comment: >
  
  Ah, but you could concentrate your compute and I/O on the more frequently used letters, scaling down as you progress through the alphabet (ASCII character set). You could even optimise locally for different languages by sharding the db's and autoscaling to the required frequency.
  It would be a type of efficiency I guess.
context: This pairs nicely with that Elon tweet, where he boasted about shutting down critical servers and Twitter was still running fine. >
  
  "I'm going to shut down critical servers and things will be fine!!!"
  two hours later
  "S e  T  ngs a e f ne!" >
  
  So, I know you're joking, but in my head I took this way too far...
  I was imagining Twitter actually sorting every letter of every tweet into different databases on different servers.  Because otherwise how would you lose letters if you shit one off.  And then I started trying to figure out how you'd make that work...
  You'd need like, 128ish databases to cover each ASCII character.  And then some incredibly stupid way to put this all back together for displaying.  I thinking some sort of bit mapping bullshit...
  I'm going to build this tomorrow if I can remember this idea.  I'm going to build the world's second least efficient Twitter platform!  This is so ducking stupid that it's the exact kind of thing Id make.  Might have to pair it down though, I don't think my home network or vm hosts could handle that many hosts...
  I'm going to need to be really drunk for this one... >
  
  Well they are doing database sharding... >
  
  Probably.  But I seriously doubt they're splitting up every single post based on the letter.
  For one, as a sharding strategy that'd be horribly inefficient due to letters having different frequencies.  Your E database would go to shit fast while the Z database does basically nothing.
  It also just like, logically makes no sense.  Which is why I want to do it lol