Quote from: gweedo on January 27, 2013, 05:29:06 AM

Quote from: DeathAndTaxes on January 27, 2013, 05:14:13 AM

Quote from: gweedo on January 27, 2013, 04:11:28 AM

Quote from: schalk on January 27, 2013, 04:04:04 AM

What point are you trying to get a across? That to optimise a website you need System Engineers? Well that's kind of a given when you are looking at a scale that big.

You will have these exact same problems with MySQL when looking at that scale. You can only scale up to some extent, then you will require techniques to allow you to scale out, like using replication.

If you read the article and look at how there setup is, they obviously are locked into a scenario where they can't even change databases, so the only way they can scale is with hardware. Now you can get more performance out of MySQL but either changing the database engine, or even using a mysql build that has beter performance and is tested. Kinda like twitter. SO the point I am trying to get across is that with ASP.NET and C# the only way to scale is thru hardware, and with other options you can just switch out some software and then you can do hardware scaling. So yea what would you want to do spend cash as a startup on hardware? Or go with this proven software that is free?

No either you didn't read the link or you lack the knowledge to understand what you are reading. The only thing which would give better performance is a NO SQL setup like what Google uses but Stack Exchange didn't need that level of performance so the jump in complexity, and design using NO SQL wasn't warranted. MySQL wouldn't magically perform better. The one advantage that MySQL would have is that it easier to scaled out vs scaled up*. That can be mitigated by smart hardware design. Server should be designed to scale up in order to maximize ROI%.

Of course we are talking about a scale roughly 50x to 100x larger than the largest Bitcoin enterprise.

*Scale up would mean increasing the performance of a single (or small cluster) or database servers. Where scale out would be replicating the database across a much larger cluster to acheive similar performance. Since SQL Server is licensed the licensing costs are lower when scaling up vs scaling out.

WOW dude I know your just trolling me but really you need to up your skills. The guess I have explain every little detail. Ok that article was just to show that ASP.NET only scales with hardware, cause of the tools that are presented by microsoft.

Now your also talking about NoSql which is probably not even worth it for any bitcoin business, even thou you brought up the stackoverflow reference for ASP.net. So we weren't even talking about bitcoin businesses.

Mysql can scale up and scaling out would be for data, and not traffic, so make that distinction when your posting. Also if you don't know already twitter uses a mysql build that they programmed themselves that give better performances, I actually used it so I do know what I am talking about. Also there is the replacement for MySql they works exactly like mysql you wouldn't have to change any if very little code to connect to it which is MariaDB they have a foundation as well

MariaDB is very easy to scale out or up and even has more performance then twitter mysql build. MariaDB actually just got some funding so it will only become better.

Once again an entire post where you grabbed a bunch of random words and spewed it across the page without saying anything coherent.

1) You do realize that asp.net =/= SQL Server right? You also know that Asp.net has database connectivity for every major (and lots of minor) RDMBS to include MySql? Building asp.net application doesn't require the use of SQL Server.

2) On SQL Server vs MySQL scaling up isnt an issue. All modern RDBMS can scale up. Scaling out refers to using multiple servers to distribute the workload. Get it OUT <-----> vs UP ^. While this can be done with SQL Server the licensing costs generally making scaling UP more cost effective. No I doubt you did realize that. Nothing in the article talked about how "mysql would have worked but they were stuck with SQL Server". MySql wouldn't have worked any better and unless it is an open source project MySql needs to be licensed.

3)

Quote

twitter uses a mysql build that they programmed themselves

Yeah of course writing a custom RDBMS is something most startups are looking to do right? Of course that custom RDBMS would also work with asp.net (and probably any other programming language). DB =/= programming language. Also how much cost (labor isn't free) do you think this custom RDBMS Twitter built ended up costing.

4)
Lastly as we pointed out these are hardware scale issues way way way beyond what a startup would face. ASP.NET and SQL Server do scale up into the "top of the web category" with sites like stackexchange which refutes your dubious claim that asp.net doesn't scale.

Then again someone who finds a $300 conference "outrageous" likely hasn't had a very successful career in database development so don't beat yourself up for continually spewing nonsense. I mean these are things picked up on the job and I doubt you will learn that stocking the shelves at Best Buy is very rewarding.