:11:35 +0000

It is the perfect theory if a theory is based on mathematics and meets the five basic principles of "Simplicity, Unity, Order, Symmetry and Definiteness" in science, industry and aesthetics.

Traditional IT theory (OOP, FP and hardware architecture, etc.) are pseudoscience. they belong to what physicist Wolfgang Pauli said "Not Even Wrong".

Keep it Simple and Unified.

Computer science is essentially a management science, and vice versa.

Software and hardware are factories that manufacture data, so they have the same "warehouse/workshop model" and management methods as the manufacturing industry.

---- Lin Pengcheng

Traditional IT theory (OOP, FP and hardware architecture, etc.) VS. Warehouse/Workshop Model

1. Traditional IT theory (OOP, FP and hardware architecture, etc.)

1.1. Mathematical support

Lack of mathematical support, in any discipline, the part that has mathematical support can be called science.

1.2. Common sense in scientific research: repeatability and verifiability

There is no definite, operational theoretical basis for design and evaluation, design is very arbitrary, and good examples of OO & FP & hardware architectures are rare.

Because the same case, different people design OOP & FP & hardware architecture varies greatly, and it is difficult to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages. So they belong to what Pauli said "Not Even Wrong"

In short, they are not repeatable, not verifiable, and not scientific at all. They are pseudoscience.

Reference:

Not even wrong, Wikipedia

"Not even wrong" is a phrase often used to describe pseudoscience or bad science. It describes an argument or explanation that purports to be scientific but uses faulty reasoning or speculative premises, which can be neither affirmed nor denied and thus cannot be discussed rigorously and scientifically.

For a meaningful discussion on whether a certain statement is true or false, the statement must satisfy the criterion of falsifiability, the inherent possibility for the statement to be tested and found false. In this sense, the phrase "not even wrong" is synonymous with "unfalsifiable".

History of the expression

The phrase is generally attributed to the theoretical physicist Wolfgang Pauli, who was known for his colorful objections to incorrect or careless thinking. Rudolf Peierls documents an instance in which "a friend showed Pauli the paper of a young physicist which he suspected was not of great value but on which he wanted Pauli's views. Pauli remarked sadly, 'It is not even wrong'." This is also often quoted as "That is not only not right; it is not even wrong", or in Pauli's native German, "Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig; es ist nicht einmal falsch!" Peierls remarks that quite a few apocryphal stories of this kind have been circulated and mentions that he listed only the ones personally vouched for by him.

He also quotes another example when Pauli replied to Lev Landau, "What you said was so confused that one could not tell whether it was nonsense or not."

Columbia physicist Peter Woit used the phrase in the title of his book Not Even Wrong: The Failure of String Theory and the Search For Unity in Physical Law. Woit also writes a blog of that name.

Not Even Wrong, BY JASON LISLE, PH.D. * | TUESDAY, DECEMBER 30, 2014

Physicist Wolfgang Pauli was once asked to review a technical paper and assess its accuracy. The content was so garbled, however, that Pauli is said to have remarked that not only was the paper not right, it was “not even wrong.” He meant the paper was so poorly written, so muddled in its reasoning, that it was impossible to evaluate in any fashion. It was even worse than wrong—it was incoherent.

The author would have to substantially improve the paper in order for it to even be assessed as wrong.

Science is largely a literary endeavor. It advances only when scientists are able to communicate their discoveries to other scientists for independent evaluation and confirmation. A hypothesis that is not clearly stated cannot be tested.

Only when experimental methods are carefully articulated can they be critiqued or validated.

Therefore, scientists must be able to cogently articulate their hypotheses, observations, and methods. They must carefully define important terms and use them in a consistent way. Anything less is confusing at best and “not even wrong” at worst.

1.3. Real-world reference models

FP & hardware system architectures do not have real-world reference models, and theories without reference systems are difficult to explain and understand, and most likely to make mistakes.
OOP is only a superficial simulation of the real world, there is no unified guidelines, principles and models. Both the system architecture and the process are very complex and confusing.

