3 ms·
Well it definitely scales, but also has a constant cost of entry, which probably would make it unsuitable for "small startups" - all details are in the paper.
by the_broken 2y ago
Well it definitely scales, but also has a constant cost of entry, which probably would make it unsuitable for "small startups" - all details are in the paper.
However, if you read through the bibliography, you might notice that every so called "hyperscaler" and many network operators of similar scale (e.g. academia) uses something similar.
- nottorp 2y ago> but also has a constant cost of entry, which probably would make it unsuitable for "small startups" The cost of entry will be worth it just in case the startup turns into the next Google overnight :)
- aseipp 2y ago> all details are in the paper. > However, if you read Yeah, no, that's not going to happen on this site. Why would people waste their time actually reading the paper? That takes too much effort and that's time you could have spent getting internet upvote points. That's why it's much better to post idiotic dismissals which have zero substance or value (and have been regurgitated 1000 times, reminiscent of when a toddler learns a new word).
- nottorp 2y agoWhat do the implementation details have to do with the general characteristics of any developer/backend software coming from google? They're always designed for infinite scaling, they always have trade offs like the initial setup costs, they always don't belong in a small operation. There are always people with a fetish for those solutions because it feels good to have the potential to handle "big data".