zlacker

[return to "In Twitter’s early days, only one celebrity could tweet at a time"]
◧
1. molecu+qx[view] [source] 2018-05-24 23:43:06
>>evanwe+(OP)
2010: "At any moment, Justin Bieber uses 3% of our infrastructure. Racks of servers are dedicated to him"

https://gizmodo.com/5632095/justin-bieber-has-dedicated-serv...

◧◩
2. firebo+WM[view] [source] 2018-05-25 03:41:44
>>molecu+qx
But, but, but...why does Twitter have so many engineers? I could write Twitter in a weekend!

--95% of anti-TWTR posters circa 2010-2016.

◧◩◪
3. snovv_+2W[view] [source] 2018-05-25 06:02:57
>>firebo+WM
Before bring acquired, WhatsApp had what, 30 employees?

How did they do it? I know they used custom BSD servers so that a single box could keep close to 1M TCP connections open. I'm sure with a fixed target to aim for and all scope known upfront a small crack team of devs could do something similar for Twitter.

◧◩◪◨
4. zmb_+511[view] [source] 2018-05-25 07:11:47
>>snovv_+2W
One-to-one vs. many-to-many messaging. The amount of work you need to do to deliver a WhatsApp message is constant and small -- just route the message to a single recipient's mailbox. The amount of work Twitter has to do to deliver a message grows as a function of followers. One celebrity tweeting another celebrity means you have to deliver the message to the mailboxes of the followers of both -- millions of times more work than WhatsApp per message. In addition, Twitter persists all the messages while WhatsApp doesn't.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. segmon+XH1[view] [source] 2018-05-25 14:24:02
>>zmb_+511
This! Everyone keep's saying it's BSD Erlang and jumping on the Erlang train. Fine tools btw, but WhatsApp is super simple compared to Twitter. rolls eyes
[go to top]