Join 3,512 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


Tweets Per Second on TWITTER.COM
June 5, 2011 1:10 PM   Subscribe

Hi, How many tweets (twitter service) are published per second circa June 2011? And do you think it is increasing exponentially? References would be great. Regards.
posted by raphael19 to Technology (6 answers total)
 
Aren't they numbered sequentially? You could check the numbers a day apart and divide by 86400.
posted by hattifattener at 1:20 PM on June 5, 2011


Here are some stats from March.
posted by Knappster at 1:24 PM on June 5, 2011


Here's a rough historic graph of tweets per day: http://blog.twitter.com/2010/02/measuring-tweets.html

Here's a more recent TPS graph: http://www.flickr.com/photos/twitteroffice/5681263084/

There are a few records mentioned in the "Growth" subheading of Twitter's entry on Wikipedia: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Twitter#Growth, and then a further update

There's also a question on Quora with a few poorly cited stats: http://www.quora.com/How-many-read-writes-does-Twitter-do-a-second

And it looks like Mashable likes covering these sorts of things: http://mashable.com/2011/01/06/new-years-twitter-record/ http://mashable.com/2011/02/09/twitter-super-bowl-tweets/

As to hattifatterner's suggestion of looking at IDs, as of last summer, Tweets are unfortunately no longer numbered sequentially: http://engineering.twitter.com/2010/06/announcing-snowflake.html
posted by SemiSophos at 5:09 PM on June 5, 2011


Grr, way to not proof-read, me. "and then a further update" was supposed be followed by a link to the first Mashable article, but then I found the other article and decided to group them together.
posted by SemiSophos at 5:21 PM on June 5, 2011


This blog post from May 31 mentions that there are about 2200 tweets/second. (First sentence under section heading "Surfacing Relevant Tweets".)
posted by blue mustard at 6:06 PM on June 5, 2011


I'm not sure if when you wrote "do you think it is increasing exponentially", you meant exponentially in the common usage sense of "really, really fast" or in the technical sense of "with a rate of change directly proportional to the observed number". If it was the former, I'd say yes. If it was the latter, just looking at the data referenced, pretty clearly not.
posted by TheShadowKnows at 8:41 PM on June 5, 2011


« Older Many months ago I saw an anima...   |  Best tower defense games for t... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.