11 ms·
That isn't really the counter-argument to the OP. Their examples were all about large complexity for the gain in throughput. Clearly, having HA and reliable tr
by lbriner 5y ago
That isn't really the counter-argument to the OP. Their examples were all about large complexity for the gain in throughput.
Clearly, having HA and reliable transport is reasonable for your use-case but that isn't the same as microservices, hadoop or Kafka.
- schmichael 5y agoDefinitely a bit off topic from me, apologies! I think I was mainly writing in agreement with the article’s closing: > What we’re all imploring you to do is to think! And to actually understand the problem you are trying to solve.
- hn_throwaway_99 5y agoI would actually go farther and say the comment you are responding to supports the article's thesis. They talk about remediating issues with email alerts. That is exactly the kind of approach you can take when you are nowhere near Google's scale, instead of building a complex system to ensure all of these remediations can happen automatically without any human intervention. Sounds like they took exactly the right approach of not over-engineering a solution prematurely.
- schmichael 5y agoI intentionally wrote the story without referring to the article to let people think for themselves about the meaning, and it makes me very happy that this was what you thought! Ironically we kind of relied on e-mail alerts for too long and would kinda sorta break Gmail. While it was probably just the web/IMAP interface or browser/client itself struggling, trying to bulk delete tens of thousands of emails while hundreds more per second were coming in often had incoherent results.