35 ms·

FYI: This post is not about your personal 2-reader a month Wordpress setup but for sites scaling to the size of TC.

user5994461 10y ago
FYI: You can run a professional blog on wordpress.com for about $100 a year (highest plan) and it will take millions of visitors. The smallest production instance on AWS is about $100 a month (c4.large) for 1 core (+intel HT) + 4GB ram + a few GB of EBS volume. The setup requires at least 4 hosts, thus that's a start price of $400 a month + the other fees (hardly 10% more :D). It's f* insane to pay more than $400 per month to run a blog. No matter the traffic.
- chrsstrm 10y ago
  >It's f* insane to pay more than $400 per month to run a blog. No matter the traffic. It's insane if your site isn't being monetized at all and downtime doesn't cost you anything. What you spend on infrastructure should be a formula of risk vs. reward taking into account availability vs. lost revenue for downtime or visitor bounce due to errors, speed, etc. Site owners will happily pay whatever the cost is as long as they are not losing sales and their net income is positive.
  - user5994461 10y ago
    Wordpress.com is more available, more stable and more dependable than a hacky setup on AWS you made yourself. Not to mention that guys who can do that kind of custom setup are going for $150-300k a year nowadays. And it's gonna take man*months of work and maintenance.
    - chrsstrm 10y ago
      I am one of those guys who can do that kind of custom setup for large scale high volume sites and the actual setup is not as complicated as it sounds. The maintenance is literally a day a month, if that. You can even automate it if you like. And if you have me on a maintenance retainer then you are not paying the equivalent of my $X00K per year salary. All of my clients who don't have their own corp DevOps team like having someone they know and can call at any time with issues instead of submitting a support ticket and waiting. Again, it all comes down to what percentage of our income do we feel comfortable spending on infrastructure? It has nothing to do with oh my - $X00 or $X000 per month sounds expensive.
- pramit 10y ago
  Been trying to say this for years. AWS is expensive and unnecessary for most blogs and small websites.
- cthalupa 10y ago
  If you're aware of the particulars of how they work, why are t2 instances not a production instance type?
  - user5994461 10y ago
    Because t2 are NOT production instances. They are cheap, overrallocated, burstable instances with a low quota of CPU usage (about 10% for a t2.micro). They can burst over the quota for short period of time and they can be interrupted for short period of time. In short, the instance can pause anytime and stop processing traffic. Try running a production database on that see where it gets you ;)
    - cthalupa 10y ago
      If you're using a t2 instance for a heavily used production database that has a relatively steady amount of traffic, then you obviously don't understand the use case for it. There are plenty of production workloads that are burst based in nature, and for those, t2's make plenty of sense. The micro is also hardly the only instance in the family - if you go to the opposite end, the t2.large has a baseline of 60%. They also are not interrupted or paused, so I don't know where you're getting that. If you run out of credits your performance is throttled to baseline gradually over 15 minutes. t2s are fine for production if you understand their strengths - workloads with low levels of constant usage and periodic bursts of higher resource utilization. http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/t2-instances.html http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/t2-instan...
mcescalante 10y ago
I'm not talking about your personal 2 reader a month setups either. There are high amounts of traffic, I just have proper caching setup. Administrative interface is the only thing you can't cache and that's low traffic.

FYI: You can run a professional blog on wordpress.com for about $100 a year (highest plan) and it will take millions of visitors. The smallest production instance on AWS is about $100 a month (c4.large) for 1 core (+intel HT) + 4GB ram + a few GB of EBS volume. The setup requires at least 4 hosts, thus that's a start price of $400 a month + the other fees (hardly 10% more :D). It's f* insane to pay more than $400 per month to run a blog. No matter the traffic.

chrsstrm 10y ago
>It's f* insane to pay more than $400 per month to run a blog. No matter the traffic. It's insane if your site isn't being monetized at all and downtime doesn't cost you anything. What you spend on infrastructure should be a formula of risk vs. reward taking into account availability vs. lost revenue for downtime or visitor bounce due to errors, speed, etc. Site owners will happily pay whatever the cost is as long as they are not losing sales and their net income is positive.
- user5994461 10y ago
  Wordpress.com is more available, more stable and more dependable than a hacky setup on AWS you made yourself. Not to mention that guys who can do that kind of custom setup are going for $150-300k a year nowadays. And it's gonna take man*months of work and maintenance.
  - chrsstrm 10y ago
    I am one of those guys who can do that kind of custom setup for large scale high volume sites and the actual setup is not as complicated as it sounds. The maintenance is literally a day a month, if that. You can even automate it if you like. And if you have me on a maintenance retainer then you are not paying the equivalent of my $X00K per year salary. All of my clients who don't have their own corp DevOps team like having someone they know and can call at any time with issues instead of submitting a support ticket and waiting. Again, it all comes down to what percentage of our income do we feel comfortable spending on infrastructure? It has nothing to do with oh my - $X00 or $X000 per month sounds expensive.
pramit 10y ago
Been trying to say this for years. AWS is expensive and unnecessary for most blogs and small websites.
cthalupa 10y ago
If you're aware of the particulars of how they work, why are t2 instances not a production instance type?
- user5994461 10y ago
  Because t2 are NOT production instances. They are cheap, overrallocated, burstable instances with a low quota of CPU usage (about 10% for a t2.micro). They can burst over the quota for short period of time and they can be interrupted for short period of time. In short, the instance can pause anytime and stop processing traffic. Try running a production database on that see where it gets you ;)
  - cthalupa 10y ago
    If you're using a t2 instance for a heavily used production database that has a relatively steady amount of traffic, then you obviously don't understand the use case for it. There are plenty of production workloads that are burst based in nature, and for those, t2's make plenty of sense. The micro is also hardly the only instance in the family - if you go to the opposite end, the t2.large has a baseline of 60%. They also are not interrupted or paused, so I don't know where you're getting that. If you run out of credits your performance is throttled to baseline gradually over 15 minutes. t2s are fine for production if you understand their strengths - workloads with low levels of constant usage and periodic bursts of higher resource utilization. http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/t2-instances.html http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/t2-instan...

mcescalante 10y ago

I'm not talking about your personal 2 reader a month setups either. There are high amounts of traffic, I just have proper caching setup. Administrative interface is the only thing you can't cache and that's low traffic.