3 ms·

There's no single metric, but in particular I believe that inherent inefficiency with WordPress design will incur more cost to scale, as an example. Not to men

There's no single metric, but in particular I believe that inherent inefficiency with WordPress design will incur more cost to scale, as an example. Not to mention things little security issues. I don't have an agenda against WordPress and very often when people ask me what they should use for simple projects I say "just use WordPress." My rule of thumb is that will probably be alright for a simple, small project, but will have to grow up to something else to scale reasonably.

aheckler 6y ago
> inherent inefficiency with WordPress design will incur more cost to scale Check out Cloudflare's Automatic Platform Optimization tool from last year [0]. It uses Workers to cache static and dynamic content from WordPress on the edge. Just $5/month. IMHO, that would "scale reasonably" for many use cases. [0] https://blog.cloudflare.com/automatic-platform-optimizations-starting-with-wordpress/ https://blog.cloudflare.com/automatic-platform-optimizations...
- nkozyra 6y ago
  CDN literally everything is - to me - a last resort you can use when your underlying application cannot handle any direct traffic. It's an expensive compromise that you shouldn't need unless you're in Alexa top 100 territory.
  - aheckler 6y ago
    That's a perfectly fair attitude. I was just trying to show that it's not very expensive to scale WordPress. :)
satya71 6y ago
Why does it have to scale? Doesn’t a CDN solve most scaling issues for a content site.
chmod775 6y ago
> but in particular I believe that inherent inefficiency with WordPress design will incur more cost to scale WordPress essentially generates static pages and is trivially set-up to run behind a CDN like Cloudflare. You can easily have WordPress sites in the Alexa top 50k that run on a $5 VPS - behind Cloudflare. > My rule of thumb is that will probably be alright for a simple, small project, Right. Simple, small projects. Like whitehouse.gov. As long as you use Wordpress for what it was designed for, it really doesn't matter what scale you have.

aheckler 6y ago

> inherent inefficiency with WordPress design will incur more cost to scale Check out Cloudflare's Automatic Platform Optimization tool from last year [0]. It uses Workers to cache static and dynamic content from WordPress on the edge. Just $5/month. IMHO, that would "scale reasonably" for many use cases. [0] https://blog.cloudflare.com/automatic-platform-optimizations-starting-with-wordpress/ https://blog.cloudflare.com/automatic-platform-optimizations...

nkozyra 6y ago
CDN literally everything is - to me - a last resort you can use when your underlying application cannot handle any direct traffic. It's an expensive compromise that you shouldn't need unless you're in Alexa top 100 territory.
- aheckler 6y ago
  That's a perfectly fair attitude. I was just trying to show that it's not very expensive to scale WordPress. :)

satya71 6y ago

Why does it have to scale? Doesn’t a CDN solve most scaling issues for a content site.

chmod775 6y ago

> but in particular I believe that inherent inefficiency with WordPress design will incur more cost to scale WordPress essentially generates static pages and is trivially set-up to run behind a CDN like Cloudflare. You can easily have WordPress sites in the Alexa top 50k that run on a $5 VPS - behind Cloudflare. > My rule of thumb is that will probably be alright for a simple, small project, Right. Simple, small projects. Like whitehouse.gov. As long as you use Wordpress for what it was designed for, it really doesn't matter what scale you have.