[conductr]

I think the self congratulatory tone is just them saying if you design things simply you can do a lot (load) with a lot less (people/complexity) and still have an app that’s resilient (ignore minor ddos issues).

It’s encouraging or reminding people that this style of architecture, which was once prevalent, is still an option and is still rather legit.

Or, that’s how I read it however I also am biased as I prefer this method of development too. I think what’s missing in the article is, who are they and who is the audience. As in, some acknowledge that most things are not ever going to see mass scale usage and don’t need to be developed to the specs of a faang

[maxk42]

Except that it wasn't their architecture which allowed them to weather this storm: it's Cloudflare's. And the storm is a whopping 1.85 requests per second, all coming from Europe which means this isn't even a DDoS to begin with.

[conductr]

Probably mincing words but I guess I consider cloudfare part of the architecture and not part of their infrastructure and it seems like you’re conflating the two?

I do get that the volume of data and requests they are handling hardly constitutes the claim of ddos.

[aequitas]

But they didn't active the "Under Attack" mode in Cloudflare, so surely they must be doing it all by themselves.

[sethammons]

sarcasm is hard to read in text; missing /s