8 ms·
Except Twitter going down is not as serious as death. The answer to “How much $ is it worth to get an extra 9 of reliability?” is never “Infinite”. So, I agree
by kevinventullo 4y ago
Except Twitter going down is not as serious as death. The answer to “How much $ is it worth to get an extra 9 of reliability?” is never “Infinite”. So, I agree with OP, if they can save a big chunk of their opex with a negligible decrease in reliability (measured by something like, how much user churn are we seeing as a result of the downtime), then it’s a good call.
I don’t know enough about Twitter’s internals to guess whether this is a good call. A bit off-topic, but having worked at Meta I think it would probably not be a good call there. Infra engineers are already directly incentivized to find fractional-percentage wins, because the savings to the company are often greater than their total comp, and that’s a pretty straightforward way to justify a high performance rating.
- metadat 4y agoFor Twitter, outages are serious business and definitely a threat to the organism. As users on the outside maybe we don't care so much, but internally Twitter has invested tremendous amounts of energy and brain power to make the service resilient and scalable over the past 12+ years. When Twitter is down, it was taken quite seriously by those who worked there. I'm sure they did the blameless postmortem culture, the whole none yards. Too much downtime and people will stop using it and / or migrate to a competitor, and then the service will be dead.