Instead, everyone who reads the article in the future will have an one-sided impression of the situation (unless the author edits the post based on the points brought up in this thread) due to the lack of comments.
198 karma · joined January 26, 2010
Instead, everyone who reads the article in the future will have an one-sided impression of the situation (unless the author edits the post based on the points brought up in this thread) due to the lack of comments.
This is how Disqus works. Something still has to power the API that serves the data for it and we happen to like Django a lot so that's what we use. There are also a lot of parts of Disqus that are not the embed (moderation panel, account management, etc.)
Anything, including service providers, can catastrophically fail at any moment. Fault-tolerant architectures are based on redundancy (including infrastructure provider redundancy, as you mention), not on "guaranteed" SLAs.
Jeremy Ashkenas (who knows a lot more about this than I do) explains this in another comment thread here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2991904
For anyone who gets a panic attack before running `git reset`, this talk may help clarify how things are working under the hood: http://www.infoq.com/presentations/A-Tale-of-Three-Trees
Available for short- or long-term engagements. Experience with building large Django applications and working all over the stack (both server- and client-side). Would prefer working in a team environment, opposed to being the primary/single programmer responsible for development.
Contact: ted [at] kaemming.com, other details at http://kaemming.com, code at http://github.com/tkaemming
Although starting a VM to run an app is irritating, spending time hunting down why your build is breaking (or worse, why production is breaking) because someone had a library a few minor versions out of sync or because they're on a different operating system is immensely more irritating.
I'd argue the opposite case — if it's true that a good programmer is at least 5-10x more productive than an average programmer[1], you'd actually save money by paying the experienced programmer significantly more when compared to hiring a team of beginning or average programmers.
[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mythical_Man-Month#The_surg...
Regardless, many deployments use this same technique for just this reason (to avoid spoonfeeding slower clients responses). How is this any more risky than running Apache up front, barring configuration errors (which could just as easily happen with any other server software)?
EDIT (Clarification):
They (nginx, lighttpd) are more difficult — although not impossible — to exploit, especially when used to buffer requests to a heavier upstream server like Apache.
Specifically, they are typically able to handle many more connections than your application server would be able to (as long as they are properly configured), without the incurring the resource overhead of your application server by bufferring the HTTP request/response.
Edit: It looks like it's taken straight from the source (http://github.com/documentcloud/backbone/blob/master/backbon...) using Docco: http://jashkenas.github.com/docco/
Edit — More extensive list here: http://posterous.com/explore/moreblogs