Also, don’t confuse 100 gbe networks where spine links are 100 but the node links are only bonded 10s (much more common at $fang).

It's a necessity really. All storage at Google has been remote and distributed for at least the past decade. That puts serious demands on network throughput if you want your CPUs to actually do work and not just sit there and wait for data.

Here's some detail as of 2012: https://storage.googleapis.com/pub-tools-public-publication-.... Note that host speed is 40Gbps. And here's FB talking about migrating from 40Gbps to 100Gbps in 2016: https://code.fb.com/data-center-engineering/introducing-back...

I know there are a lot of companies that try to put some lipstick on nfs pig and call it reliable/scalable/etc. so long their clients don’t actually try to run it at scale or don’t complain too publicly when they try and can’t, they are able to get away with it.

Of course that over longer networks it isn't suitable as the roundtrips have too much latency, other than that, is your experience much different regarding nfs?

Supporting all of a Fortune 500’s business operations is very reasonable to call ‘scale’ in the normal world.

Your comment is a like a billionaire claiming that somebody that managed to hit 30 million isn’t rich.