I am preparing a new blog, that I do have the intention to have it featured on HN sometimes.
For now what I will do is use a very lightweight Wordpress theme, and cloudflare.
Is that enough?
Is Your Site Hacker News Ready?
11–20 of 51 posts
Re: Is Your Site Hacker News Ready?
#12For http://pineapple.io I had 250 simultaneous users at once, and I believe 16,000 over the course of the day.
Server cut through it like butter :) Just lots of caching, optimization, sprites, etc. That traffic isn't even that bad, but I was happy my rails code performed nicely.
Re: Is Your Site Hacker News Ready?
#13I am preparing a new blog, that I do have the intention to have it featured on HN sometimes. For now what I will do is use a very lightweight Wordpress theme, and cloudflare. Is that enough?
If you're just blogging, is there a reason you want to do it all yourself? I just set up a Blogger account with a custom domain and let it be...
Re: Is Your Site Hacker News Ready?
#14200 hits per minute? Is that all it takes? (I guess the answer is "No, only if you've misconfigured", but still...)
I was expecting a lot more that that given the number of servers going down as soon as they hit the front page.
Re: Is Your Site Hacker News Ready?
#15Mostly as an educational exercise (perhaps in futility) I decided to try writing my own small php framework specifically to build and serve static files, load external libraries only when necessary and automatically send caching headers. The point being, for instance, not to even load Dwoo except if compiling the static pages (as opposed to fetching data from a view, building them and serving them with each request.)
Now i'm wondering if i'm not both overoptimizing and missing the point entirely.
And yes I do realize 'custom php framework' is missing the point of frameworks and that php is an abomination. Getting Laravel to do what I wanted (awesome as it is, and it is) started to seem like trying to tweak a cannon into a flyswatter.
It's still fun, but I dread it ever getting posted here. Assuming it gets finished.
Re: Is Your Site Hacker News Ready?
#16200 hits per minute? Is that all it takes? (I guess the answer is "No, only if you've misconfigured", but still...)
A misconfigured site that serves all its own assets will perform terribly because 200 hits per minute x 20 assets = 4,000 hits per minute. Wordpress has tons of assets too.
Re: Is Your Site Hacker News Ready?
#17200 hits per minute? Is that all it takes? (I guess the answer is "No, only if you've misconfigured", but still...)
A misconfigured site that serves all its own assets will perform terribly because 200 hits per minute x 20 assets = 4,000 hits per minute. Wordpress has tons of assets too.
Never used WP, but aren't those static assets? The bottleneck would be bandwidth then, should not be a huge load on the server. If it's compiling stuff or fetching them from DB though, then that could cause some problems.
Re: Is Your Site Hacker News Ready?
#18Is Wordpress.com itself capable of handling a slashdotting? If so, why not use it?
Re: Is Your Site Hacker News Ready?
#19My solution was to move my WP blog from being hosted locally to Github pages using Jekyll. They'll do a much better job keeping it up than I will and more importantly it's less for me to worry about.
Re: Is Your Site Hacker News Ready?
#20I am preparing a new blog, that I do have the intention to have it featured on HN sometimes. For now what I will do is use a very lightweight Wordpress theme, and cloudflare. Is that enough?
If you're just blogging, is there a reason you want to do it all yourself? I just set up a Blogger account with a custom domain and let it be...
I used to have a wordpress.com blog, but after they charged to everything I wanted to do, I got annoyed with them.
Also, I like to sometimes fiddle with stuff, and not let my "webmastering" get too rusty.
It is good to sometimes ssh to something that you own and wreck it at your will :)
To me, part of the fun of setting up a blog, is not only writing, but also taking care of it. I don't know really why (I have no intention of doing that for other people)