This may seem a little too much like spammy adverstising but just to disclaim, I have no affliation or anything with the company....I'm just a fan of their software and this does seem particularly topical to this thread. New Relic just released some new (cheaper) pricing options for that might help address the 24 hour issue in a more affordable way for smaller organisations:
"Here's the package *(Available through October 31st, 2013)*: ************************************* * *Startup Package (only for companies with less than 10 employees)* - One flat fee for up to 8 servers and up to 5 users - Transaction Traces and all the other features found in our Pro offering - 2 weeks of data retention (vs 24 hours in lite) - *All for $199/month* *Small Business Package (only for companies with less than 20 employees)* - One flat fee for up to 12 servers and up to 10 users - Transaction Traces and all the other features found in our Pro offering - 2 weeks of data retention (vs 24 hours in lite) - *All for $499/month* As you may know, our current pricing is $199 for ONE server per month for more or less the same features - so this is the equivalent of us undercutting ourselves. Oh well. We just want you as a customer!" Cheers, Dan On 22 October 2013 10:27, Javier Candeira <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 8:58 PM, Lars Yencken <[email protected]> wrote: > > I can second NewRelic. We've used it for some time at work, and it's > > definitely the strongest performance monitoring tool that I've used. > > Recently I used their free tier for my language game in Flask, and it's > > again been useful. The 24h limit to history does prevent you from > > investigating performance over time though -- for that you have to pay. > > I've also been looking at open source solutions in this space, like > collectd, ganglia, nagios, cacti, but it seems they overlap a bit, and > at the same time they leave out a lot of the error monitoring that the > likes of New Relic give you. I'll report back when I get a better > idea. > > > We use Github, but Bitbucket's more reasonably priced. It's what I use > for > > my personal projects. The workflow around pull requests is probably not > as > > strong for teams though. > > Can you give an example? Besides the fact that pull requests don't > create an issue (which may even be better for some people, I'm > agnostic on the point), I can't see much difference. > > J > _______________________________________________ > melbourne-pug mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/melbourne-pug > -- Common Code = { 'email': '[email protected]', 'mobile': '0422 987 423', 'address': '114 Hoddle Street, Abbotsford 3067', 'zen': 'http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0020/', }
_______________________________________________ melbourne-pug mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/melbourne-pug
