On Sunday, 14 December 2014 at 18:50:44 UTC, Sean Kelly wrote:
On Sunday, 14 December 2014 at 18:25:26 UTC, Joakim wrote:
On Sunday, 14 December 2014 at 17:09:31 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
You mean scale like Twitter and LinkedIn?
Maybe that's why they still lose money hand over fist,
especially Twitter, because of all the extra servers they have
to buy. :p By comparison, Whatsapp was able to put millions of
users on a server with erlang and become profitable with much
less revenue:
http://forum.dlang.org/post/bmvwftlyvlgmuehrt...@forum.dlang.org
I don't really understand how you can simultaneously advertise
Erlang and bash Java for inefficiency. I think the core
concurrency model in Erlang is really great, and it scales
horizontally to great effect, but it's a bear to do TCP work in
and is far less efficient than Java, let alone C++.
I'm not trying to say erlang is much more efficient in the
general case than Java, as I've heard it isn't, but that they
chose a language and OS that was highly optimized for their use,
concurrency, and were able to scale using fewer servers as a
result, as opposed to just throwing general-purpose java/.net and
more servers at the problem. Just another example of right tool
for the job.
