3 ms·

I'm actually impressed that they get away with running a site with so much traffic on such minimal hardware. Almost an argument against the cloud/NoSQL/scale-ou

by sriramk 17y ago

I'm actually impressed that they get away with running a site with so much traffic on such minimal hardware. Almost an argument against the cloud/NoSQL/scale-out trends :)

100k 17y ago
That is a good point that is often overlooked. If you're willing to maintain your own servers, you can get _much_ better bang for the buck than leasing them from Amazon (and way better IO performance which matters a lot for your DB). I sometimes feel like there's two types of people interested in the NoSQL stuff: 1. People building internet scale sites (Facebook, Twitter, Google, etc) 2. People who don't know how to optimize their database. But maybe I'm just cynical. :)
- zaphar 17y ago
  3. People who don't like sql and don't like row oriented storage.
  - abalashov 17y ago
    People who don't know/understand SQL and fail to grasp row-oriented storage.
spolsky 17y ago
Everybody wants to believe their site is going to be The Next Twitter, and as good engineers, they believe that they should build it super-duper-scalable from the beginning so they don't have to re-architect it if it really does take off. Pragmatically, 99.99% of startups don't become Twitter and will manage fine with one DB server and one web server, especially if you use a compiled language and a commercial-grade database and nice hardware. And even if you become Twitter, well, they had terrible scaling problems, and it doesn't seem to have hurt them one bit.
- aditya 17y ago
  Are you guys still in BizSpark, btw?
  - scorpion032 17y ago
    I heard in a Podcast that they are; and it is valid for a duration of 3 years. So, they still would be.