Stack Exchange’s Architecture in Bullet Points
blog.serverfault.com
Stack Exchange’s Architecture in Bullet Points
1–10 of 34 posts
Re: Stack Exchange’s Architecture in Bullet Points
#2Not Apache? shocked.
Re: Stack Exchange’s Architecture in Bullet Points
#3I'd be interested in finding out why they chose to go with Windows-based web servers. Administering 12 production nodes would not be fun and doing so over remote desktop seems like a pain to me.
I recently discovered puppet and I am just way too excited about what I can do with it.
Re: Stack Exchange’s Architecture in Bullet Points
#4I'd be interested in finding out why they chose to go with Windows-based web servers. Administering 12 production nodes would not be fun and doing so over remote desktop seems like a pain to me. I recently discovered puppet and I am just way too excited about what I can do with it.
From what I recall, it was was Jeff Atwood knew best when he started it.
It is a good example of all those stories of not being able to change technology after you become popular. It seems that they are accepting Linux where it fits best at least.
Re: Stack Exchange’s Architecture in Bullet Points
#5I'd be interested in finding out why they chose to go with Windows-based web servers. Administering 12 production nodes would not be fun and doing so over remote desktop seems like a pain to me. I recently discovered puppet and I am just way too excited about what I can do with it.
From what I recall, it was was Jeff Atwood knew best when he started it. It is a good example of all those stories of not being able to change technology after you become popular. It seems that they are accepting Linux where it fits best at least.
Doesn't Spolsky's company live in the MS world, as well? (More significant that Atwood's familiarity, I'd guess.)
Re: Stack Exchange’s Architecture in Bullet Points
#6I'd be interested in finding out why they chose to go with Windows-based web servers. Administering 12 production nodes would not be fun and doing so over remote desktop seems like a pain to me. I recently discovered puppet and I am just way too excited about what I can do with it.
StackOverflow is done in ASP.NET MVC. They were one of the earliest adopters of ASP.NET MVC. It would make sense to go with Windows servers as Mono w/ Linux may not be up-to-date with latest C#/ASP.NET code. BTW, as they are part of BizSpark program, they would have got the server licences for cheap.
And I am genuinely curious as to why you think 12 Windows servers are pain compared to 12 Linux boxes?
Re: Stack Exchange’s Architecture in Bullet Points
#7I'd be interested in finding out why they chose to go with Windows-based web servers. Administering 12 production nodes would not be fun and doing so over remote desktop seems like a pain to me. I recently discovered puppet and I am just way too excited about what I can do with it.
They could do almost everything (administrator wise) via Powershell if they chose too, they're not necessarily stuck using Remote Desktop.
Re: Stack Exchange’s Architecture in Bullet Points
#8Here's an earlier explanation about their caching set-up using Redis:
http://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/69164/does-stackover...
Re: Stack Exchange’s Architecture in Bullet Points
#9I'd be interested in finding out why they chose to go with Windows-based web servers. Administering 12 production nodes would not be fun and doing so over remote desktop seems like a pain to me. I recently discovered puppet and I am just way too excited about what I can do with it.
From what I recall, it was was Jeff Atwood knew best when he started it. It is a good example of all those stories of not being able to change technology after you become popular. It seems that they are accepting Linux where it fits best at least.
It seems odd, too, that they would use both CentOS and Ubuntu. Why not run Redis on Ubuntu?
Re: Stack Exchange’s Architecture in Bullet Points
#10I'd be interested in finding out why they chose to go with Windows-based web servers. Administering 12 production nodes would not be fun and doing so over remote desktop seems like a pain to me. I recently discovered puppet and I am just way too excited about what I can do with it.
Both Joel Spolsky and Jeff Atwood made several articles or blog posts explaining this. Obviously, they've got the licenses cheap; they're using the technology (WISC) they know best; and WS2008 is far, far better than any other previous MS server OS, due precisely to huge pressure from the linux challenger :)
Note : I'm a FSF member and free software fanatic, but I won't pretend that something that obviously works well, doesn't.