Ask Your Question

How scalable is askbot?

asked 2011-12-15 17:07:50 -0600

Tuta's avatar

updated 2011-12-15 18:04:18 -0600

Could it run on really large websites, like Stackoverflow..

What are the biggest sites?

edit retag flag offensive close merge delete


To answer this we'll need to look at Stackoverflow numbers, we'll try to look up tomorrow.

Evgeny's avatar Evgeny  ( 2011-12-15 17:47:06 -0600 )edit

1 Answer

Sort by ยป oldest newest most voted

answered 2011-12-15 18:07:45 -0600

Evgeny's avatar

updated 2011-12-16 09:17:38 -0600

To date (Dec 2011) the biggest public site is and probably the second biggest

It seems that on stackoverflow there are several content writes per minute - in single digits - a single database and an application server will handle that, askbot can do that too - easily.

According to this post (published in March 2011) - - stackoverflow takes about 100 million pageviews per month - about 40 pageviews per second on average.

Askbot takes 200 ms to generate some pages without caching - that gives only 4 page views per second (on heavy pages, probably 6 if you count in statistics of various page loads). So you'll need 10 read servers working in parallel and one master database server to match performance of stackoverflow with askbot. Possible, but you will need resources and a sys admin.

We are working on serious caching support and the numbers will improve significantly.

Right now I think the pressure from the users is to better support concurrent reads - so we will solve this problem first. For concurrent writes - we'll think of that when some client proves that they actually have that problem.

edit flag offensive delete link more


Thank you, Evgeny! good answer!

Tuta's avatar Tuta  ( 2011-12-16 10:08:34 -0600 )edit

Aren't these numbers too optimistic? I tried pingdom and other tools (webpagetest): common pages (such as this page, or the main /questions/) always start rendering >1s, and a complete load time is usually above 3s.

piskvorky's avatar piskvorky  ( 2011-12-16 14:40:30 -0600 )edit

Actually the numbers I listed are measured on the server side - the time to render page by the server. The webpagetest will measure entire round trip between the web browser and the server. Try or those are faster. Also, you should only hit the complete load time once - to load all the js, which loads at the bottom of the page.

Evgeny's avatar Evgeny  ( 2011-12-16 15:43:18 -0600 )edit
Tuta's avatar Tuta  ( 2011-12-16 16:48:02 -0600 )edit

Interesting discussion! :) I don't think speed is very important at the moment, but for the record, webpagetest measures both "first view" and "repeat view", and breaks down the times for different activities/resources -- so it's not just "full load time for uncached view".

piskvorky's avatar piskvorky  ( 2011-12-16 21:10:59 -0600 )edit

Your Answer

Please start posting anonymously - your entry will be published after you log in or create a new account.

Add Answer

Question Tools



Asked: 2011-12-15 17:07:50 -0600

Seen: 2,403 times

Last updated: Dec 16 '11