Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by fearthetelomere 641 days ago
>Diving into the actual contents of one of those PASSIVE_UPDATE_V1 dispatches, we would send all of the channels, members, or members in voice, even if only a single element changed.

> the metrics that guided us during the [zstd experiment] revealed a surprising behavior

This feels so backwards. I'm glad that they addressed this low-hanging fruit, but I wonder why they didn't do this metrics analysis from the start, instead of during the zstd experiment.

I also wonder why they didn't just send deltas from the get-go. If PASSIVE_UPDATE_V1 was initially implemented "as a means to scale Discord servers to hundreds of thousands of users", why was this obvious optimization missed?

1 comments

It was a bug
Thanks, explains a lot. Wish the article did a better job explaining that instead of framing it as a version upgrade to V2.