3 ms·

I'd really caution against your pricing structure. Unlimited access to a million keys is no joke, I've run some rather large memcached servers and none of them

I'd really caution against your pricing structure. Unlimited access to a million keys is no joke, I've run some rather large memcached servers and none of them were $20/month. You should pricing should always reflect the true cost + your desired profit margin. I'd probably be charging hardware usage + 15% before even factoring in the value of the service itself. Right now I'd say you're vastly too cheap; don't think about the costs solely as your servers but what's the value you've added to memcached/caching? Surely that's more than what you're charging? Tldr; Keep the small plans cheap but make the big plans waaay more expensive. Those using the biggest plans are finding the most value.

donutdan4114 11y ago
Thanks for the feedback, I will review the pricing to data storage cost. My general thought is that most people won't max out the system, and that the cheaper accounts will offset the cost of the larger ones.
donutdan4114 11y ago
You bring up a good point though, the service is much more focused on smaller data sets. I'm not trying to compete with huge storage services.
beachstartup 11y ago
well, if you consider that they're probably just deploying on $5 and $10 digitalocean droplets, the 'unlimited' nature of the requests just means 'as much as your instance can handle', and there's a built-in profit margin.
- donutdan4114 11y ago
  Currently the service is in rackspace, and it's not cheap hosting. But yes, "unlimited" means as fast as the service can handle among all the other requests that are incoming too.
  - beachstartup 11y ago
    why not just separate all the clients onto cheap discrete VMs running the api, and forward requests with nginx or haproxy or something?
  - donutdan4114 11y ago
    This service isn't designed to compete with something that has dedicated VMs and that kind of thing. It's vastly cheaper than most other data stores for this reason. Granted, it will scale for very heavy use. Right now, it's essentially launch day, so how much people use it will determine how I optimize it.

donutdan4114 11y ago

Thanks for the feedback, I will review the pricing to data storage cost. My general thought is that most people won't max out the system, and that the cheaper accounts will offset the cost of the larger ones.

donutdan4114 11y ago

You bring up a good point though, the service is much more focused on smaller data sets. I'm not trying to compete with huge storage services.

beachstartup 11y ago

well, if you consider that they're probably just deploying on $5 and $10 digitalocean droplets, the 'unlimited' nature of the requests just means 'as much as your instance can handle', and there's a built-in profit margin.

donutdan4114 11y ago
Currently the service is in rackspace, and it's not cheap hosting. But yes, "unlimited" means as fast as the service can handle among all the other requests that are incoming too.
- beachstartup 11y ago
  why not just separate all the clients onto cheap discrete VMs running the api, and forward requests with nginx or haproxy or something?
- donutdan4114 11y ago
  This service isn't designed to compete with something that has dedicated VMs and that kind of thing. It's vastly cheaper than most other data stores for this reason. Granted, it will scale for very heavy use. Right now, it's essentially launch day, so how much people use it will determine how I optimize it.