4 ms·
Playing a devil's advocate here: a use case might already be hitting the maximum per server RAM. A factor of 2.4 might mean 2.4 times more hardware. You might
by vardump 5y ago
Playing a devil's advocate here: a use case might already be hitting the maximum per server RAM.
A factor of 2.4 might mean 2.4 times more hardware. You might need 240 servers instead of 100.
- lmm 5y agoSure. And? Everything that you need to do to manage 240 servers, you need to do to manage 100 servers. Like I said, if you're in the scaling stage then you'll be getting to 240 in a few months either way, so you need to be ready for it. 2.4x higher operating expenses matter eventually, when you're a mature organisation, but if the software is under active development you almost certainly have higher priorities.