> I’d be curious to see how hardware stacks up against events/second end2end as well.
That heavily depends on which part of the stack you are looking at. (Event ingestion, processing, load balancers, databases etc.). There is a lot less hardware there than one would imagine ;)
All event processing (currently) takes place on three 32 core Xeon machines. But it has seen much worse days when we had many more before we optimized critical paths. Likewise what we have now is pretty chill, but we need to also consider the case where a worker drops entirely from the pool so these are over-provisioned for the amount of work they each take.
The data layer is probably more interesting from a scaling point of view in general since it's harder to scale, but it's also not exactly a point we're particularly happy with. There is already a comment from david (zeeg) on this post going into our plans there.
96 core to process 10K complex event/s sounds quite impressive given the kind of analysis you seem to have to do. Did sentry used to have all the stack trace, local variable data originally or that kind of extensive processing a more recent development? I am more used to Java where the basic stack trace is provided by the VM and I assume processing those are much simpler than some of the user kind of events?
> All event processing (currently) takes place on three 32 core Xeon machines. But it has seen much worse days when we had many more before we optimized critical paths.
Finally I could understand what kind of efficiency you guys have. Not bad at all I’d say though not exactly “high load miracle” the article title would imply.
I'm not sure what the article how the article implies a "high load miracle". But we are quite proud about the efficiency gains and some of our solutions for the problems we encounter I think.
That heavily depends on which part of the stack you are looking at. (Event ingestion, processing, load balancers, databases etc.). There is a lot less hardware there than one would imagine ;)