Live data from Hacker News

Why WhatsApp Only Needs 50 Engineers for Its 900M Users

wired.com

101–110 of 255 posts

Re: Why WhatsApp Only Needs 50 Engineers for Its 900M Users

#101

I don't quite understand the correlation. If the article was about how Whatsapp achieves scale and parallelism through functional languages, then fair enough. But I'm not sure it's fair to say they need 50 engineers, in part, because of the language choice ? Surely they need 50 engineers because their product is fairly simple and there's no need to have more engineers than features. Maybe the point it should have mad…

Actually I believe that answer is in the article: “Our strategy around recruiting is to find the best and brightest engineers. We don’t bring them in specifically because the engineer knows Erlang,”

WhatsApp only needs 50 engineers because of who they hire. Even using Erlang, I pretty sure they would need more than 50 engineers if they hired mainly around average engineers.

Re: Why WhatsApp Only Needs 50 Engineers for Its 900M Users

#102
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Surely they need 50 engineers because their product is fairly simple and there's no need to have more engineers than features. Right. There's not even a way to adjust notification levels based on person or group. I ended up turning off notifications for the whole app, so it stopped serving the same use cases that text messages do. People still need to text or call me if they need an urgent answer.

On the Android app there is. Choose the "View Contact" or "View Group" menu option from the top right and then change that contact or group's notification settings.

Ah, right. Thanks. Still, if there were 60 developers, could they have this feature on all clients.

That was just an example anyway. I could easily have pointed to the ambiguous end-to-end encryption (are my messages even being encrypted?) or the lack of encryption in group chats.

Re: Why WhatsApp Only Needs 50 Engineers for Its 900M Users

#103
"WhatsApp doesn’t talk much about its engineering work" - Wrong as hell. They first talked about this in erlang conf about 3 yrs ago, in 2012. [Youtube Link]( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDk6l3tPBuw ).

I hate how tech blogs take a thing thats quite well known and old and spins into a "did you know?" post like it was just unraveled (Oh, maybe your staff just heard about it, doesnt mean no one knows shit.)

Re: Why WhatsApp Only Needs 50 Engineers for Its 900M Users

#104
post #92
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure you could do it in an afternoon, right? Just like anyone on HN can make a "basic CRUD app" like Facebook in a weekend. I really dislike the arrogant attitude behind these types of comments. Have you worked at WhatsApp? Do you have any idea what they spend their days doing, what their systems look like, what their requirements are like? WhatsApp have close to a billion users, 50 engineers and they manage to p…

Have you worked at WhatsApp? Do you have any idea what they spend their days doing, what their systems look like, what their requirements are like? Do you? If yes, please enlighten us. Otherwise I don't see the point of your objection. No one said that it can be done in a weekend. All that the parent comment said is that the fundamentals of building WhatsApp are already solved. He/she didn't dismiss it. Just because…

Not "parent" but search for Erlang Factory talks they talk about it. Here is one from Rick Reed. He explains how the product works :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c12cYAUTXXs

Re: Why WhatsApp Only Needs 50 Engineers for Its 900M Users

#105
There are more than 50 engineers working to support WhatsApp. A complete count should include all of the work that was out-sourced, such as engineers at AWS (or whomever is supplying the computing), the engineers for Erlang, etc. If the government builds a bridge by using a construction company, no one says the government is capable of building a bridge with zero engineers.

The app is still a remarkable achievement. Those engineers have done a remarkable job integrating everything (plus their own business logic on top), but they are also leveraging a great deal of work done by others.

Re: Why WhatsApp Only Needs 50 Engineers for Its 900M Users

#107

"WhatsApp doesn’t talk much about its engineering work" - Wrong as hell. They first talked about this in erlang conf about 3 yrs ago, in 2012. [Youtube Link]( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDk6l3tPBuw ). I hate how tech blogs take a thing thats quite well known and old and spins into a "did you know?" post like it was just unraveled (Oh, maybe your staff just heard about it, doesnt mean no one knows shit.)

I'd say one talk at an erlang conference three years ago falls into the umbrella of not talking much. The article doesn't say "they never talk about engineering."

Re: Why WhatsApp Only Needs 50 Engineers for Its 900M Users

#108
post #47
post #17

> Why WhatsApp Only Needs 50 Engineers for Its 900M Users Answer: because sending short messages from A to B is basically a solved problem. There is even a programming language (Erlang) that was made with this application in mind. The prototypical "Hello World" example for Erlang is a messaging application.

I'm sure you could do it in an afternoon, right? Just like anyone on HN can make a "basic CRUD app" like Facebook in a weekend. I really dislike the arrogant attitude behind these types of comments. Have you worked at WhatsApp? Do you have any idea what they spend their days doing, what their systems look like, what their requirements are like? WhatsApp have close to a billion users, 50 engineers and they manage to p…

Hang on, I _could_ write a (small) twitter or (early) fb clone in a weekend. Easily. That would probably scale to 10k tweets or feed entries.

What I in _no_ way could do is rewrite fb or twitter at the scale these systems operate today with a billion users and even more posts and data points. I don't agree with the sentiment of the previous poster, but fb & twitter were initially basic CRUD apps.

Re: Why WhatsApp Only Needs 50 Engineers for Its 900M Users

#109

"WhatsApp doesn’t talk much about its engineering work" - Wrong as hell. They first talked about this in erlang conf about 3 yrs ago, in 2012. [Youtube Link]( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDk6l3tPBuw ). I hate how tech blogs take a thing thats quite well known and old and spins into a "did you know?" post like it was just unraveled (Oh, maybe your staff just heard about it, doesnt mean no one knows shit.)

Reading through comments, I think there is an undercurrent of slight envy or resentment (perhaps unconscious) both towards WhatsApp and Erlang. We are rational people so we'll never admit to that, so it comes out in other objections "It is a simple system", "I could do the backend in a weekend"...

There are a lot of startup people here, who work at a startup, bet their time, money, life? on one, and talking about a successful lean startup sold for 19B probably bring feelings of "How come it is not my startup?".

And then for Erlang, it has different syntax, and have to think about concurrency, functional programming, and it is hard for someone used to curly braces. Maybe many tried it, but dismissed it, or bet (time, money, life?) one something else so it is easy to say "But it is not about the platform or technology". Because other conclusions might mean "heck, maybe I made a mistake, I should have that up as well for my problem domain", nobody like to feel that way. Of course, nevermind that engineers from WhatApp have mentioned Erlang was one of their strategic advantages.

Managing 2-3M connections per machine means needing to have fault tolerance (so Erlang is a good choice), but also means managing an order of magnitude less machines! One of the deeper insights we can learn in general is that at scale no matter how cool the concurrency mechanisms, how fast, and new, if they don't go hand in hand with fault isolation then it will just be a very fast system until it starts crashing and its throughput drops to 0. Of course you can do fault isolation with separate servers and OS processes (containers,VMs...) but in this case they do it at a finer grained level.

Re: Why WhatsApp Only Needs 50 Engineers for Its 900M Users

#110
post #107

"WhatsApp doesn’t talk much about its engineering work" - Wrong as hell. They first talked about this in erlang conf about 3 yrs ago, in 2012. [Youtube Link]( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDk6l3tPBuw ). I hate how tech blogs take a thing thats quite well known and old and spins into a "did you know?" post like it was just unraveled (Oh, maybe your staff just heard about it, doesnt mean no one knows shit.)

I'd say one talk at an erlang conference three years ago falls into the umbrella of not talking much. The article doesn't say "they never talk about engineering."

It is an hour talk and it specifically mentions how Erlang was used and how it gave them a strategic advantage.

I have found other mentions about it, perhaps on Erlang mail lists, here is an interview with Eugene Fooksman:

https://pdincau.wordpress.com/2013/03/27/an-interview-with-e...

"""

And the consensus in our team is that it is largely because of Erlang. We’re managing to serve huge amount of connections from single front-end server (this is from last year’s Erlang

"""

I don't know how much clearer can it get.

Here is another directly from their website:

https://blog.whatsapp.com/196/1-million-is-so-2011

It is a bit older they clearly indicate that FreeBSD and Erlang are key and critical elements that let them operate they way they do.

Post reply on HN