5 ms·
Shocked to see them using MySQL here. I can’t imagine it working very well at their scale.
by rzz3 4y ago
Shocked to see them using MySQL here. I can’t imagine it working very well at their scale.
- bognition 4y agoWhy not? MySQL can be extremely performant at scale. I’ve seen tiny MySQL databases serve in ver 50k req/sec.
- makeitdouble 4y agoMySQL gets a bad rap because of it's casual wrangling of data types and query formats. Performance wise it's one of the toughest battle tested system you can imagine.
- kcb 4y agoBut is it Web Scale?
- LinuxBender 4y agoAdding the reference [1] in case it is obscure for some. [1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2F-DItXtZs https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b2F-DItXtZs [video][language]
- blinding-streak 4y agoIt works if you rig it to work well at that scale. Google used a modified version of MySQL to host AdWords for a long time. A very large database with massive qps: https://insidebigdata.com/2013/09/18/googles-f1-database-means-big-data/ https://insidebigdata.com/2013/09/18/googles-f1-database-mea...
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- polio 4y agoFacebook uses it for user data
- rco8786 4y agoMySQL scales incredibly well
- echelon 4y agoMySQL can back 50,000+ QPS services! 1. Sharding. 2. Different DBs for different microservices. Purpose-specific. Ship analytics data out for BI. 3. Redis layer for high QPS services with repetitive queries (eg. session stores)
- withinboredom 4y agoWe have billions of MySQL tables at work. It scales well.
- unnouinceput 4y agoBillions (plural, which implies at least two) of tables? I doubt that.
- slenk 4y agoI would believe millions of tables. Or billions of rows. Unless you host about 80million Wordpress blogs, or 8 million WHMCS installs