2. Warehouse/Workshop Model

2.1. Mathematical support

Based on mathematical models, operations research, management science
The architecture can be visualized with a simple star chart and Gantt chart

2.2. Common sense in scientific research: repeatability and verifiability

With 10 principles, 5 aesthetics, and 5 basic components
In the same case, the architectures designed by different people will be consistent and clear, and the superiority of different people's design solutions can be accurately judged by mathematical models and operations research, which is in line with the scientific principle of repeatable and verifiable certainty, so we call it science. The best people can effectively prove the superiority of their solutions by mathematical methods, so this method is the choice of the best people.
- In my mathematical and principle-based "warehouse/shop floor model" theory, uncertainty exists in a deterministic principle-based framework and mathematical model. Uncertainty is controllable, and when an uncertain event occurs, the scheduler can immediately optimize it by dynamic planning and incorporate it into the deterministic system.
- Uncertainty is the monkey on the palm of Buddha. The monkey may make trouble, but it cannot turn over the palm of Buddha's hand, and Buddha (scheduler) sentences the monkey to 500 years of imprisonment and then exiles it to a hundred thousand miles, and finally incorporates it into the deterministic Buddhist system.
- Just like after Enron, the principle-based international accounting standards turned around and defeated the proud and conceited rule-based US accounting standards, effectively dealing with uncertainty and avoiding being exploited. Most importantly, they are simple, effective and reliable.

2.3. Real-world reference models

The theory of having a real-world mainstream system as a reference model is easy to understand, easy to comprehend, and if there is controversy or doubt, the real-world reference model can be analyzed and the answer found.
This has been the best practice of the manufacturing industry for centuries, and there are countless research materials and book boxes available on the subject.
- We should be based on a centrally managed large data model standard system, not many simple types (or objects) that manage confusion,
- Validate centrally instead of everywhere.
- The large data model standard system is managed by the warehouse.
- The input data of each workshop (pure function, pipeline) is given by the warehouse scheduler to the data that has been checked to meet the standard.
- The output data of each workshop (pure function, pipeline) is checked by the warehouse and saved after meeting the standard.
- The workshops are independent, short, logically simple, clear, linearly scalable, they do not interact with each other, only with the warehouse, which guarantees simplicity, correctness and high efficiency.
- Replace "the complex and chaotic m*n object interactive network" with "1:n One scheduler for global scheduling and optimization of all workshops(pure function, pipeline).".

Reference

Apple M1 Ultra is a mistake

Lin Pengcheng — Fri, 26 Apr 2024 12:31:57 +0000

Apple M1 Ultra use "dispatch center (virtual global unified warehouse, integration layer or platform, the parent company of the enterprise group)" model, which is a variant of my warehouse/workshop model. It has two warehouse/workshop models (M1 Max) managed by a single dispatch center.

This model can avoid the complexity of hardware scale too large, It's a simple and fast implementation.

2022-03-14, I read in the Chinese news ("Apple'S M1 Ultra chip assembly secret found in patent") that M1 Ultra uses UltraFusion encapsulation architecture based on TSMC Cowos-S5 architecture. I saw from the news and Cowos-S5 paper’s abstract (2021-06-01, Wafer Level System Integration of the Fifth Generation CoWoS®-S with High Performance Si Interposer at 2500 mm2) that it is similar to "AMD Infinity Fabric Architecture" and "Intel UCIe" technology, with only chip interconnection function and no scheduler function. reference: 2021-06-01, P. K. Huang; C. Y. Lu; W. H.
Wei R&D, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, Ltd., Hsinchu, Taiwan, R.O.C.; Wafer Level System Integration of the Fifth Generation CoWoS®-S with High Performance Si Interposer at 2500 mm2

I think:

TSMC's approach doesn't have a scheduler because it lacks a complete base ecology, but Apple can use MacOS as a scheduler.
Apple & TSMC's chip interconnection method is a mistake. The correct method should be memory interconnection, splicing the memory of two M1 Max into one large memory (or virtual large memory). Then M1 Ultra is not only A fractal system of M1 chip (standard warehouse/workshop model), but also a bigger M1 chip (standard warehouse/workshop model).

Apple has forgotten their previous slogan: "Bigger is Better" and "Bigger than bigger".

It is also a simple and high-performance approach. It can be used as solution of future M1 Supercomputing. It maintains the consistency of the Architecture of the Apple M Series chips, so it can maintain the simplicity, uniformity and compatibility of the system.

In the future, Apple must implement my dispatching center technology and implement OS kernel as DBMS-like ASIC. Currently, only Apple has a complete basic ecosystem. So it's the only one that can do that. reference: 2021.11.15, OS kernel as DBMS-like ASIC: The future OS kernel will be a data-oriented scheduler (with Computer hardware and software integration architecture diagram)
MS windows + Intel (AMD), Google android + ARM can also be combined to have a complete base ecosystem, but the coordination takes a long time.
ThrudTheBarbarian, a member of r/chipdesign (a chip design forum) who has worked at Apple for almost a couple of decades, commented on my post on r/chipdesign on 2022-03-15 22:07:28(UTC+8)

Uh huh. Maybe you’re right. Maybe some of the highest-paid, and certainly one of the best silicon design teams on the planet are wrong, but extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

The chip, from advance talks and benchmarks, seems to perform fairly well. We’ll find out soon.
Apple are not beholden to any particular internal architecture, as a founder of ARM, they have a perpetual license that allows them to do whatever they want internally, so I could see different internal design for the M2 (or whatever is put into the Mac Pro). They only need to remain compatible at the ABI/Instruction-set interface.

I don't agree with him, the M1 Ultra perform fairly well because it has two M1 Max spliced together, I really can't imagine how bad architecture would make it perform worse than a M1 Max, this is a really low standard for evaluation.

The Apple M1 Ultra's architecture is a complex solution, It destroys the simplicity and unity of my warehouse/workshop model which M1 adopts as architecture, Therefore, the scalability and compatibility are extremely poor, which brings about the complexity of the system, and the manufacturing cost, process complexity and difficulty are all high.

My architecture conforms to the two basic principles of simplicity and unity in scientific research, mathematics, and industry. It has excellent scalability and compatibility. Simplicity is the foundation of high performance and high reliability. It can be judged and concluded by obvious scientific common sense: my architecture is far superior to the architecture of the Apple M1 Ultra.

r/chipdesign has deleted my post and banned me permanently, I can only post screenshots.

ThrudTheBarbarian's commend full screenshot

ThrudTheBarbarian work at Apple full screenshot

Conclusion:

Apple's understanding of my theory is not good enough.
My warehouse/workshop model will definitely be the architecture of all computers (including supercomputers) in the future.

2022-03-14, a discussion at r/programming

Systematic Best Practices for Java's New Features: Java has abandoned OOP in favor of my theory!

Lin Pengcheng — Sat, 20 Apr 2024 13:11:58 +0000

Starting with Java 8, Java started to change its slow and clunky image, trying to add new features and improve performance. However, since Java's main application area is enterprise applications, the strategy of updating the programming language is more conservative, and most of them are still sticking to Java 8, and not many enterprises or individuals are applying the new features of Java. There are only brief introductions to the stand-alone use of individual new features, not articles on best practice guidelines for the systematic use of multiple new features, and people don't realize that Java has abandoned OOP in favor of my theory, "The Math-based Grand Unified Programming Theory: The Pure Function Pipeline Data Flow with Principle-based Warehouse/Workshop Model"!

Workshop: Stream (JDK 8-9), Stream Gatherers (JDK 22)

Stream is an object-style pipeline operation used to construct a pipeline of production data within the workshop.

