3 ms·
For a database? At expensify scale? It's still feels like a lot.
by Macha 4y ago
For a database? At expensify scale?
It's still feels like a lot.
- robertlagrant 4y agoWhat is expensify scale?
- Macha 4y agoTen million users [1] averaging maybe averaging 40 or so interactions per year (filling out an expense report isn't a common task for a lot of those users)? Napkin math of 1.2 qps. Even if you 10x that for backing workflows, and double it because users are more active than expencted, that's still only 30qps. [1]: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1476840/000162828021020115/expensifys-1.htm https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1476840/000162828021...
- alberth 4y agoGiven the time, effort and hard dollar expense they put into development of BedrockDB - I have to imagine they do more than 1 QPS. Why else would they benchmark to show they can achieve 4,000,000 QPS if all they need is 1 QPS?
- tiger3 4y agoSunk cost fallacy?
- robertlagrant 4y agoWhile I think the figures might be a little conservative (or might work for the mean, but not the peak) it is a little odd to imagine why an expenses app would need a database that syncronises via a private blockchain to track expenses. It would be interesting to understand the rationale.