with some basic extrapolation, at how many users they'll hit the extra expensive Hertzner servers? or in other words, at which point they'll need to improve their architecture?
I honestly wish that the answer is "when we get so big to the point that a single machine can not handle it, we close registrations".
Can we please drop the "number must go up" mentality? The whole point of federated systems is to avoid concentration of power in a handful of servers. I'm sure that the people doing there have good intentions, but why can't we just let things just a little bit dispersed?
Sure, until you google some error, or some other random thing, find some thread somewhere, want to comment/ask/contribute, and you can't, since the registrations are locked.
it'll be interesting to see if at that point, federation starts to become the way of scaling or not. If it was seamless, it wouldn't matter where you signed up and they could just host multiple lemmy instances on different servers. So far I have rather spotty experiences though with content sometimes making it to federated servers, sometimes not etc etc.
Its "community" (on Lemmy), or "magazine" (on kbin) scaling that seems hard.
But since each server has a local-copy of the community that its serving out, maybe the hardest part has already been solved by the Federation model. Each federated-instance is effectively a proxy / front-end for the users on that instance.
---------
I guess Mastodon is way larger than Lemmy though and they haven't had issues yet.
1TB RAM Hertzner servers are available, so at least 8x more scaling before that's a problem.
2TB RAM is common in commodity servers, albeit expensive ones ($1000ish/month). Somewhere between 4TB to 20TB RAM is the pragmatic limit (where costs for vertical scaling start to get far worse)
Interestingly it seems max memories have been going down or at least not increasing in commodity x86 servers. Vendors advertised 24 TB servers enabled by lots of (192?) DIMM sockets in 2018 or maybe even earlier.
rglullis|2 years ago
Can we please drop the "number must go up" mentality? The whole point of federated systems is to avoid concentration of power in a handful of servers. I'm sure that the people doing there have good intentions, but why can't we just let things just a little bit dispersed?
ajsnigrutin|2 years ago
IceSentry|2 years ago
zmmmmm|2 years ago
dragontamer|2 years ago
Its "community" (on Lemmy), or "magazine" (on kbin) scaling that seems hard.
But since each server has a local-copy of the community that its serving out, maybe the hardest part has already been solved by the Federation model. Each federated-instance is effectively a proxy / front-end for the users on that instance.
---------
I guess Mastodon is way larger than Lemmy though and they haven't had issues yet.
dragontamer|2 years ago
2TB RAM is common in commodity servers, albeit expensive ones ($1000ish/month). Somewhere between 4TB to 20TB RAM is the pragmatic limit (where costs for vertical scaling start to get far worse)
fulafel|2 years ago
tedunangst|2 years ago