Originally posted by stevenc
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Spotify Switches From Debian To Ubuntu
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Ansla View PostWhere did you find that figure?
Netflix is high-bandwidth. Lets say 1 in 2 American Households watches Netflix once at peak hours. That's a LOT of traffic.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Ansla View PostWhere did you find that figure?
EDIT: http://www.azcentral.com/story/money...rises/2138874/
So it looks like Netflix alone is not quite 50% now but it is still a significant amount of traffic from one site.Last edited by profoundWHALE; 17 July 2014, 02:08 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by stevenc View PostAnother, much simpler explanation is that most people on their staff right now are users/fans of Ubuntu rather than Debian. And despite the reasonings given to management, this was just the personal preference of the majority of their staff? If you look closely at the email on Debian mailing lists it mentions that one Debian developer no longer works at Spotify.
This would explain why they didn't go for RHEL/CentOS either, despite having very long-term supported releases, and systemd already (in RHEL7). Or FreeBSD.
Why do they need 5000 servers anyway? Netflix streams video, accounting for more than half the Internet traffic in the US at peak times, from only 50 servers or so. FreeBSD, just saying.
Comment
-
Originally posted by eidolon View PostI wasn't aware Spotify was already using systemd or any other non-default init on Debian, or are you speaking to the fact that the Debian Project offers no commercial support? As I said, Spotify's 14.04 configuration only matters to the extent they can get support for it; if that's not something they are interested in or is otherwise not a concern of theirs, then their 14.04 setup is of no matter at all.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Ansla View PostWhere did you find that figure?
And Netflix have about 1000 of these (FreeBSD) systems by now (not 50):
At peak times, Netflix accounts for around a third of the consumer Internet traffic in North America. This week, one of its senior engineers described how it gets all those movies to your screen.
But storing and streaming HD movies is obviously a lot more demanding than, just OGG audio streams. So I maintain that Spotify has relatively many servers for what they do.
Comment
-
Originally posted by brent View PostWell, Debian doesn't clearly communicate how they want to go about LTS releases, so this is easy to understand from Spotify's point of view.
Now if you're running a hosting provider, selling servers as a service or using linux in any number of ways that your installs are very likely to be numerous and unlikely to be uniform, you will probably want those LTS installs.
Still, I do accept that Debian is a bit fuzzy about the release cycle and it'd be nice if they commited to at least minimum dates earlier.
Comment
-
Originally posted by stevenc View PostAnd Netflix have about 1000 of these (FreeBSD) systems by now (not 50):
http://www.networkworld.com/article/...o-your-tv.html
Incredibly, there is no data center behind Netflix. The application is "cloud native", running on 500 to 1,000 Linux-based web machines and distributed across three Amazon service zones, an infrastructure that provides a highly agile and available service, Cockroft said. If something goes wrong, Netflix can continue to run the entire service on two out of three zones -- a scenario it tests often with its open source Chaos Gorilla software.
FreeBSD is only used for content delivery network. The web sites & all run on LInux.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Teho View PostNot only that but they also run 1000 or more Linux machines:
-Source, 2013
FreeBSD is only used for content delivery network. The web sites & all run on LInux.
Comment
-
Originally posted by justmy2cents View Postit's not about breaking promises. it's about quality of delivering. all you need to look is how LTS is approached to.
ubuntu is more or less mashup of the regular current version with longer life time. its basically regular version with slapped "LTS" and "5 year warranty" stickers on it. not to mention ubuntu is not really working on most projects at all beside rebranding
centos/rhel on the other hand take fedora as base, where work just started with intent of having production and stability value which makes centos/rhel defacto best choice when you need LTS. and rh would be one of biggest contributors working actively in FOSS
Comment
Comment