321–330 of 426 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know, but it is impressive that they are doing it for $400.
It's impressive it takes that much money to do almost no traffic. A raspberry PI could handle the compute.
Honestly you can go very far with unmettered data plans. We consume 2GB/S, maxed out, which ends up being 5184TB a month. We have millions on users a day, all on a streaming video platform. It cost less than $2K/Month. The cloud is crazy expensive. Private servers are beasts, and they are cheap. Of course, for this price, you don't have redundancy and horizontal scaling. You also don't have to maintain and debug a sy…
> It cost less than $2K/Month.
The solution in this article is serving on the order of 100TB/month for $400/month including a high speed global CDN, their API and database servers being hosted reliably, and redundancy and backup being handled by someone else.
Your solution is hosting on the order of 1000s of TBs of month (ignoring the database and other aspects of this website), but the price is an order of magnitude higher. You’ve also given up all of the automatic redundancy and hands-off management, and you don’t have the benefit of a high speed global CDN.
But more importantly, you have significantly higher engineering and on-call overhead, which you’re valuing at $0.
If anything, that only makes Polyhaven’s solution sound more impressive.
> Of course, for this price, you don't have redundancy and horizontal scaling.
Which is a huge caveat. The global CDN makes a big difference in how the site loads in global locations. Maybe not a big concern if you’re serving of static files with a lot of buffering, but they have a dynamic website and a global audience and they said fast load times are important.
> You also don't have to maintain and debug a system with redundancy and horizontal scaling.
But you have to do literally everything else manually and maintain it yourself, which is far from free.
All of these alternative proposals that value engineering time at $0/hour and assume your engineers are happy to be on-call 24/7 to maintain these servers are missing the point. You pay for turnkey solutions so you don’t have to deal with as much. Engineers don’t actually love to respond to on call events. If you can offload many of your problems to a cloud provider and free up your engineers for a nominal cost, do it.
Honestly you can go very far with unmettered data plans. We consume 2GB/S, maxed out, which ends up being 5184TB a month. We have millions on users a day, all on a streaming video platform. It cost less than $2K/Month. The cloud is crazy expensive. Private servers are beasts, and they are cheap. Of course, for this price, you don't have redundancy and horizontal scaling. You also don't have to maintain and debug a sy…
> We consume 2GB/S, maxed out, which ends up being 5184TB a month. We have millions on users a day, all on a streaming video platform. > It cost less than $2K/Month. The solution in this article is serving on the order of 100TB/month for $400/month including a high speed global CDN, their API and database servers being hosted reliably, and redundancy and backup being handled by someone else. Your solution is hosting…
Labour isnt expensive if you're operating towards a minimum needed to function, and your systems are sufficiently operationally stable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> fair enough, however they juggle the buzzwords. Oh absolutely true, you don't want to look completely clueless in front of people who take your money to setup an infrastructure ;) >and make hard requirements to IT, that would help That would make stuff so much more easy. Often it even lacks even a inventory of used applications/hardware....network. Just one example: Made a plan for new hardware and network (new cab…
> you don't want to look completely clueless That's why I give them money, so they bare with my cluelessness on their field. Would do it myself otherwise. Or the way round: "I hire smart people for a lot of money, why would I tell them what to do" (Steve Jobs) > that one little DOS-machine The donkey does the work and the horse gets the fame.
Honestly you can go very far with unmettered data plans. We consume 2GB/S, maxed out, which ends up being 5184TB a month. We have millions on users a day, all on a streaming video platform. It cost less than $2K/Month. The cloud is crazy expensive. Private servers are beasts, and they are cheap. Of course, for this price, you don't have redundancy and horizontal scaling. You also don't have to maintain and debug a sy…
Not including extra human cost in the analysis is just disingenuous. I think to manage private servers of that size you would need at least two extra experts totalling at least $20k/month.
Honestly you can go very far with unmettered data plans. We consume 2GB/S, maxed out, which ends up being 5184TB a month. We have millions on users a day, all on a streaming video platform. It cost less than $2K/Month. The cloud is crazy expensive. Private servers are beasts, and they are cheap. Of course, for this price, you don't have redundancy and horizontal scaling. You also don't have to maintain and debug a sy…
> We consume 2GB/S, maxed out, which ends up being 5184TB a month. We have millions on users a day, all on a streaming video platform. > It cost less than $2K/Month. The solution in this article is serving on the order of 100TB/month for $400/month including a high speed global CDN, their API and database servers being hosted reliably, and redundancy and backup being handled by someone else. Your solution is hosting…
The entire team is composed of half of one dev.
I'm 100% sure it's way cheaper than anybody that has AWS on resume.
Of course, some things have to give, like the global CND, and some data guarantees.
Everything is a compromise. It's all depend of what is important for your project.
EDIT: also, my comment was not meant to oppose the article, but rather confirm the view that you should calibrate your setup to your project. Doing so will lead to great savings in hosting, and project complexity. A lot of projects don't need the cloud.
This website is one of the fastest web pages I’ve ever used. Although it’s simple, it immediately loads pages and pages of images. Like in a flash. I’m on mobile web and it’s such a snappy experience.
If Poly Haven is reading this: you nearly have an amazing FCP on the models browser but the external normalize.css file is killing you.[0] Self-hosting would drastically improve your 75p paint time. I'd also encourage you load your fonts late via JS. Your main JS package competes right now with WOFF files from Google Fonts for priority and there's no need for that. [0] https://www.webpagetest.org/result/220106_BiDc42…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What?! Maybe if you hire SV-skilled engineers on location in Sillicon Valley, but you can easily serve 2GB/second (on infra worth $2K/month) with one sys-admin dealing with it, and for way less than a whopping $10k/month.
> with one sys-admin dealing with it, And if that one sys-admin wants to go on vacation? Or travel away from a computer? Or takes another job? You can never have “just one” admin handling a server and being on-call 24/7. Would you really want a job where you could never, ever be away from a computer because you’re the only on-call person? This doesn’t work.
Works fine for me. $20K a month for two people doing f*k all is insane.