Live data from Hacker News

How Discord Stores Billions of Messages (2017)

blog.discord.com

151–160 of 377 posts

Re: How Discord Stores Billions of Messages (2017)

#151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slack implemented something similar called Huddles, but I think is for paid plans only. I personally think Slack calls quality in general are much worse than other services or platforms like Discord or Meets/etc, so I don't know if it'll really help reaching people and companies that are using alternatives for voice.

Huddles uses Amazon's chime backend for audio, so it should perform much better then the current "audio calls" that slack had, though I haven't tried it yet.

My company was also using discord for virtual desks and have moved to slack huddles. They work as good as discord voice channels.

Re: How Discord Stores Billions of Messages (2017)

#152
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honestly, I find discord super frustrating. Can't have multiple chats open at the same time, can't close the right rail, etc. It's UX is subpar in almost every way that matters to me. I use it because _everyone_ uses it, not because I want to.

I can't think of many reasons Discord "ate the whole market" besides smart marketing, honestly. It does audio rooms incredibly well, but everything else (even their developer support team) is just terrible.

[deleted]

Re: How Discord Stores Billions of Messages (2017)

#153
post #122
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't think of many reasons Discord "ate the whole market" besides smart marketing, honestly. It does audio rooms incredibly well, but everything else (even their developer support team) is just terrible.

Everything else was/is much worse. Even years later it's still the only platform I know of that combines text chat rooms, voice chat rooms, and video streaming into one place, all accessible from your 'server' as they call it. It also has clients for many platforms, including a web client, all of which look and function the same. Any alternative out there does one of those things decently well, but either completely…

>combines text chat rooms, voice chat rooms, and video streaming into one place

and unlike skype (and probably teams too) supports PUSH 2 TALK which gaming oriented voice chats had close to 2 decades ago and is even more useful now, during WFH.

Re: How Discord Stores Billions of Messages (2017)

#154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Discord ate the market because it is free and good enough voice quality. Before that everyone was paying for voice server hosting or doing it themselves. Is that smart marketing or just the standard operating procedure for startups around that time?

Technically Skype existed but lost with the new sms-looking ui that everyone hated and it was hardly suitable for anything larger than a friend group. Then there were long-standing issues of voice chats being P2P and thus allowing users to find the IP of other users, enabling DDOS attacks on routers.

Yeah I think people forget that Skype actually owned the video game voiceserver market for a few years.

Ventrillo and Teamspeak and Mumble were all good. But you had to assign someone in your friend-group to manage the server. This meant paying for hosting to do it "the right way", and in turn one friend either paid the hosting themselves or you had to figure out how to split the cost. Then if someone else joined the group you had to split it with them, etc.. Some people would self-host teamspeak or ventrillo at their houses so you could avoid those costs, but now you are reliant on an unreliable system of one friend hosting your voiceserver on their desktop computer. This means that router mishaps could send it offline, them turning off their computer could send it offline, or if the teamspeak/vent daemon wasn't running then your whole server is offline.

Skype solved a lot of those problems because it was always online, no one had to manage a server, and it was free. It sucked in just about every other way as a game chat option, but the benefits of no-server-management, always-available, and no-cost, made an objectively inferior product dominate the world of game chat.

Discord simply took the features of teamspeak/mumble/ventrillo and combined it with the service benefits that skype offered. No more server cost sharing and no more server administration. But you still got the benefits of actual game chat servers like voice lobbies (as opposed to initiating calls like skype).

I really don't think Marketing is what made Discord successful. This is truly an example of someone who solved a need. We needed a product like teamspeak/ventrillo/mumble combined with a service like skype. Discord was that creation. It truly solved a problem for gamers. Gamers were not looking to cling to skype, but they were all using it. Discord created a product that fit into the market perfectly and the masses ran to it because the need was so big, and Discord solved the problem that gamers needed. The ease of setup also helped. Sending a single share link that someone simply clicked was all it took to join a server and start talking. I think that ease of setup is also an incredibly under-rated strength of Discord. In fact I would venture to guess that most gamers joined their first Discord server by clicking a discord share link that was sent to them via Skype.

Re: How Discord Stores Billions of Messages (2017)

#155

Discord had like $300M invested and they created unparalleled piece of software that ate whole market, damn. One of the most impressive softwares that I've seen and use after years of using ventrilo/mumble/teamspeak.

Better engineering than Slack, but not as good of a business

Re: How Discord Stores Billions of Messages (2017)

#156

Maybe I don't know enough about databases, but could you really not have done this with postgres?

I'm very much in the "use PostgreSQL unless you have absolutely proven to yourself that it won't work for your project" camp but in this case it really does look like moving to Cassandra was a good choice.

NoSQL scalable stores like Cassandra basically only work well if you have a very strong model of the queries that you will need to make.

In this case, that's exactly what they had: they knew what their read/write patterns looked like and they knew that they would be growing at hundreds of millions of rows per month, so easy horizontal scalability was a hard requirement.

The biggest weakness of classical relational databases like PostgreSQL come when you have a super high volumes of inserts (as opposed to updates) which will continue to grow your database over time, and you need to keep all of that data accessible for real-time queries.

They might have been able to achieve something like this using a PostgreSQL extension such as Citus, but it really does look like what they are doing fits Cassandra's sweet spot.

Re: How Discord Stores Billions of Messages (2017)

#157
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It works nice and is free, but for how long? How long can they keep paying for that bandwidth and message data storage while keeping the thing essentially free?

> It works nice and is free, but for how long? I wonder about this a lot. I wonder if they have some big 'whales' that help sustain their business OR they're just selling all of our data (is that enough to make money at discords scale??).

It's a spy and data mining operation for some intelligence group same reason why twitter and facebook got traction.

Re: How Discord Stores Billions of Messages (2017)

#158
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't think of many reasons Discord "ate the whole market" besides smart marketing, honestly. It does audio rooms incredibly well, but everything else (even their developer support team) is just terrible.

Their moderation and community management tools are fantastic.

It's definitely improved over the years, but every remotely populated server I'm in uses bots for basic moderation features like ban words, proper bans/kicks (for example, temporary bans), warns, etc. There's still a long way to go in my opinion.

Re: How Discord Stores Billions of Messages (2017)

#159

They wouldn't need to store so many if they actually let people delete their messages on account deletion. Instead, they ban many people who attempt to do so via automated scripts.

Deletion of data at scale is a really difficult technical problem, unfortunately.

I'm not saying they shouldn't do that though - especially given regulations like GDPR. Designing systems for deletion is important! But it's also really hard, especially if you didn't design for it from the start.

There's also no way the tiny fraction of users who want to delete their data would make up a significant enough proportion of the messages that it would impact their scaling strategy.

Re: How Discord Stores Billions of Messages (2017)

#160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Discord ate the market because it is free and good enough voice quality. Before that everyone was paying for voice server hosting or doing it themselves. Is that smart marketing or just the standard operating procedure for startups around that time?

I agree, but also worth mentioning that Discord really did Chatrooms correctly. The ability to easily create servers, invite users to your server, and then make that server your homebase with its own channels and emojis, is pretty novel and perfectly fit into the gaming community which is basically a loosely connected graph of friend groups.

Also, RBAC which allows huge flexibility for users to run their community in whatever fashion they want.
Post reply on HN