Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

It would seem that Facebook has been able to scale. Perhaps this line of code worked for them in 2007, and they changed it only when it started to be a problem.


It's probably still there and has probably never caused any problems. In other words I think iand is exaggerating.


It is certainly not still there given that facebook doesn't run PHP any more. They wrote a compiler to translate a subset of PHP to C++, which they then compiled into a massive executable. The compiler is open source and called hiphop, and it does not implement the PHP memory limits.


By that logic, no one runs any programming languages, since they all get translated to x64 or other instruction sets.


That makes no sense at all. The function in question sets the memory limit for the PHP interpreter. A specific piece of software. Facebook does not use that specific piece of software.


Your comment was ambiguous then. It sounded like your logic was "they don't run PHP because they wrote their own implementation"... which is still running PHP. I think you meant to say they're not running the normal PHP interpreter, so that particular functional call might not be implemented (but it could be, still...).


Facebook still uses PHP bro...


They still write code in the language PHP. They do not run that code using PHP the software you download from php.net. The memory limits of the PHP interpreter from php.net are not relevant at all to facebook's current operations.


They don't do that anymore. Ask your Facebook friends, hphp has changed since then.


I know, I used past tense. But the initial hiphop work was when php memory limits stopped being relevant for them.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: