4 ms·

You can cache, effectively, your entire website to Jekyll if need be, and can do so with basically just flat files vs. having to work out memcache on a shared h

by bmelton 14y ago

You can cache, effectively, your entire website to Jekyll if need be, and can do so with basically just flat files vs. having to work out memcache on a shared host. Upgrading one's server isn't necessarily the de facto answer. There are a lot of other considerations to be had, specifically whether or not you care if your server can handle HN levels of traffic -- throwing money at the problem isn't necessarily the answer.

falcolas 14y ago
And then there's the real question for a blog - does it really need to be dynamic, and does it justify the additional costs associated with a higher quality server/higher complexity setup.
TomGullen 14y ago
Throwing more money should be the answer to this problem. If your server can't handle a HN burst and assuming it's not caused by your code being badly written the obvious solution is to get a better server. We're talking a few tens of dollars a month more. The time a startup founder spends trying to 'fix' the issue in another way would be better spent elsewhere. Pay more, move on.
- bmelton 14y ago
  Ignoring the point that frankly, I probably don't care about my blog enough to do even that. The point I was trying to give was this -- my blog is not my app. My blog does not have paying customers. It may or may not be a 'foot-in-the-door' to future sales, but in the same way I'm don't throw money at titanium business cards to ensure they don't accidentally catch fire, I'm not going to throw money at my blog for similar reasons. The other point, y'know, that the article makes, is that if you're not serving static files for your blog, your blog is effectively "badly written". A static file scales to practically infinity. It's almost a guarantee that whatever else you're doing, even if it's wordpress with caching, doesn't scale as well. And again, why would I change my hosting bill from $10 a month to $100+ a month on the .01% possibility that I'll see a huge traffic spike?

by bmelton 14y ago

falcolas 14y ago

And then there's the real question for a blog - does it really need to be dynamic, and does it justify the additional costs associated with a higher quality server/higher complexity setup.

TomGullen 14y ago

Throwing more money should be the answer to this problem. If your server can't handle a HN burst and assuming it's not caused by your code being badly written the obvious solution is to get a better server. We're talking a few tens of dollars a month more. The time a startup founder spends trying to 'fix' the issue in another way would be better spent elsewhere. Pay more, move on.

bmelton 14y ago
Ignoring the point that frankly, I probably don't care about my blog enough to do even that. The point I was trying to give was this -- my blog is not my app. My blog does not have paying customers. It may or may not be a 'foot-in-the-door' to future sales, but in the same way I'm don't throw money at titanium business cards to ensure they don't accidentally catch fire, I'm not going to throw money at my blog for similar reasons. The other point, y'know, that the article makes, is that if you're not serving static files for your blog, your blog is effectively "badly written". A static file scales to practically infinity. It's almost a guarantee that whatever else you're doing, even if it's wordpress with caching, doesn't scale as well. And again, why would I change my hosting bill from $10 a month to $100+ a month on the .01% possibility that I'll see a huge traffic spike?