3 ms·
> It's great at what it does but I think you've out grown it. There is absolutely no justification for him to be running into these sort of issues at such an i
by meritt 8y ago
> It's great at what it does but I think you've out grown it.
There is absolutely no justification for him to be running into these sort of issues at such an incredibly low load. Let's pretend he gets 50,000 hits per day (he says 50k per month but I don't know reqs/sec). Than's less than one per second. The $5/mo box over at DigitalOcean can handle 100 times that with the most poorly optimized PHP, Wordpress, and MySQL installation.
The problem is entirely due to a shitty host and/or grossly misconfigured server. No CMS should run into load issues at the microscopic traffic levels he's complaining about. He doesn't need Cloudflare, either.
So, yes, a static site would indeed perform better but to imply that he's actually reaching the limits of a simple CMS is absolutely ridiculous.
- speedplane 8y agoI'd pretty confidently bet this guy has some ridiculous and/or buggy wordpress plugin that loads a bunch of images or is horribly written that is causing the problem. Even a naive and basic wordpress install on crappy hardware should be handle this load.
- xupybd 8y ago>There is absolutely no justification for him to be running into these sort of issues at such an incredibly low load Yet he is running into these issues. Is it a buggy plugin or a configuration issue?probably, yes. But that's exactly the problem static sites solve. I don't mean to say he's out grown it as in you can't serve Wordpress at the volume he's currently getting. I mean you have to have everything setup correctly to do so.One option would be to learn the workings of Wordpress and maybe the web server hosting this. If that's what he wants to do with his time great. I suspect he may have other interests, if that's the case static hosting would be a good alternative. It might not be the best, but it's the best I know.