Yeah, that's a lot of money, and a lot of memory. I'm against defining averages for that sort of thing because memory usage is directly proportional to, among other things, how badly written an app is. I'd wager that variable is actually the most important.
My guess is Heroku is taking into consideration how easy it is to put all that infrastructure to use, if you write an app with Heroku in mind. And how much you'd save by not hiring a sysadmin, and... well, still a lot of money :) On Wed, Sep 22, 2010 at 2:30 PM, railsnerd <[email protected]> wrote: > This comment on Hacker News got me thinking: > > "And with hilarious I mean really hilarious, as in the $3500 price > point for a 50G memcached instance. For that money you can also buy a > physical server with 64G RAM every month, fresh from the factory..." > --- http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1664914 > > 50GB is massive and I'm wondering what sort of site actually needs > this? > > Would a popular forum require this much? It would have to be very, > very popular? > > > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Heroku" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected]. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/heroku?hl=en. > > -- http://awesomebydesign.com -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Heroku" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/heroku?hl=en.
