3 ms·
An appview doing partial sync of the atmosphere is going to have two drivers of its cost: 1. number of users being synced, 2. number of direct users of the appv
by pfraze 2y ago
An appview doing partial sync of the atmosphere is going to have two drivers of its cost: 1. number of users being synced, 2. number of direct users of the appview. #2 because some additional work is done for the direct users, such as computation of the following feed.
I won't have exact numbers until we actually finish that distro and deploy it, but my ballpark for 5k direct users with, say, 100 follows on average leading to 500k synced users, I'd say $100-200/mo with a max of $500. If you're not running a big instance, you're not paying big costs.
EDIT: I should clarify that the partial sync runmodel that we're developing will still operate on atproto's "shared heap" approach which means that activity outside of the selected sync-set (the 500k users) will not be visible to the NYT users. How we solve that limitation is an open question. We could introduce message-passing to notify about that activity, for instance. I think that's the most notable downside compared to a comparable AP deployment, which inherently operates on message-passing.
- rglullis 2y agoYou absolutely buried the lede. Of course the idea is for the NYT to see all messages from its followers as well, not just their own follows. They should also be able to search and discover anyone that is on the atmosphere (after all, the first thing that journalists will want to do when investigating a person is to see their social media presence). With that in mind, what would be a real estimate for operating costs? I'm really taking your "EDIT" as admission that ATProto will only be able to claim "actually decentralized" once it changes into something that resembles ActivityPub.