Ken Wei's personal annotations on this page
Ken bookmarked
on 2009-03-05
-
Keeping working set in memory is not the only reason for sharding but one of the most frequent ones. The examples I like to use is YouTube - they did not shard until after Google bought them (though they were in pain) and 37Signals
-
For me simple is best. Complex architectures are more error prone harder to maintain (upgrades etc) and troubleshoot.
-
Unless you’re Google scale with failures happening daily you can’t really be sure you’re handling “wild” failures, not the test ones well.
-
Google guys tells us single MySQL server on a good hardware has MTBF somewhere between 1000 and 2000 days.
-
So am I denying all MySQL industry practices (which we also covered in a great depth in our book) ? Not really. I’m just suggesting do not just grab advice from the Internet or friends tip and do not complicate beyond the need.
-
It may be boring but boring systems often have highest uptime
-
where startups spend lots of time building systems that will scale to the billions of records they’ll never have to store.
This link has been bookmarked by 5 people . It was first bookmarked on 02 Mar 2009, by sven duzont.
-
-
Keeping working set in memory is not the only reason for sharding but one of the most frequent ones. The examples I like to use is YouTube - they did not shard until after Google bought them (though they were in pain) and 37Signals
-
For me simple is best. Complex architectures are more error prone harder to maintain (upgrades etc) and troubleshoot.
- 5 more annotations...
-
-
FadzlanComplexity often causes trouble. But simplicity should not be confused with “lack of good design”
Would you like to comment?
Join Diigo for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.