Erlang does have problems

Joel Reymont joelr1@REDACTED
Tue Aug 29 19:02:36 CEST 2006

On Aug 29, 2006, at 4:59 PM, Dmitrii Dimandt wrote:

> And there are both advantages and disadvantages to that, as there  
> always
> are, but I think, that if Erlang community could focus on the
> disadvantages... Man, this could be the next killer-language :)  
> (Ruby is
> slowly filling the void, and C# 3.0 is around the corner, and there  
> is that
> curious little fellow by the name of Nemerle...)

Why not Ruby on the Erlang VM?

Even the "flagship" Erlang apps have their problems. ejabberd uses  
tons of memory because strings are being passed around as lists  
despite being received as binaries from the socket. This is a problem  
on 32-bit systems as it limits the number of users you can host and  
it's a bigger problem on 64-bit systems as words are LARGER.

The ejabberd developers came up with a fix, they are loading expat (C  
parser) as a driver. They are still using a port per message or per  
connection (don't remember exactly) and blow through the number of  
ports normally configured. Yes, you can up the number of ports but a  
better solution would be to stop using strings and create a shared  
pool of XML parser ports.

Some high-profile messaging startups are using ejabberd now, although  
they don't advertise it. They are also considering dropping ejabberd  
and either going with a commercial implementation or writing their  
own stuff. I know because I keep in touch with them.

Despite the Ericsson AXD 301 advocacy there are no high-profile  
Erlang deployments that I know about. There should be and we should  
all know! That is if we want Erlang to become mainstream. On the  
other hand, why bother?


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list