3 ms·
> You'd also save a ton of less operations and engineering staff. You absolutely would not. The cost of having developers put out extremely optimized code (due
by Sebb767 4y ago
> You'd also save a ton of less operations and engineering staff.
You absolutely would not. The cost of having developers put out extremely optimized code (due to the scaling limits) and cuddle that single server to never, ever fail easily eclipses the cost of a having a multiple servers by a few orders of magnitude.
EDIT: To the downvoters, I'd really love to see the calculation on how engineering time would be cheaper than buying a second server in any reasonable timeframe.
- icedchai 4y agoI was comparing the costs to building/operating on a single server to the real Twitter. Twitter is a massive, distributed, hugely complex system, which requires a large team to build, maintain, and operate. That costs $$$. Both for people and servers. (You are right, servers are cheap compared to employee costs though.)