I don't know, if you're going to critique the very talented engineers at Uber, seeing your blog fall over due to capacity doesn't lend you a lot of credibility.

First, it's unlikely that they wrote the blog software. Second, a critique should be based on the merits of the content, not the person delivering it.

On what information do you base your opinion that the engineers at uber are very talented?

So far what i have seen, the only thing Uber is talented at is violating local laws and then throwing sacks of money at it to pay fines or whatever. (and inflating their own (bubble)value, but probably not many people agree with that)

Seeing their blogs mysql-> postgres followed by a postgres -> mysql migration, doesn't give me the idea they are very talented (they still might be, but so far no data has proven me this). Talented would be to forsee these issues and to have avoided encountering them at all. At least that would be my definition of very talented.

I'm not sure what anything you said has to do with their choice of database.

Then with your own reasoning, i'm also not sure that is worth a comment of yours.

I clearly indicate their recent changing of db software twice to avoid issues (experts could solve) is an indication one in my eyes is not very talented.

Actually no, you didn't clearly say that at all. How do the experts solve the fact that Postgres' rewrites entire indexes on row updates?

"Seeing their blogs mysql-> postgres followed by a postgres -> mysql migration" this is not clear to you? Perhaps a visit to an optician is in your best interest.

And why do you make the assumption, i'm a postgresql expert to answer that question.

Though others did, so if you would have bothered to read the other thousands of comments on the matter. You would not have needed to ask this question,

PostgreSQL Heap-Only-Tuples (HOT) from: http://use-the-index-luke.com/blog/2016-07-29/on-ubers-choic...

I disagree. When you put yourself on stage to criticize another, you open yourself up to criticism. And in this case, his little blog didn't scale, and it was rightfully pointed out.

It's not terribly nice, but the comment is true, and relevant.

Criticism is good. Straw men are not ("your opinions and arguments on dbs are irrelevant because your blog fell over"), and being holier-than-thou about it only makes people stop listening to your actual criticism. That's why I think it's unproductive.

If you're stupid enough to think that blog software reflects on the contents of the blog, then you're likely not going have the critical thinking capacity to evaluate any of these criticisms anyway.

An hour or two worth of work with varnish and you pretty much solve that problem. In 2016, that's the sort of thing I'd expect anyone competent rolling their own platform to be doing. If you're not using some off the shelf blogging platform (like blogger, wordpress.com, medium, tumblr, or infinity others that are free and not too bad) then that means you are trying to prove a point in hosting your own thing. If you can't do that very well, that perhaps proves a different point than you intended.

I run varnish even on silly joke websites I set up with no traffic and literal kilobits worth of only static content, it's just so easy to do and it's a good habit to have.

>then that means you are trying to prove a point in hosting your own thing

No it doesn't. Stop projecting.

And these moralizing comments make HN dull and dreary. Compared to 7-10 years ago sometimes I feel that suddenly we're in some sort of new Victorian era.