Library / Case Studies

MetricsDB: TimeSeries Database for storing metrics at Twitter

Using a custom storage backend instead of traditional key value store reduced the overall capacity requirements by a factor of 10. This also reduced latency by a factor of five.

By Twitter engineers · Twitter · Added 2026-10-12

Open original source

All content belongs to Twitter engineers / Twitter. We only link to it and give credit. Report a problem

Learn this case study

About 37 min left. Your work is saved as you go.

What you are about to study

Twitter explains a real system. You should know the basics: caching, queues and replication.

Ideas you will meet

Observability
Metrics, logs, traces, SLOs and alerting.
Databases
Schemas, indexes, query plans and choosing a store.
Time and Ordering
Logical clocks, vector clocks and bounded clock error.

What we already know about this

Our own lessons on these ideas. Read them here before you start, so it makes sense.

  • System Design Foundations · 9 minObservability and running a systemMetrics, logs and traces, how to define 'healthy' with SLOs, and how to ship changes without breaking things.Read here

    You cannot fix what you cannot see

    A system you cannot observe is a system you cannot trust. Observability is the ability to understand what is happening inside from the outside. Three kinds of signal work together.

    SignalWhat it isBest for
    MetricsNumbers over time (requests per second, error rate, CPU)Dashboards, alerts, trends
    LogsTimestamped records of eventsDetails of what happened
    TracesThe path of one request through many servicesFinding where time is spent

    Figure SDA-FND-11-1 · From alert to root cause · © forcsguy.com

    What to measure

    A simple checklist, the four golden signals:

    1. Latency: how long requests take (use percentiles).
    2. Traffic: how much demand there is.
    3. Errors: how many requests fail.
    4. Saturation: how full the busiest resource is (CPU, memory, connections, disk, queue depth).

    Averages hide pain. If the average is 100 ms but p99 is 4 seconds, one user in a hundred is waiting four seconds, and with many requests per page that is most of your users sometimes.

    Defining healthy: SLIs, SLOs, error budgets

    • An SLI (indicator) is a measurement, like "fraction of requests answered successfully in under 300 ms".
    • An SLO (objective) is the target, like "99.9% over 30 days".
    • The error budget is what is left over: 0.1% of requests may fail. While there is budget, ship features; when it runs out, focus on reliability.

    Alert on symptoms users feel (error rate, latency) more than on causes (one machine's CPU). Page a human only for things that need action now.

    Ship changes safely

    Most outages come from changes. Reduce the risk:

    • Small, frequent releases are easier to understand and undo than big ones.
    • Canary release: send a few percent of traffic to the new version and watch the metrics before going wider.
    • Feature flags: deploy code turned off, then enable it gradually, and switch it off instantly if needed.
    • Blue-green: keep the old version running so you can switch back in seconds.
    • Backwards-compatible changes: database and API changes should work with both old and new code during rollout.
    • Fast rollback must be a rehearsed, boring button.

    When things go wrong

    Have an incident process: someone leads, someone communicates, mitigate first and investigate later. Afterwards write a blameless postmortem that asks "how did our system and process allow this?" rather than "who did this?". That is how reliability actually improves.

    A worked example: error budgets and burn rate

    Your service has an SLO of 99.9% of requests succeed over 30 days, and it serves 10 million requests a month.

    • Error budget: 0.1% of 10,000,000 = 10,000 failed requests may happen in the month before you break the promise.
    • Burn rate is how fast you spend it. A burn rate of 1 uses exactly the budget over 30 days. If 5% of requests are failing now, the error rate is 50 times the allowed 0.1%, a burn rate of 50: the whole month's budget is gone in 30 / 50 = 0.6 days, about 14 hours.
    • Alert on burn rate, not on a single bad minute. A common pattern watches two windows together: page someone if the burn rate over the last hour is above about 14 and the last 5 minutes agree (a fast burn: 2% of the monthly budget gone in an hour). Open a ticket for a slower burn, say rate above 6 over 6 hours. Two windows avoid paging for blips and avoid missing slow leaks.

    Why this beats "alert when error rate is above X": it ties alerts to what users were promised, it pages only when the budget is in danger, and it gives the team a rule for trade-offs: when the budget is healthy, ship faster; when it is nearly spent, slow down and fix reliability.

    Figure SDA-FND-11-2 · Alerting on how fast the error budget burns · © forcsguy.com

    Finding the cause with all three signals

    A worked investigation shows why you want metrics, traces and logs together.

    1. A metric alerts: the checkout success rate dropped and p99 latency rose. Metrics tell you that something is wrong and how bad, cheaply and over time.
    2. Narrow it down by dimension: break the metric down by region, version and endpoint. Only the new version in one region is affected, a strong hint it is a deploy.
    3. A trace shows where the time goes: one slow checkout request shows 4.8 of its 5 seconds in a call to the payment provider's tokenisation endpoint.
    4. Logs give the detail: filter logs by the trace id from that request and read the exact error: a timeout talking to a new tokenisation URL.
    5. Fix and verify: roll back the version, and watch the metric recover.

    Figure SDA-FND-11-3 · From an alert to a root cause · © forcsguy.com

    The glue is a correlation id (trace id) carried on every request and written into every log line, so you can jump from one signal to the others.

    Mistakes people make

    • Alerting on causes instead of symptoms. "CPU is 85%" may be fine; "users are seeing errors" never is. Page on symptoms users feel, and use cause metrics for diagnosis.
    • Averaging percentiles. The mean of two hosts' p99 is meaningless; merge distributions instead (see the t-digest lesson).
    • High-cardinality labels. A label such as user_id on a metric creates a new time series per user, which can multiply storage and cost by millions. Put such detail in logs or traces.
    • Logs without structure or ids. Free text is hard to query. Log JSON with a trace id, service and version.
    • Dashboards no one owns. A wall of graphs nobody reads is noise. Build a small dashboard per service around the golden signals: latency, traffic, errors and saturation.
    • No runbook. An alert that does not say what to check first wastes the first ten minutes of every incident.

    Try it yourself

    Run any test in the System Builder and read its charts as if they were production graphs: which signal moves first, and which part would you look at next? Build the search metrics lab to practise percentile maths, and read the t-digest lesson for how real systems summarise latency at scale.

    Real-world reading

    Open this lesson with its quiz and exercise

  • Databases Deep Dive · 12 minReplication topologies and multi-region databasesSingle-leader, multi-leader and leaderless replication, how they handle conflicts and lag, and what changes across regions.Read here

    Why replicate

    Replication keeps copies of data on several machines for three reasons: availability (survive a node failure), read scaling (serve reads from replicas) and latency (put data near users). The hard part is keeping copies consistent while writes continue. (Basics are in the replication and sharding lesson of the foundations course; this lesson compares the topologies.)

    Single-leader (primary and replicas)

    One node, the leader (primary or master), accepts writes and ships its changes to followers (replicas), which serve reads.

    Figure SDA-DDV-04-1 · Single-leader replication · © forcsguy.com

    • Synchronous replication waits for a follower before acknowledging: safer, slower, and a stalled follower can block writes. Asynchronous is faster but a failover can lose the latest writes. A common compromise: one synchronous follower, others asynchronous.
    • Failover must detect failure, choose the most up-to-date replica, redirect clients and ensure the old leader does not come back believing it still leads (split brain).
    • Replication lag causes stale reads. Techniques: read-your-writes (route a user's reads to the leader shortly after they write), monotonic reads (keep a user on one replica), and checking replica position.

    Multi-leader

    Several nodes accept writes (often one per region) and replicate to each other. Benefits: local write latency and continued operation if a region is cut off. Cost: write conflicts.

    Conflict handling options:

    • Avoid them: route all writes for one record to one leader (for example by user or region).
    • Last write wins by timestamp: simple, but silently drops one of two concurrent updates and depends on clocks.
    • Merge values (union of sets, counters) using mergeable data types (CRDTs; see the collaborative editing lesson).
    • Custom resolution in application code, or ask the user.

    Multi-leader also appears in offline-capable apps (each device is a leader) and collaborative editing.

    Before: single leader

    After: multi-leader across regions

    What changed

    • Users in each region write to a nearby database
    • Concurrent edits to the same row need conflict handling
    • More moving parts to run and monitor

    Leaderless (Dynamo-style)

    Any replica accepts writes; clients write to several replicas and read from several, using quorums (W + R > N) to get fresh data (see the key-value store lesson). Background anti-entropy and read repair fix stale copies; versions or vector clocks detect conflicts. It favours availability and is typical of Cassandra and DynamoDB-style stores.

    Figure SDA-DDV-04-2 · Choosing a replication model · © forcsguy.com

    Multi-region designs

    • Active-passive: one region serves writes; another is a warm standby. Simple; failover loses a little data (the replication lag) and takes minutes.
    • Active-active: several regions serve traffic. Requires either partitioning data by home region (each record has one home, cross-region reads are replicas) or true multi-leader conflict handling.
    • Global databases use consensus across regions (see the consensus lesson) for strong consistency at the cost of cross-region write latency; some offer tunable consistency per query.
    • Latency numbers matter: a cross-ocean round trip is around 100 ms or more, so synchronous cross-region replication adds that to every write.
    • Data residency laws may require keeping certain users' data in a region.

    Partitioning and replication together

    Real systems shard data into partitions and replicate each partition (a leader per partition spreads write load across nodes). Rebalancing, hot partitions and cross-partition transactions are the new problems (see sharding and the consistent-hashing lesson).

    Master/slave naming

    You will see "master/slave", "primary/replica" and "leader/follower" for the same single-leader idea; most current documentation prefers the last two.

