Re:Scaling Mercurial at Facebook
by ZenoArrow on Tuesday January 07, 2014 @06:16PM
(#7020689)
To be honest, whilst we have no way to accurately determine whether the code is a mess without a chance to see it, the most surprising line of this article (in my opinion) was that the code base was larger than the Linux kernel. I'm not seeing anything on the front end that would warrant such complexity, guessing a large chunk of the code base is server code. Would be interested in reading a summary of the components of the Facebook code base.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:Scaling Mercurial at Facebook
by plorkyeran on Tuesday January 07, 2014 @07:01PM
(#7020876)
I suspect that the kernel is one of the only things running on Facebook's servers that they didn't write from scratch. Alexandrescu has mentioned that a 1% speedup to HHVM saves FB about $100k per year, and at that sort of scale it's pretty easy for reinventing every wheel to make sense.
Re:Scaling Mercurial at Facebook
by moron4hire on Tuesday January 07, 2014 @08:31PM
(#7021143)
right, so why can't projects like that exiat in their own repository? what keeps HHVM and Facebook tightly coupled?
Some of them are.
> We already have some of the easily separable projects in separate repositories, like HPHP
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/1897...
Presumably some parts aren't so isolated.
This rather surprised me as well. I tend to think of the Linux kernel as one of the larger single code-bases out there. Am I wrong?
Re:Scaling Mercurial at Facebook
by michal8181 on Wednesday January 08, 2014 @03:54PM
(#7026532)
Yes.
As described here http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/million... Facebook code base (~60 MLOC) if almost 4 times bigger than Linux 3.1 (a mere 15 MLOC).
It's one of the largest open source projects perhaps. But when you get into a large company like facebook who creates a hell of a lot of different things the numbers are way higher.