Message: 1
From: kband(a)www.llamacom.com
Subject: Re: [Wikipedia-l] Everything in the last
digest
To: wikipedia-l(a)nupedia.com
Date: Sun, 3 Mar 2002 21:54:40 -0600 (CST)
Reply-To: wikipedia-l(a)nupedia.com
Why would we want to distribute hosting? And for
that matter, what's
wrong with advertising, provided it's done as
subtly as possible, and
not from various merchants of death ;-) (which I
still think is for
Bomis to decide -- I may feel very proprietary
about a lot of stuff
here, but I still remember I'm on somebody
else's
playground. Jimbo et
al. have been very cool about trying to get
input, but business
decisions should belong to them)
It's a matter of scaling. Hosting is currently the
only bottleneck
in the wikipedia process, other than possible
problems in organization
of material. If the popularity of Wikipedia doubles,
the hosting needs
to double--with distributed hosting, that would
happen automatically.
-tc
--__--__--
I understand that, Cunc, but wouldn't Bomis having
larger, perhaps more redundant (and mirrored) servers
work as well? I've never dealt with wiki technology,
but my last tech job was with a firm that did online
transaction management. We had three active servers
up at all times (web, SQL, and mail), and were always
running checks so that we could add more servers as
soon as it was necessary. It's very expensive, but
isn't that where the advertising comes in? I know
remote networking is viable, but is it practical? It
just doesn't seem to be a sensible solution long-term.
Can you imagine having to deal with migrations, etc.,
every time someone decides to back out? Ugh.
---JHK
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - sign up for Fantasy Baseball