Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Networking Communications Hardware

Behind the Scenes at Hotmail 292

mallumax writes "ACM Queue interviews Hotmail engineer Phil Smoot on how they manage more than 10,000 servers spread around the globe. Between them, they process billions of emails per day and are overseen by hundreds of administrators. To do that they have returned to the command line. From the article: 'Our operations group never wants to rely on any sort of user interface. Everything has to be scriptable and run from some sort of command line'. The overriding philosophy seems to be KISS. Also: tape backups are out and spam levels have stabilized."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Behind the Scenes at Hotmail

Comments Filter:
  • UNIX? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by IAmTheDave ( 746256 ) <basenamedave-sd@yah[ ]com ['oo.' in gap]> on Friday January 13, 2006 @12:16PM (#14464080) Homepage Journal
    If I recall correctly, wasn't Hotmail originally run on UNIX boxes?
  • Fairly Impressive (Score:5, Interesting)

    by eldavojohn ( 898314 ) * <eldavojohn@noSpAM.gmail.com> on Friday January 13, 2006 @12:19PM (#14464109) Journal
    I don't know about everyone else but this article was shocking to me.

    Not only are the questions well picked but the some of the answers are quite interesting. For instance Phil on scalability:
    The problems are those of basic client-server programming--that is, figuring out the browser/http/server data-access patterns and optimizing the protocols, extending these protocols as new functionality is introduced, and ensuring that these protocols work across geo-distributed data centers when the speed of light becomes a factor. Designing applications with built-in redundancy so that they are resilient to abuse is also a challenge.
    Before reading this article, I always had hotmail pegged as a hacked together e-mail system less organized than a monkey sh*tfight but if Phil speaks the truth, I've underestimated them. They're a hacked togethor server mess with a lot of effort put into staying afloat--and they have been doing well for a long time.

    I guess I've always taken my free Hotmail account for granted.
  • by saskboy ( 600063 ) on Friday January 13, 2006 @12:19PM (#14464110) Homepage Journal
    I used to get about 35 spam a day in my primary hotmail account that I'd had since 1997. Now it gets about 4 a day so things have improved, but my biggest concern about Hotmail is that its virus scanning is horrible. There have been several times when it would have let me download a virus attachment, or allowed multiple obvious virus messages through. They've switched to Trend from McAfee, but I think the problem still remains.
  • Re:UNIX? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by jcaldwel ( 935913 ) on Friday January 13, 2006 @12:22PM (#14464147)
    Last time I was able to get a sniff out of it, they had changed over to Win-ders boxes, at least at the visible part of the Internet.
  • by KrisCowboy ( 776288 ) on Friday January 13, 2006 @12:26PM (#14464185) Journal
    In the landscape of today's megaservices, Hotmail just might be Mount Everest

    Is this true? I thought Google might be the Everest. Anyway, speaking from personal experience, in my university every student has multiple yahoo/gmail accounts but just a handful use Hotmail. Can someone throw light on the actual number of users all over?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 13, 2006 @12:27PM (#14464189)
    Have you guys ever sat back and wondered what the world would be like without spam? Think of how much processing power the Hotmail servers have to throw at filtering out spam. I know our company personally blocks around 75% of all incoming mail with RBL's before it even gets into the system to be further processed with the anti-spam tools and yet spam STILL slips by all that. Could you imagine having a physical mailbox absolutely filled to capacity ever single day with junkmail.. to the point where you have trouble sifting through it all to find the legitimate mail and bills?
  • Re:UNIX? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by ThinkFr33ly ( 902481 ) on Friday January 13, 2006 @12:51PM (#14464430)
    Hotmail sucks because of the feature set when compared to Gmail or Yahoo mail, not because it runs on Windows.

    The new Windows Live Mail beta is fairly good. Doesn't have the feature set of Gmail or Yahoo yet, but it's getting there.

    If it wasn't for the near impossibility of migrating 20,000+ e-mails from Hotmail to Gmail, I probably would have jumped ship long ago... but Live Beta is keeping me interested.
  • Re:UNIX? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by TheLink ( 130905 ) on Friday January 13, 2006 @12:57PM (#14464482) Journal
    Did Hotmail have a higher server (or hardware cost) to subscriber ratio after they migrated to windows?
  • Windows (Score:2, Interesting)

    by certel ( 849946 ) on Friday January 13, 2006 @01:03PM (#14464542) Homepage
    It's interesting, but for some specific uses, IIS does a great job of handling traffic. For example, streaming video from servers seem to run a lot better on IIS and seem to be a little less resource intensive. I'm not sure about the overall use of Hotmail, though.
  • by Iphtashu Fitz ( 263795 ) on Friday January 13, 2006 @01:14PM (#14464633)
    more than 10,000 servers spread around the globe ... are overseen by hundreds of administrators.