Warehouse: Records (JDK 14 to 16)

Record is an immutable datatype that is used as a data carrier, primarily in scenarios where data is stored, preserved, and there is no additional custom behavior. It is very suitable for use as a "repository", of course, if there are special needs, other Java classes are more suitable, it can also be applied, my theory has a strong compatibility. See also: "The unification with FP and OOP"

Class

In my theory classes are mainly used as namespaces to organize code, or compatible with OOP to use traditional Java code.
Object

It isn't needed in my theory, which is used for compatibility with OOP in order to use traditional Java code.

Scheduler: Virtual Threads (JDK 19-21), Structured Concurrency (JDK 19-22)

Structured Concurrency

Used to construct the scheduler algorithm: Dynamic Tree Gantt Chart (Operations Research).
Virtual Threads

Used to run tasks after assigning them to workshops.

Other New Features

JEP 467: Markdown Document Annotation

This feature uses my original method from 2019-02-17, "Markdown Literary Programming that don't break the syntax of any programming language". My approach is simpler, flexible, visual, extensible, and applicable to all programming languages and markup languages. It takes source code from the text age to the web age, and improves the functionality and experience dramatically.

Demo: LivePreview in Notepad++
Native Compilation (GraalVM), Native Code Interaction

Similar to what I said in "The unification with Programming Language Platform", except that I advocate using Lisp to represent the intermediate language, which is simpler, clearer, more convenient, and easier to implement and extend; GraalVM uses JVM bytecode as intermediate language.
Syntax enhancements, tool enhancements

These have nothing to do with programming paradigms and will not be discussed.

In summary, the new features of Java indicate that Java
has abandoned OOP in favor of my theory,
"The Math-based Grand Unified Programming Theory: The Pure Function Pipeline Data Flow with Principle-based Warehouse/Workshop Model"! Combined with Java's strong development of native compilation and native code interaction, it shows that Java's two core concepts of OOP and virtual machines have been abandoned.

Why did Java abandon OOP in favor of my theory?

The reason is as follows:

Java's main application area is enterprise application software, from the reference model, my Warehouse/Workshop Model is a natural and direct counterpart to the architecture of enterprise application software, which is simple, clear, and much superior to the current mainstream OOP, FP, and command programming.
In my article "Traditional IT theory (OO, FP and hardware architecture, etc.) VS. Warehouse/Workshop Model", I pointed out that my Warehouse/Workshop Model is based on mathematical models, which is a downgrade from the pseudo-science of OOP, FP, and imperative programming.
My Warehouse/Workshop Model is data-centered, which is consistent with database thinking, so database vendors are natural allies of my theory, and Oracle, the owner of Java, is the largest database vendor, so it's a natural choice for Java to turn to my theory.
In my Chinese article "My theory has an estimated 100,000 high level followers around the world (Attachment: Most authoritative peer review)", I pointed out that my Warehouse/Workshop Model has already achieved absolute victory at the lowest level of CPU/SoC chips and computer hardware architectures, and that in the IT field, the lowest level of technology determines the upper level of technology, and thus my theory has achieved absolute victory at all levels of the IT field, such as OS, DB, programming languages, and application development. It's just a matter of time, this is the inevitable law, the Java language change is just a beginning.

Whether Java had the idea written in this article before or not, from now on, Java must have the idea and work hard to develop for it! :-)

"JEP 467: Markdown Documentation Comments" uses my original method on 2019-02-17

Lin Pengcheng — Thu, 29 Feb 2024 13:14:33 +0000

"JEP 467: Markdown Documentation Comments" uses my original method on 2019-02-17, It offers much more features, Extensibility, simplicity and visualization, It works with all programming languages and markup languages.

Markdown Literate programming that don't break the syntax of any programming language

https://github.com/linpengcheng/PurefunctionPipelineDataflow/blob/master/doc/markdown_literary_programming.md

Live preview in Notepad++

https://github.com/linpengcheng/ClojureBoxNpp