How Slack Works

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 6 ก.ย. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 50

  • @zss123456789
    @zss123456789 4 ปีที่แล้ว +56

    *Timestamps*
    0:00 Intro (Keith Adams)
    1:26 Agenda
    2:37 Scale and Style
    6:18 Architecture Overview
    8:19 Logging in
    14:11 MySQL Shards
    18:18 RTM.start payload
    19:51 Message server
    24:32 Deferring Work
    27:39 Putting it all together
    31:41 Challenges
    32:59 Challenge 1: Mains Failure
    34:14 Challenge 2: Rtm.start for large teams
    35:02 Challenge 3: Mass reconnects
    Plan of attacks
    35:50 Scale-out mains
    37:04 Rtm.start for large teams
    38:33 Mass reconnects
    41:45 Stuff left out
    43:19 Wrapping up
    44:20 Questions

    • @pathoslp
      @pathoslp 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      🐐

  • @cerberuspandora
    @cerberuspandora 5 ปีที่แล้ว +80

    I love how honest this guy is

    • @ridhwaans
      @ridhwaans 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      which part

  • @tommyls4357
    @tommyls4357 2 ปีที่แล้ว +7

    I love how articulate he is. He comes across as a smart guy. I'd like to work with him.

  • @BillaCode
    @BillaCode ปีที่แล้ว +3

    I realised after 4 years of experience working in software field, I still don't have basic knowledge of making a high scalable app. Great video, thanks for sharing this great knowledge

  • @Super21Nash
    @Super21Nash 3 ปีที่แล้ว +20

    Slack in 2016 was a pretty new app, and I completely respect the devs decisions to favor faster deployment. I have experience with a product which is almost 10 yr+ old and - we are still scrambling for DB alerts.

    • @nitrovent
      @nitrovent 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      I feel with you. We have a large SharePoint Farm solution that is ~10 years old we work on

  • @sanjay_nk
    @sanjay_nk 3 ปีที่แล้ว +9

    Handling great scale with simplicity in design. Excellent !!

  • @janvikalra_
    @janvikalra_ 29 วันที่ผ่านมา

    SUPER insightful and detailed deep dive. thanks for sharing!

  • @augusto3113
    @augusto3113 5 ปีที่แล้ว +65

    I just wish the "Microsoft Teams" would watch this and learn to not suck

    • @arunsatyarth9097
      @arunsatyarth9097 4 ปีที่แล้ว +12

      There is nothing great about this design btw.

    • @lattelover7186
      @lattelover7186 4 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      @@arunsatyarth9097 No need a fancy architecture if the classic one get the job done and still easier to maintain.

    • @arunsatyarth9097
      @arunsatyarth9097 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@lattelover7186 I didnt say the word "fancy". I just said there is nothing in particular here for Teams folks to look at and learn as OP suggests.

    • @YourAliasIsNotAvailable
      @YourAliasIsNotAvailable 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@lattelover7186 "easier to maintain" on a 1M loc monolith php app...
      Do you even code?

  • @simonc997
    @simonc997 3 ปีที่แล้ว +7

    At 18:00, can someone help me understand what he means by the left and right heads, writing left and writing right?

    • @karana2260
      @karana2260 3 ปีที่แล้ว +11

      active-active can run into collisions when same data is updated in both parallely. Think your profile updated from phone and laptop simultaneously and one gets updated on Master1 and other on Master2. which one is the correct one? Time stamps could solve these collisions but manual intervention is needed sometimes there too. To solve this I think they have partitioned the queries (based on team id Keith says, but I think it would be more complex ) such that certain group goto Master 1 only and nver to master 2 , and vice-versa. Avoiding conflicts.

    • @zacklight
      @zacklight ปีที่แล้ว

      ​ @Karan A Yeah it made no sense if the parition was just based on teamId because in that profile example the teamId's should be the same and so both requests go to the same master without introducing any conflict...

  • @nindinindi6405
    @nindinindi6405 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    Nice

  • @shimaozheng9968
    @shimaozheng9968 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    @12:19 what does it mean when he mentioned the time to the shard is arbitrary? It means it just randomly picks up a shard and record it? What's the benefit of doing in this way vs. consistent hashing?

    • @gilad-drori
      @gilad-drori 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Maybe due to the thundering hoard effect.

  • @neuemage
    @neuemage 7 ปีที่แล้ว +11

    Discord is best team app

  • @pengdu7751
    @pengdu7751 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

    this may be a dumb question but why is there a message server in the first place? why a separate service?

    • @omerocak4710
      @omerocak4710 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      search "control and user plane separation" on google. it has many benefits. efficiency, security, isolation, capacity, scaling, easy managing, maintenance, failure-handling, etc.

    • @NickolayKutovoy
      @NickolayKutovoy 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      I will not be surprised that it wasn't easy to support websockets/two way communication in LAMP at that time and this was easiest/fastest solution

    • @while-loop
      @while-loop 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Also likely to handle live websocket connections.
      You can only support 65k connections per server so scaling 80 full blown web apps just to handle dumb websocket connections may be overkill.

  • @lokthar6314
    @lokthar6314 6 ปีที่แล้ว +25

    a PHP Monolith?
    Slack is a really great piece of Software but those design decisions though..

    • @8Trails50
      @8Trails50 5 ปีที่แล้ว +39

      Their team was experienced with PHP. Time to market is key. Everything else is overrated for a start up. Now they can do whatever they want since they are successful.

  • @fuhuoyeyou
    @fuhuoyeyou 4 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    too honest.

  • @tenshi7angel
    @tenshi7angel 5 ปีที่แล้ว +4

    Would prefer to use Discord, but beggars can't always be choosers. Oh well.

  • @James-mk8jp
    @James-mk8jp 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Slack is slow as sh*t great job keith

  • @Textras
    @Textras 6 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    ahh GDRP

  • @VahidOnTheMove
    @VahidOnTheMove ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Poor presentation. He shows a slide and talks about something else.

  • @o1egm
    @o1egm 6 ปีที่แล้ว +15

    Very poor design...

    • @TremendousSax
      @TremendousSax 4 ปีที่แล้ว +17

      What's poor about it?

    • @yvrelna
      @yvrelna 2 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      It's not a poor design. It's a design that allowed Slack to scale from a small start-up to one of the largest and best communication platforms. It's a very successful design.
      Good architecture and good design isn't one that contains all the hip buzzwords. Good designs are often very boring, and that's ok. That means an adult is in charge of the operations, not the hippies who sprinkled the latest immature fad and then leave the mess to someone else.
      The result is what matters, Slack is a very slick communication platform. Its architecture design may not contain sexy buzzwords, but it is what allows it to outshine all the other competitors who have buzzwords-driven design. That's not a "poor design".

  • @phenomenal325
    @phenomenal325 ปีที่แล้ว

    Lol is slack still even a thing or in business? Pretty sure the markets owned by Microsoft teams now.

  • @Dstonephoto
    @Dstonephoto 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

    Sweet lord, this is the most SV-esque mumble job ever.

  • @jvm-tv
    @jvm-tv 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    It works for them and obviously a successful product but God! what a boring architecture! I wouldn't want to work there.

  • @SreekarAnugu
    @SreekarAnugu 3 ปีที่แล้ว +12

    too boring, nothing much to learn for people preparing for system design interviews. I wasted 20 minutes, don't do that mistake.

    • @zbbentley
      @zbbentley 3 ปีที่แล้ว +38

      ...learning about the architecture of famous, successful companies making bags of money isn't applicable to system design interviews? Boring is *good*. I give system design interviews. I give massive points for boring, easy to operate, and easy to understand.

    • @igboman2860
      @igboman2860 3 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      @@zbbentley and cheap total cost of ownership. ie cheap to build and maintain

    • @adityashah133
      @adityashah133 3 ปีที่แล้ว +14

      Who do we have here? Someone who's too smart for our entire era. The title clearly says how Slack works or at least worked at the time this video was made.
      Now, since you found this video boring, assuming after coming here yourself, I wouldn't ever want to hire you adding already to the fact that you watched this video for preparing for a job interview? For system design? The whole idea of system design is that it may be different for every product, and you need to build one depending on what resources you have, what your timeline is and most importantly, what you really know for sure, say the fundamentals. If there was a standard and a fixed path, I'm sure this video wouldn't even exist.
      You wasted 20 minutes, but to everyone a favor and don't take any interviews. You wouldn't want to waste their time too.

    • @vishanthbharadwaj
      @vishanthbharadwaj 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      Point is if u see this design u should have enuf knowledge to figure out the flaws and improve it on ur own

    • @foreverursabhi
      @foreverursabhi 3 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      He didn't go in very deep, I'll give you that, but if you really found it boring, you'd not be trolling TH-cam trying to win SD interviews. Let's chalk it up to the fact that you didn't hear some fancy words you might have expected, like Kafka, Cassandra, leaderless replication, and consistent hashing.

  • @ronysaha3966
    @ronysaha3966 6 ปีที่แล้ว +1

    Flock is better

  • @nichtverstehen2045
    @nichtverstehen2045 2 ปีที่แล้ว

    i stopped watching at php crap