3 ms·

Monthly operational costs: $783 Maybe there is a relation?

• viach 7y ago
  Are you going to say there is not even a distributed no-SQL cluster behind this? Well, I can understand the UI part, but there are limits...
  • panpanna 7y ago
    Local config for static stuff and postgres yes-SQL. I assume it doesn't scale extremely easily but seems to work good enough for now.
    • deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
    • cryptonector 7y ago
      YesSQL. Perfect. I'm going to steal that. YesSQL scales just fine to enterprises like VCS repo hosting. All you have to do is shard correctly (along the lines where you least need the power of SQL, preferably).
• NKCSS 7y ago
  Where did you get that from?
  • dsissitka 7y ago
    Not sure about that figure but there's https://lists.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss/%3CBVRVZEWYB30Q.3HGIC803LDBH7%40homura%3E https://lists.sr.ht/~sircmpwn/sr.ht-discuss/%3CBVRVZEWYB30Q..... Looks like their monthly expenses were around $1,200 going in to Q2.
    • majewsky 7y ago
      And that's for an offering including a CI build farm. Not just a website.
      • panpanna 7y ago
        I just took 640+129/3 Anyway, few hundred dollars added or subtracted doesn't really change the point. This is a fairly cheap operation given what it provides.
• t0astbread 7y ago
  I guess this boils down to the classic: No approach is universally better. You can write a client-side application and distribute it through some CDN (like Netlify) and have no administration duties or server cost. However, your app will end up not working without JS (and your tech stack could possibly be a mess, depending on your choices). Or you can generate pages on the server which requires you to have, well, a server. Both approaches have benefits and drawbacks.
• juped 7y ago
  Are you calling this high or low, and are you snarking or praising? We're in way too deep here.