Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

"100% of our production system is now running Go"

groups.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 189 posts

Re: "100% of our production system is now running Go"

#31

Post by dbecker »

jmaygarden wrote: post #25
dbecker wrote: post #20

This is a really awkward sentence: "100% of our production system is now running Go as 95% of our application." I'm curious what the 5% is that they didn't convert to go.

Read the whole paragraph. It's C. "100% of our production system is now running Go as 95% of our application (C being the other bits). Not side bits, but our critical path."

I meant "what functionality is the remaining 5%." Not "what language is it."

Basically, once you are 95% Go, what parts are hard to convert to Go to make it 100%

Re: "100% of our production system is now running Go"

#32

Post by pcwalton »

jonathansizz wrote: post #28
aaronblohowiak wrote: post #2

Creator of SASS and Haml now using Go for whole production system. When asked about surprising things about Go, its creators have said that they expected to recruit people from c++ communities, instead it seems to be more ruby/python people.

I think that Mozilla's Rust is aiming squarely at C++ developers, whereas Go is more of a Java replacement. And it's interesting to see Python and Ruby being squeezed lately, from various directions; Clojure, Go, other languages. Since Python went mainstream and started being picked up for serious projects, it naturally came under the spotlight a lot more than it had previously, and I think many people have started t…

"I think that Mozilla's Rust is aiming squarely at C++ developers, whereas Go is more of a Java replacement."

I basically agree with this as a Rust developer (although I'm not sure about Go being in Java's niche; I think of it more as in node.js's niche -- highly scalable web apps). Early on, I think both Rust and Go were thought to be targeting the same segment, but it turned out that we really weren't. Personally, I'm completely fine with that; different language designs are appropriate for different roles. The huge amount of work that we've done to make non-allocating and manually-memory-managed code easy, predictable, and type-safe is totally overkill for Go's niche, for example, while for games and web browsers this sort of thing is essential.

Re: "100% of our production system is now running Go"

#35

Post by luriel »

dbecker wrote: post #31
jmaygarden wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Read the whole paragraph. It's C. "100% of our production system is now running Go as 95% of our application (C being the other bits). Not side bits, but our critical path."

I meant "what functionality is the remaining 5%." Not "what language is it." Basically, once you are 95% Go, what parts are hard to convert to Go to make it 100%

Probably binding to pre-existing C libs.

It will take some time to replace 40 years of existing accumulated C libraries.

Re: "100% of our production system is now running Go"

#36

Post by Devilboy »

siculars wrote: post #6
spicyj wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This happens only if you have some Google login cookies already -- if you delete all your Google cookies then you won't be asked to log in.

Um. What? Did you just tell me to fuck myself?

I believe he did.

Re: "100% of our production system is now running Go"

#37

Post by ww520 »

joejohnson wrote: post #34

"100% of our production system is now running Go as 95% of our application (C being the other bits)" So... 95% of their production system is running Go.

I guess it's playing word semantic. 100% of their MACHINES are running GO in SOME capacity, while other languages play some roles in other capacity.

Re: "100% of our production system is now running Go"

#39

Post by mturmon »

thebigshane wrote: post #19
cageface wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In hindsight it doesn't seem so surprising. Go really isn't a good alternative to C++ for the kinds of things that really need the low-level control and direct memory access C++ provides. And if you don't really need those things you probably should have moved on to Java or Ruby/Python/etc already. And since a lot of Java shops are fantastically risk averse I'm not at all surprised that the same kind of people that w…

Straight from Rob Pike -- http://commandcenter.blogspot.com/2012/06/less-is-exponentia... Python and Ruby programmers come to Go because they don't have to surrender much expressiveness, but gain performance and get to play with concurrency. C++ programmers don't come to Go because they have fought hard to gain exquisite control of their programming domain, and don't want to surrender any of it. To them, software isn…

Nice link. The separate submission and thread is here:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4158865

Re: "100% of our production system is now running Go"

#40

Post by moe »

zeeg wrote: post #21

I'd be really curious to know what their "800 million requests a month" means. When we actually added up numbers a while back, we were doing around 250 million requests to our Python machines/day, and we only had 200 servers (which included dbs/etc), that was around 3-3.5 billion pageviews a month IIRC. We now have 300 machines and do about 5 billion pageviews, but that completely ignores the huge amounts of requests…

200 servers for 800mio requests seems a little nuts.

Two of my customers are doing 500mio and 400mio respectively on ~20 each, on Rails (i.e. as slow as it gets).

Post reply on HN