Slack was down • Hacker News Board

Re: Slack was down

#241

Post by awj » Wed, Jul 31, 2019, 3:22 PM UTC

wtetzner wrote: post #224

awj wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ircd with logging enabled + elastic search/sphinx/lucene + web frontend Slack is way more than that, though. My recollection is that even the initial version of Slack was more than that. At this point, it's enough that "let's extend ircd" isn't exactly a practical answer. Either they maintain their own incompatible fork of ircd or they try to force their business desires into the irc protocol. There's plenty of thi…

I don't use Slack, but I'm curious about which features make up the "more than that" part.

Based on me augmenting my memory with searches of release notes at the time:

- Phone apps from the jump - Easy ability to upload files - Search includes the content of those files - Editing

Re: Slack was down

#242

Post by MiroF » Fri, Aug 02, 2019, 1:21 AM UTC

scott_s wrote: post #210

IggleSniggle wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah see the people that are caring about this are caring because it has used up all of their available RAM, has pushed stuff into Virtual Memory, and it is causing performance problems for their system. Or, if they are IT, it is causing performance problems on their users' systems. This is a pretty reasonable complaint when you're talking about a system with 2gb, and a chat application that uses 1.5gb of memory...or…

"Virtual memory" is not a synonym for swap space: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2937597

Is this really such a common mistake? What is virtual about putting memory onto a hard drive

Re: Slack was down

#243

Post by scott_s » Tue, Aug 06, 2019, 9:57 PM UTC

MiroF wrote: post #242

scott_s wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Virtual memory" is not a synonym for swap space: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2937597

Is this really such a common mistake? What is virtual about putting memory onto a hard drive

In my experience, yes, I see the misconception frequently. I think it stems from Microsoft using the name "Virtual memory size" for swap space in earlier versions of Windows.