Latest Announcemnent
New thread

Server Question =/

Status
Not open for further replies.
K

Kedzi

Active Member
691
2009
54
0
I was wondering, I know that this is really random but:

If a little website was hosted on FaceBook's server would it be fast as hell?

:))
 
11 comments
Since they're pretty much the biggest website on the internet, and still load pretty fast, I would say yes. Your site would load pretty much instantly.

and kedzi, yeah :P but that cost is nothing for a giant corporation like them.
 
Yeap, facebook is running on about 80.000 of these servers.. Nothing compared to Google, who owns over 1.000.000 servers in various datacenters.
 
Overall page generation would probably be slower than a single server (given delays between proxy servers, etc) but obviously a lot more scalable. Your site would probably be faster on its own properly configured dedi.
 
Depends entirely where you were in comparison to the servers. But it wouldn't take any time if you split up the site into a few different servers. One for MySQL, one for images, one for the actual php pages (even though all this is overkill) we would also assume that all these servers all have equally ridiculously fast connection speeds so there should be no delay since you are simply loading one thing from each identical server.

Technically it should be faster then running everything on one server because if a single server had to do all three it would have a small amount of load where as if it were separated there wouldn't be any load at all. There would be a small delay between the php file server to connect to the mysql server, but since datacenter connections between each other are ridiculously fast you wouldn't notice it. But maybe you are right, that small delay may cause it to be slower then a single server.

Now if you were to take one 100mb sql database and distribute it between 10 servers, you would be right elight, there would be a delay.
But having a seperate server for images will increase speeds (maybe even one for dns hosting, and maybe one more for cdn hosting, and one for mail hosting.. lol)
 
@so19
It really depends on the scale of the site. You're referring to ridiculously high speeds of internet. Yet you forget to mention that a super server with multi-cores will literally process something just as fast. It doesn't matter if it has to pull 3 things at once. Anyway, whether you have it on one server or multiple ones there won't be any noticeable difference until you're dealing with huge sites.
 
You are both right. But I was trying to say just because you have a site put onto a few different super servers, there would be no decrease in loading times.
Even though you could still achieve the same speed with one super server for a relatively small site.
 
Facebook has their own datacenter and are making a new one too in NC.
rutherford.jpg
Sources:
http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2009/04/17/a-look-inside-facebooks-data-center/
http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2010/11/11/facebook-plans-north-carolina-data-center/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top