[patio11]

This comment is more aggressive than comments should be on HN.

I would exercise a bit of humility when commenting about other people's architectural decisions: they have bled all over that codebase and infrastructure, but I have not. They see it in their dreams, and I do not. They may from time to time decide to tell the community about their adventures. That is an excellent opportunity for me to learn from another engineering team's perspective and experiences, rather than an opportunity for me to demonstrate my intellectual superiority over them. They do not, as a function of having written about their experiences, owe me responses to my off-the-cuff analysis of their engineering tradeoffs.

[dkarapetyan]

In that case it's excellent story telling and nothing more. We're an engineering discipline and use case studies in engineering disciplines are measured by different standards, humility and hubris aside. You can bleed and dream about your architecture all you want but as a community we should be more analytical than that and not fall into the all the usual mental traps just because we bled for some engineering decisions. Teasing apart confounding variables and showing pros and cons of the various approaches and adding a bit more detail about the actual libraries would have made this a much better post. If he had provided all those details then some of us could have double checked the numbers with some benchmarks and learned from it but that opportunity was squandered.

Once again, I'm not aggressive but I am critical. nexneo has since addressed all the issues people have brought up and if he'd done that initially then I would have been much less critical.