Is it possible to host Facebook on AWS?
blog.sqlizer.io
Is it possible to host Facebook on AWS?
1–10 of 164 posts
Re: Is it possible to host Facebook on AWS?
#2> If we take the 2012 estimate to be true, Facebook’s server capacity outstrips Moore’s Law.
As well as inflation, and all manner of other totally irrelevant concepts.
Re: Is it possible to host Facebook on AWS?
#3Tech's own Fermi problems.
Re: Is it possible to host Facebook on AWS?
#4> If we take the 2012 estimate to be true, Facebook’s server capacity outstrips Moore’s Law. As well as inflation, and all manner of other totally irrelevant concepts.
is it really irrelevant? It's a well understood benchmark for tech growth rate is it not?
Re: Is it possible to host Facebook on AWS?
#5> If we take the 2012 estimate to be true, Facebook’s server capacity outstrips Moore’s Law. As well as inflation, and all manner of other totally irrelevant concepts.
It could be relevant if there is some fixed refresh cycle of servers. That is, newer servers can serve more end users because of the faster cpu, drives, etc. The author seems to have skipped the concept though.
Re: Is it possible to host Facebook on AWS?
#6> If we take the 2012 estimate to be true, Facebook’s server capacity outstrips Moore’s Law. As well as inflation, and all manner of other totally irrelevant concepts.
is it really irrelevant? It's a well understood benchmark for tech growth rate is it not?
It's a benchmark for transistor density, nothing else. Of course a single company could grow faster than transistor density can scale. The only possible insight, if you can call it that, is that facebook owns more square centimeters of transistors now than they did in 2012.
Re: Is it possible to host Facebook on AWS?
#7I think a lot of the smaller details this article glosses over contribute to FB's ability to run on so few machines. For example, comparing my anecdotes of FB's internal network (they probably have the most organized/mature IPv6 network on the planet) with those of my AWS public cloud experience, I'd reckon that a lot of FB applications would require architectural redesigns to operate in that kind of environment.
The real question isn't "can FB be hosted on AWS?", it's "why isn't FB competing with AWS?" because what they've already got is much better for the range of applications that they deploy.
Re: Is it possible to host Facebook on AWS?
#8> Its application code is still developed using PHP
This is surprising since 1) Facebook is most likely using Hack and 2) it could save a lot of money by moving to Go.
> Facebook’s entire site runs on HHVM (desktop, API and mobile)
Isn't Facebook running mostly on React? I'm guessing HHVM only really powers the API, business logic, etc.
Re: Is it possible to host Facebook on AWS?
#9I think a lot of the smaller details this article glosses over contribute to FB's ability to run on so few machines. For example, comparing my anecdotes of FB's internal network (they probably have the most organized/mature IPv6 network on the planet) with those of my AWS public cloud experience, I'd reckon that a lot of FB applications would require architectural redesigns to operate in that kind of environment. The…
I suppose the reason Facebook doesn't resell their infrastructure is because their endgame is to _be_ the internet. From their point of view, any site you're on that isn't Facebook is their competition.
Re: Is it possible to host Facebook on AWS?
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
is it really irrelevant? It's a well understood benchmark for tech growth rate is it not?
It's a benchmark for transistor density, nothing else. Of course a single company could grow faster than transistor density can scale. The only possible insight, if you can call it that, is that facebook owns more square centimeters of transistors now than they did in 2012.
That's the original inspiration, but I thought people adopted the exponential rate from the original context as a bench mark for all sorts of stuff. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore%27s_law#Other_formulatio.... At best I can figure the problem with the auhtor's usage is that it's not relative to a per unit performance but rather a per enterprise performance, ie not a faster server but more of them over a unit of time. I'm not entirely convinced the restriction to a per unit basis is valid, but maybe that's a more meaningful definition than just arbitrary exponential growth.