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

My startup is Microsoft-based, here's why

jitbit.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 209 posts

Re: My startup is Microsoft-based, here's why

#141

Post by jf22 »

etherael wrote: post #132
jf22 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>"On the other hand, if you build your apps around a horizontally scalable storage solution" I'm assuming you're talking specifically about Sql Server because there is no technical reason you can't use MS tech with Node, Mongo or MySql. What about Sql Server doesn't scale horizontally? Sql Server was scaling horizontally in the enterprise space since 2005. And also, all the fancy middleware ( memcache, lucene, whatev…

SQL databases in general don't scale well once they've maxed out a single machine, cross server joins are never going to be pretty and there's a pretty good reason why denormalising data and the adoption of NoSQL solutions with baked in clustering is taking off in a big way. Re NoSQL solutions on windows, theoretically possible, sure, but which NoSQL solution targets windows as its primary platform rather than an aft…

Your first sentence is has 0% to do with the tech stack.

RavenDb.

Yes: https://jira.mongodb.org/browse/SERVER-2612

http://www.windowsazure.com/en-us/develop/nodejs/

Re: My startup is Microsoft-based, here's why

#142

Post by jf22 »

Retric wrote: post #138
etherael wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SQL databases in general don't scale well once they've maxed out a single machine, cross server joins are never going to be pretty and there's a pretty good reason why denormalising data and the adoption of NoSQL solutions with baked in clustering is taking off in a big way. Re NoSQL solutions on windows, theoretically possible, sure, but which NoSQL solution targets windows as its primary platform rather than an aft…

In our tests NoSQL was far slower than SQL solutions the advantage was it dealt with hardware failures more easily, but if you use 5% as much hardware it's far less of an issue. Edit: I think one of the largest probmems is most developers doin't understand SQL or databases that well. Indexed Views for example are an incredibly efficient tools that allow you to avoid a lot of expensive joins without the normal risks o…

Sure, but this is a tech agnostic statement. Nothing to do with Microsoft or .net.

Re: My startup is Microsoft-based, here's why

#143

Post by jlarocco »

codeulike wrote: post #105
ebbv wrote: post #91

I don't see what the anecdote about the other person has to do with your story. It seems like you're citing it to try to imply that Linux can be expensive, but that's not really a valid point based on that anecdote. Their software costs were $0/mo of that $3000/mo. Linux has nothing to do with whatever reasons they had for such expensive server costs. There is no question that whatever their server costs, they would…

Linux has nothing to do with whatever reasons they had for such expensive server costs. It might do. The point is that Node/Ruby etc aren't particularly efficient compared to C# and the CLR, so you need more Server power for a given application. For example StackOverflow ran from a single windows server in the early days, they didn't add a second one till Oct 2008 http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2008/10/adde-a-second-s…

"Node/Ruby are slow, therefore Linux is not good for servers." I don't think that argument works.

There are many, many other tools besides Node/Ruby that run on Linux. Many of them are as efficient or more efficient than C# and the CLR.

Re: My startup is Microsoft-based, here's why

#144

Post by dragontamer »

jmj42 wrote: post #133
toomuchtodo wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've worked in IT for 12 years. Microsoft server stuff never just works . I'm in the process of replacing a $1 MM video asset management system that sits on top of Windows Server with OpenStack/Debian precisely because of this. Microsoft server just works . Hah!

I've worked in IT for more than 15 years. More often than not, Microsoft's enterprise products do "just work." In fact, due do volume pricing (making server 2008/2012 licenses very cheap), around here I recommend Server 2012 w/ standalone LDAP role when people need an LDAP server. Why? Because it just works. An a related note, I, too, am in the process of building a new video management system based on windows (why a…

Agree'd.

Anyone who doesn't agree, hasn't tried to setup the Kerboros LDAP crap on Linux.

