|
|
|
|
|
by achompas
5088 days ago
|
|
Yes, you have a decent amount of traffic but you're also only dealing with ~160 uncompressed bytes (plus whatever overhead) per event. The hurdles you've overcame aren't that particularly amazing nor challenging. >42M uniques last month.[0] Are you really going to assert Twitter hasn't dealt with amazing or challenging hurdles in getting this far? [0] http://siteanalytics.compete.com/twitter.com/ EDIT: this ignores that twitter.com is not the only Twitter client--they served 15B (!!) requests/day (!!!) as of a year ago. Not to mention metadata, instrumentation for services, logging, DB backups, and managing configuration of all of those distributed resources. Are we still talking about the ease of 160B? http://www.readwriteweb.com/hack/2011/07/twitter-serves-more... |
|
In 2008/2009, another engineer and myself built an ad-platform that received around 500M impressions per day, 5M clicks per day. And it wasn't just recording a tweet or publishing out to followers. We took the user input query, had to do some keyword/relevancy targeting, geofiltering, matching to advertisers and deliver back a large result set of adverts. All within 100ms.
Our platform was also apache, mod_php, memcached, mysql and rabbitmq. So definitely not the most optimal of platforms by any means. We had two colos with ~20 servers (dell r410s) at each facility.
Twitter just recently announced 400M tweets/day. I'm not trying to brag about my experiences, because looking back now we made numerous amateur mistakes, but just showing that Twitter's "scale" is a joke compared to everyday challenges at any large internet ad network.