3 ms·
The BEAM's multi-node scaling works really well. The argument that you'll need to break things out if you get big enough doesn't really hold water.
by OkayPhysicist 3y ago
The BEAM's multi-node scaling works really well. The argument that you'll need to break things out if you get big enough doesn't really hold water.
- hosh 3y agoAnd even if you need to break things out, you can build different variants of distributions that can all still work together.
- davidw 3y agoBEAM isn't magic scaling sauce, and you're going to run into trouble if you get big enough. But that's a "good problem to have". And it's probably 'enough' for many businesses as-is.
- OkayPhysicist 3y agoIt's not magic, but neither are any of the alternatives. There needs to be a compelling "my constellation of services written in a variety of languages, communicating via a half-baked homebrew collection of API calls beats a constellation of distributed Erlang applications communicating via message passing over the BEAM" to claim that Erlang has scaling issues relative to the alternative. The reality is that asynchronous, parallel, distributed computing is hard, Erlang makes it easier. Not easy, but easier.