I agree with Zed Shaw here -- both "web scale" and your definition are not very good. "Web scale" is especially bad because it can mean anything and be used by

I agree with Zed Shaw here -- both "web scale" and your definition are not very good. "Web scale" is especially bad because it can mean anything and be used by anybody. However, your definition doesn't really make sense either. Exactly what is being scaled here? Static web hits? Database lookups? Database writes? What characterizes your ability to scale? Sharding? Distributed processing or retrieval a la MapReduce? Instead of describing what you think your architecture can handle, why not try describing exactly what your architecture can handle. If someone is actually trying to convince me that their architecture is a good one I don't ever want to hear "web scale," I want to see graphs and hear means, medians, standard deviations, and confidence intervals.