    Checklist

    • What happens to writes if the leader or a region is lost, and how long?
    • How much data can we lose (RPO) and how long can we be down (RTO)?
    • How do we handle stale reads from replicas?
    • Who resolves conflicts, and how?
    • Have we practised failover?

    Real-world reading

    Open this lesson with its quiz and exercise

  • Databases Deep Dive · 13 minChoosing a database typeA practical map from workload to database: relational, document, key-value, wide-column, search, graph, time-series and vector stores.Read here

    Start from the access pattern

    There is no best database; there is a best database for a workload. Ask:

    1. What are the main queries (by key, by range, by search, by relationship)?
    2. How much data and how fast does it grow? Read/write ratio?
    3. What consistency and transaction guarantees are needed?
    4. What latency is required, and where are users?
    5. What can your team operate?

    The families

    Figure SDA-DDV-05-1 · Map from need to database family · © forcsguy.com

    Relational (PostgreSQL, MySQL)

    Tables, SQL, joins, constraints, ACID transactions. The default for most business data. PostgreSQL has rich features (JSON, full-text, extensions, many index types); MySQL is widely deployed and simple to operate. They scale vertically very far, and read replicas and sharding extend them. Choose when data is structured, relationships matter and correctness is critical.

    Document (MongoDB and similar)

    Stores JSON-like documents; flexible schema; related data can be embedded in one document so a single read gets everything. Good for content, catalogues and objects read whole. Watch for duplicated data, joins you must do in code, and weaker multi-document transaction habits.

    Key-value (Redis, Memcached; DynamoDB as a key-value/wide hybrid)

    Lookup by key at very low latency. Redis adds data structures (hashes, sorted sets, lists, bitmaps), persistence and clustering (see the Redis lesson). Ideal for caches, sessions, counters, rate limits, leaderboards. Not for ad-hoc queries.

    Wide-column and partitioned key stores (Cassandra, DynamoDB, HBase)

    Data is partitioned by a partition key across many nodes; you design tables around queries. Excellent write throughput, horizontal scale and availability. Cost: limited query flexibility, careful key design (hot partitions), eventual consistency by default. Good for event logs, messaging history, time-ordered user data.

    Search engines (Elasticsearch, OpenSearch, Solr)

    Build an inverted index (word to documents) for full-text search, relevance scoring, filters and facets. Usually a secondary copy of data from a primary database, kept in sync. Not a system of record: treat it as a derived index that can be rebuilt.

    Graph (Neo4j and others)

    Stores nodes and relationships and answers questions that follow connections: friends of friends, fraud rings, recommendations, dependency analysis. Where many-hop traversals would need expensive recursive joins in SQL, a graph database is natural.

    Time-series (InfluxDB, TimescaleDB, Prometheus)

    Optimised for append-heavy, timestamped data with time-range queries, downsampling and retention. Used for metrics, IoT and finance ticks (see the metrics monitoring lesson). Keep tag cardinality low.

    Vector databases (and vector indexes in other databases)

    Store embeddings (arrays of numbers representing meaning) and find the nearest neighbours, using approximate indexes (graph-based or clustering) for speed. Used for semantic search and retrieval for AI applications. Many general databases now offer vector indexes, which can be enough for moderate scale and avoids another system.

    A quick chooser

    NeedFirst choice
    Business data with relationships and transactionsRelational
    Flexible, self-contained recordsDocument
    Cache, session, counter, leaderboardRedis
    Massive write volume, simple access by keyWide-column / DynamoDB-style
    Full-text search and facetsSearch engine
    Many-hop relationship queriesGraph
    Metrics and sensor dataTime-series
    Semantic similarityVector index
    Analytics on large historyWarehouse or lakehouse (see the big data course)

    Polyglot persistence and its price

    Many systems use several stores, each for what it does best: a relational database as the source of truth, a cache, a search index and a metrics store fed from it. The cost is keeping them in sync (change events, outbox pattern, rebuild jobs), more to operate and more failure modes. Add a store only when a measured need justifies it.

    SQL versus NoSQL, honestly

    "NoSQL" is a family of different designs, not one thing. Relational databases scale further than many assume; NoSQL stores often give up joins and some consistency for scale and flexibility. Decide on requirements, not fashion. If in doubt, start relational and specialise later.

    Questions before committing

    • Can we model our top ten queries easily?
    • What happens at 10 times the data? At a regional failure?
    • How do we back up, restore, migrate and monitor it?
    • Does the team know it, and is it supported well on our platform?

    Real-world reading

    Open this lesson with its quiz and exercise

Go deeper on this

A path through videos, articles, other case studies and code on the same ideas as MetricsDB: TimeSeries Database for storing metrics at Twitter.

  1. Warm upGet the vocabulary first.

  2. WatchHow others solve the same problem, on video.

    Videos belong to their creators and play from YouTube. More on YouTube (opens in a new tab)

  3. ReadEngineers explain it in their own words.

  4. See it in another companyThe same ideas, a different system.

  5. Read the codeSee how it looks when it is real.

Keep learning

Loading community…