1 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32321726 2 https://stackoverflow.com/questions/676326/how-does-stackove...
1 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32321726 2 https://stackoverflow.com/questions/676326/how-does-stackove...
[0] https://hanselminutes.com/847/engineering-stack-overflow-wit...
Amazon for new critical applications prefers NoSQL solutions for this reason since performance is flatter and not dependent on vagaries of the query optimizer.
IMHO the logical progression for applications with typical relational models is starting with an RDBMS in combination with an ORM, breaking out of the ORM when necessary for more complex/slower queries, ditching the ORM altogether when it starts to break, then evaluating sharding or moving domains into a NoSQL solution piecemeal. A well-architected monolith or series of microservices suits this paradigm which allows you to realize the productivity benefits of SQL and only worry about the deduplication, indexing, and consistency issues that come with NoSQL when it becomes actually necessary.
Then again if I were Amazon I'd probably plan for scale up front and be jaded by their experience with Oracle too.
I'm assuming stackoverflow runs as a part of all this, and not separately.
The only reason I know that is because I was working at a company and discussing the issues the company was running into scaling SQL Server and Stack Overflow was used as a counter example of SQL Server scalability. It lead into a long discussion of caching on high read workloads.
I'll never touch SQL Server again if I can help it.