2 ms·
> It is the worst possible way to schedule jobs at scale. The literal evidence proves that this approach is absolutely workable at scale, so “the worst possibl
by mdekkers 3y ago
> It is the worst possible way to schedule jobs at scale.
The literal evidence proves that this approach is absolutely workable at scale, so “the worst possible way” clearly doesn’t apply.
The interesting question here is “how did they make this work?” The answer to which is immensely valuable to the technical community at large. “What are they building next?”, whilst interesting, is less immediately valuable as they will be building something Slack-scale, and most orgs are not Slack or Slack-scale
- krisoft 3y ago> The literal evidence proves that this approach is absolutely workable at scale, so “the worst possible way” clearly doesn’t apply. The “worst possible” to me implies that it is possible. Think about trying to solve the same problem by hurling engineers into an erupting vulcano. It is expensive, hurts the morale, causes staff retention issues, but also fundamentally does not solve the task of scheduled task running. I would not describe that as “worst possible” because it lacks the second factor by not being a possible solution.