News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:A Comparison of Go Web Frameworks (2014) by bojo on Tuesday June 16, 2015 @01:31AM (#9723976)
An alternative way to look at it would be "you are only building the 20% of Rails you actually need."

I've never been a fan of full-fledged frameworks and prefer the more pragmatic method of only pulling in components that I need though.

Re:A Comparison of Go Web Frameworks (2014) by juliangregorian on Tuesday June 16, 2015 @10:13AM (#9725907)
Re:A Comparison of Go Web Frameworks (2014) by bojo on Tuesday June 16, 2015 @11:41PM (#9729963)
Re:A Comparison of Go Web Frameworks (2014) by tptacek on Wednesday June 17, 2015 @03:31AM (#9730457)
Going from 30 servers to 2 sounds like something whose cost savings might add up to as much as 100 hours of developer time.
Re:A Comparison of Go Web Frameworks (2014) by juliangregorian on Wednesday June 17, 2015 @02:21PM (#9734123)
That's cool. I bet they could reduce it to 0.15 servers by rewriting it in C.

They probably would have drastically reduced the number of servers even if the rewrite was still in ruby, having much better understanding around the runtime requirements.

Ruby also seems like a questionable choice in the first place for such a service. Perhaps a prototype.

Nobody is pretending that MRI Ruby is the most performant runtime you can find, but that's just not an issue for 99% of web stacks.