Wordpress on AWS: smooth and pain free • Hacker News Board

Re: Wordpress on AWS: smooth and pain free

#121

Post by user5994461 » Wed, Nov 02, 2016, 11:58 AM UTC

chrsstrm wrote: post #105

user5994461 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FYI: You can run a professional blog on wordpress.com for about $100 a year (highest plan) and it will take millions of visitors. The smallest production instance on AWS is about $100 a month (c4.large) for 1 core (+intel HT) + 4GB ram + a few GB of EBS volume. The setup requires at least 4 hosts, thus that's a start price of $400 a month + the other fees (hardly 10% more :D). It's f * insane to pay more than $400 pe…

>It's f* insane to pay more than $400 per month to run a blog. No matter the traffic. It's insane if your site isn't being monetized at all and downtime doesn't cost you anything. What you spend on infrastructure should be a formula of risk vs. reward taking into account availability vs. lost revenue for downtime or visitor bounce due to errors, speed, etc. Site owners will happily pay whatever the cost is as long as…

Wordpress.com is more available, more stable and more dependable than a hacky setup on AWS you made yourself.

Not to mention that guys who can do that kind of custom setup are going for $150-300k a year nowadays. And it's gonna take man*months of work and maintenance.

Re: Wordpress on AWS: smooth and pain free

#122

Post by bigmanwalter » Wed, Nov 02, 2016, 2:03 PM UTC

bigmanwalter wrote: post #88

partiallypro wrote: post #85

I do similar for my personal website on Azure, they have a Wordpress plugin that maps the upload folder to use a blob storage instance. It's a bit dated and doesn't support things like custom domains using https (for the blob.) Something I hope they address (it's 2016 guys.) I don't know if this Amazon solution does the same thing or not. However currently I have to use my Blob's CNAME domain to serve assets over htt…

I'm assuming you're on Debian or Ubuntu. You can set up automatic security updates on Apt, and if you have a firewall you're halfway there. Then I would make sure each website has its own user, group, and www-user and using file permissions, make it so each virtualhost doesn't have access to others' files. If you wanna be extra safe you can have each site on its own vps. Although what's nice about keeping a bunch on…

DM me or shoot me an email, e@ericwaldman.ca if you have any questions about it :)

Re: Wordpress on AWS: smooth and pain free

#123

Post by chrsstrm » Wed, Nov 02, 2016, 7:44 PM UTC

user5994461 wrote: post #121

chrsstrm wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It's f* insane to pay more than $400 per month to run a blog. No matter the traffic. It's insane if your site isn't being monetized at all and downtime doesn't cost you anything. What you spend on infrastructure should be a formula of risk vs. reward taking into account availability vs. lost revenue for downtime or visitor bounce due to errors, speed, etc. Site owners will happily pay whatever the cost is as long as…

Wordpress.com is more available, more stable and more dependable than a hacky setup on AWS you made yourself. Not to mention that guys who can do that kind of custom setup are going for $150-300k a year nowadays. And it's gonna take man*months of work and maintenance.

I am one of those guys who can do that kind of custom setup for large scale high volume sites and the actual setup is not as complicated as it sounds. The maintenance is literally a day a month, if that. You can even automate it if you like. And if you have me on a maintenance retainer then you are not paying the equivalent of my $X00K per year salary. All of my clients who don't have their own corp DevOps team like having someone they know and can call at any time with issues instead of submitting a support ticket and waiting. Again, it all comes down to what percentage of our income do we feel comfortable spending on infrastructure? It has nothing to do with oh my - $X00 or $X000 per month sounds expensive.

Re: Wordpress on AWS: smooth and pain free

#124

Post by cthalupa » Fri, Nov 04, 2016, 9:46 AM UTC

user5994461 wrote: post #120

cthalupa wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're aware of the particulars of how they work, why are t2 instances not a production instance type?

Because t2 are NOT production instances. They are cheap, overrallocated, burstable instances with a low quota of CPU usage (about 10% for a t2.micro). They can burst over the quota for short period of time and they can be interrupted for short period of time. In short, the instance can pause anytime and stop processing traffic. Try running a production database on that see where it gets you ;)

If you're using a t2 instance for a heavily used production database that has a relatively steady amount of traffic, then you obviously don't understand the use case for it.

There are plenty of production workloads that are burst based in nature, and for those, t2's make plenty of sense. The micro is also hardly the only instance in the family - if you go to the opposite end, the t2.large has a baseline of 60%.

They also are not interrupted or paused, so I don't know where you're getting that. If you run out of credits your performance is throttled to baseline gradually over 15 minutes.

t2s are fine for production if you understand their strengths - workloads with low levels of constant usage and periodic bursts of higher resource utilization.

http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/t2-instan...