Hi Peter, > What do folks consider a "high-volume" site? If I'm looking to > handle 3 - 5 > million page views monthly, which I can do with a few production Rails > servers and a non-trivial production architecture (memcache, n-tier > architecture, etc.), do folks think Radiant will be up to the task?
We're using Radiant on a number of mid- to high-traffic sites. I don't have current numbers in front of me, but at last count our two largest clients had half a million unique visitors so let's assume a significant number of pageviews. All of our apps to date are given one dedicated app server and when called for, a separate DB server (one is backed by an Oracle cluster.) The built-in caching mechanism is adequate for all but the largest of those. Horizontal scaling has been achievable so far without much forethought at the application level. > Have you > used other CMS?s? Where did they fall short, or where did they have > features that you miss? We've used the whole gamut. End users like Radiant because, as they tell us, the admin UI is more user-friendly and the core concepts more grokkable than the alternatives. From a developer perspective, Radiant is great because the core is built to be extensible. There's almost an a la carte approach to building out a CMS in Radiant, and when someone asks for a feature that doesn't exist yet, integration doesn't require armed combat with the framework. To be fair, some of the other platforms out there may be a better fit for portal or community sites. We've done a few Radiant sites that integrate the notion of user accounts, and in every case we've had to make concessions that affect performance. Just a fair warning, if that's your scenario. Hope this is helpful. If you want to talk specifics, feel free to email me. Josh _______________________________________________ Radiant mailing list Post: Radiant@radiantcms.org Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/ Site: http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant
