Architecture, Design & Strategy - Latest Comments on Scalability is Easy! (To Get Wrong)

Eli Weinstock-Herman (tarwn) [Member] in response to: Scalability is Easy! (To Get Wrong)

Eli Weinstock-Herman (tarwn) [Member] — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 14:41:37 +0000

Voodoo Child: Been there :)

The whole reason I wrote a simulator for these scenarios was because having conversations about scaling tend to devolve into a lot of hand waving. I'm going to do a couple more posts and post up the code so when people are in similar situations they can at least run some scenarios and make some pretty graphs in excel to bring to the conversation :)

Voodoo Child [Visitor] in response to: Scalability is Easy! (To Get Wrong)

Voodoo Child [Visitor] — Thu, 06 Dec 2012 12:20:08 +0000

The real fun starts when you inherit a critical system which is in serious need of *right* scaling yesterday while too much *wrong* scaling already has been implemented.

Baseline? Numbers? Right after a documented system design.......

"I didn't mean to take up all your sweet time, I'll give it right back to ya one of these days" - Jimmy Hendrix (I suspect he designed the system I'm working on)

Eli Weinstock-Herman (tarwn) [Member] in response to: Scalability is Easy! (To Get Wrong)

Eli Weinstock-Herman (tarwn) [Member] — Wed, 05 Dec 2012 15:05:53 +0000

Absolutely, unfortunately that's not obvious to the people that skip the baseline. I've seen a number of developers that had a tendency to make a logical leap from "I code good" to "my code makes the system faster/better/strong/smarter", which made performing a baseline seem redundant and/or wasteful.

Which is doubly unfortunate, since my anecdotal experiences have shown a strong correlation between skipping the baseline and poor optimization.

SQLDenis [Member] in response to: Scalability is Easy! (To Get Wrong)

SQLDenis [Member] — Wed, 05 Dec 2012 13:23:08 +0000

Without a baseline and numbers it basically becomes voodoo