Re: My startup is Microsoft-based, here's why

#145

Post by 51Cards »

etherael wrote: post #116

2 SP3's from OVH would be both cheaper (89*2) and have way, way more bang for the buck than a single weak amazon instance. (E3 1245v2 8 ht cores @ 3.4ghz , 2 x 120GB SSD in soft raid and 32gb memory) If you wanted to run windows on those, you'd need to buy two licenses pushing an extra 50$ a month onto the price. You also wouldn't need to screw around with spawned instances in failover, and you could actually use the…

> Cons; > Everyone has to use Windows.

That is a personal opinion. To me it's not a "Con", just a personal choice. I work on both platforms (Windows and Linux) and I don't view either one as a Pro or a Con. Just a different environment. If it's not your first choice doesn't make it a bad choice, which I think summarizes a lot of the article in question.

Re: My startup is Microsoft-based, here's why

#146

Post by bhauer »

TheAnimus wrote: post #131
spamizbad wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Techempower's benchmark's paint a different story than you describe. Node.js seems to be the fastest. ASP.NET MVC shows some strong performance in a handful of database tests but when it comes things like json serialization etc it falls behind the competition. http://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r5&f=ug-... Edit: FWIW it doesn't test Microsoft SQL Server. Still, for most simple-ish web applications I…

>Edit: FWIW it doesn't test Microsoft SQL Server. Still, for most simple-ish web applications I can't imagine MSSQL server being significantly faster than Postgres or MySQL. Its selling point is really its feature set as opposed to its performance anyway. More than just that, they tested mono, which sadly is often very slow, and didn't test on IIS.

The ASP.NET tests run on Windows (EC2) used IIS. We have a SQL Server pull request [1] but haven't been able to incorporate it yet and this will not be included in the upcoming Round 6.

https://github.com/TechEmpower/FrameworkBenchmarks/pull/336

Re: My startup is Microsoft-based, here's why

#148

Post by dragontamer »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #102
soundgecko wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Meanwhile millions of businesses are able to get it to work quite well. Ever use StackOverflow? NewEgg? Their server and tools revenue continues to increase by double digits. You think that's all media manipulation? Go search Dice for for the number of openings. Just because someone was not able use the right tool for the right job in your instance doesn't prove anything. One of my friends used Windows Server to stre…

Wow, great. Stackoverflow and Newegg. Amazon? Linux. Google? Linux. Apple? Linux. Large Hadron Collider? All. Linux. Using Microsoft server in a production environment? Gonna have a bad time. There's a reason most sane people don't use it in important places. I don't hate on Microsoft server products because its in fashion. Its because I like to sleep at night.

Amazon and Google write their own custom code. Hell, all of the major "linux" users have hand-built infrastructure that they don't share with the open source community.

Stackoverflow and Newegg use a vanilla Microsoft Stack.

Re: My startup is Microsoft-based, here's why

#150

Post by viraptor »

Spooky23 wrote: post #115
viraptor wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not just a cool cloud thing. Managing multiple services on a single host comes at its own price too. Trying to manage security separation, disk space, specific user access, projecting bandwidth / cpu / memory / disk usage in the future, figuring out which services cannot run on the same host for yet another set of reasons. Then you add HA for only one service and end up with host A with services X,Y,Z and host B…

It depends on the technology stack that you're using. If your apps are .Net/CLR-based, it's very possible to get the separation that you're looking for. On Unix this is done all of the time with JVM-based apps as well. End of the day scaling horizontally or vertically requires real engineering and operational discipline. I am seeing much more sloppy horizontal scaling than I used to, because the marginal cost of a VM…

> If your apps are .Net/CLR-based, it's very possible to get the separation that you're looking for.

I'm not sure I follow. Unless I'm missing something, the only thing this separates is the memory between applications and optionally user privileges via the standard permissions / security domain. Other resources are completely shared - that is, one app can fill the disk / bandwidth / server thread pool / ... of other apps, right?

Post reply on HN