    Heh. I used to work at Akamai [akamai.com] which provides content delivery services for many of the biggest sites on the web. They have somewhere over 15,000 servers that are managed by tens of administrators, not hundreds. In fact, a typical NOCC (yes, 2 'C's for Akamai) shift at Akamai is only staffed by 8 or so people, with only a couple of senior level admins on call. And they're delivering all sorts of web-based content, including streaming, not just e-mail.
    But then Akamai runs them all on linux, whereas I belive Hotmail is all Windows based. You do the math.
  • by esconsult1 ( 203878 ) on Friday January 13, 2006 @02:22PM (#14465360) Homepage Journal
    After reading the article, it seems that a they did not think out a really scalable platform to run their services and apps. So over time, it became a huge mashup of servers and services. Heck, they can't even properly map the production environment to a small development set.

    Compared to Google clusters [internetnews.com], they seem to be light years behind. As a software developer, I can tell you that the key to rolling out applications quickly, is to have a decent framework in place. Whatever that framework might be (from shell scripts to java monstrosities), once its in place, developing apps on top of it are easy. Similarly a well thought out app execution environment is golden.

    If you ever check out Google's MapReduce [google.com], you'll see what I mean. It's just so well thought out and so elegant, that its easy to believe that they can scale outwards forever. You'd not be too far off if you thought that Microsoft were rethinking their whole production environment to compete with Google.

    There's no way that Microsoft can quickly and easily roll out vast new applications that scale, because that whole clustering framework is completely opposite to what Windows provides.

  • by bill_kress ( 99356 ) on Friday January 13, 2006 @02:57PM (#14465655)
    I was a strong hotmail user before Microsoft took it down, uh, I mean took it over.

    It was a great service! One of the first, and probably the best.

    Microsoft took it over and there was no advancement or innovation for years (a decade?). Spam ate up my tiny inbox while Microsoft just threw MSN graphics all over the place.

    When Gmail came out, I gave it a try. It was everything Hotmail could have been years ago if it hadn't been bought by MS! (Well, it COULD have been out of business, so I've got to give them that I suppose).

    They forced Microsoft to pay a little attention to features. They gave out a little more storage and started blocking some spam, but it was too little too late.

    In order to write this I decided to visit my hotmail inbox, I haven't been there for a while. 136 emails, and 43 have been detected as junk. They are ALL junk--A party invite from "heather", a Cola Quiz, etc. 136 undetected junk emails out of 179.

    And even at that, they still only give 1/8 the amount of storage that Google does.

    Crap, on top of that I just looked at a spam with pictures in it and it didn't auto-block them like Google does. Now I'm probably infected.

    Thanks Microsoft!

    From,

    The guy who used to argue the advantages of Microsoft to the Unix admins...

  • Re:Better subject... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by alexjohns ( 53323 ) <[moc.liamg] [ta] [cirumla]> on Friday January 13, 2006 @05:15PM (#14466983) Journal
    And how does the NSA process all that email?

    Has anyone ever considered that spam may actually help keep us all 'freer'? There's billions of spam messages everyday that add to the legitimate traffic. If all spam email magically disappeared, all that would be left is 'legitimate' correspondence.

    Which would make the NSA's new job of spying on us much easier.

    I used to know a guy who always went to the limit on doing his taxes - exploited every loophole, deducted everything that could even vaguely be deductible, said he gave more to charity than he actually did. He mailed his forms in on April 13th. Said that he figured it was right in the middle of the heaviest flow - kind of like pissing into the Amazon. Figured that one of the reasons they never caught him was that everything 'seemed' right (and he always made sure there were no technical errors) and without a good reason to flag it, they just processed his return and gave him his money because, you know, they had about 30 million more returns to go through.

    Wonder if he's still doing that? Jim, you out there?

  • Re:UNIX? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by DA-MAN ( 17442 ) on Friday January 13, 2006 @08:43PM (#14468692) Homepage
  • by nighty5 ( 615965 ) on Friday January 13, 2006 @09:56PM (#14469048)
    I've agree with mostly what you've said, but I'd say it was Yahoo that pushed Hotmail's innovation button, and not Gmail.

    Gmail didn't appear until much later on, but Yahoo were creating some fantastic portal features.

    I have a Gamil, Yahoo & Hotmail accounts, but prefer to give out my Hotmail account for "free offers" and other junk, its a junkbox.

    However Gmail & Yahoo are both solid email solutions, and as you say, Gmail fairs better than all of them in the spam war.

    Gmail; From a geek perspective, I admire them for creating key mappings that mimick those of vi/vim.

    There is features present in Yahoo I'd love to see in Gmail:
    * Setup up one-time (or temporary) email addresses that are binded to your email address.
    * A decent calendar that can sync to iCal and Sunbird. (I don't think Yahoo have this yet)
    * Events management, setup birthday reminders and the like.
    * A virtual notepad that you can scribble down notes
    * Sharing your calender, its private by default.
    * Check number of new messages without logging in or providing credentials (uses a cookie)

    Yahoo is awesome, if you havent tried out their web portal, take a look. Its very impressive.
  • Re:UNIX? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Achromatic1978 ( 916097 ) <robert@@@chromablue...net> on Saturday January 14, 2006 @01:36AM (#14469755)
    That's crud. What, they know how to change the server string in the source, but not enough to turn off ServerSignature? Far more likely that they have IIS pretending to be Apache left over from porting code that might have been reliant upon hardcoding.

Intel CPUs are not defective, they just act that way. -- Henry Spencer

Working...