Excellent perspective, Sean, thank you. I'll check into our numbers; and the 300ms is a very helpful data point.
Also, thanks for the references to volume. Could you please clarify CACM? Is that cacm.acm.org or cacm.org, please? Or something else entirely? Many thanks, Peter > From: Sean Cribbs <[email protected]> > Reply-To: <[email protected]> > Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2009 11:54:05 -0400 > To: <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Radiant] Stories of stability > > It's more useful to break it down into req/s. > 5M page views a month is an average of 2 req/s (not taking into > account spikes). Do you have some info about your peak request rate? > > I've seen even the heaviest pages take less than 300ms to render, plus > you'll most often be hitting the cache, which is even faster. I'm > betting you could handle that on a 1GB vps with the whole stack > installed. If it can't handle the traffic, you could put Varnish or > some other reverse-proxy cache in front, at the expense of freshness. > > Other Radiant deployments to consider w.r.t. volume: redken.com, CACM. > > Sean > > On Thursday, December 24, 2009, Peter Degen-Portnoy > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Compete.com tells me that ruby-lang gets about 1/10 the traffic I currently >> get. So your musing about the production configuration is at the heart of >> the question. >> >> - Peter >> >>> From: Mohit Sindhwani <[email protected]> >>> Organization: Viometrix | Onghu >>> Reply-To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]> >>> Date: Thu, 24 Dec 2009 21:47:26 +0800 >>> To: <[email protected]> >>> Subject: Re: [Radiant] Stories of stability >>> >>> Peter Degen-Portnoy wrote: >>>> Thanks, Steven, for the added perspective. >>>> >>>> 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? >>>> >>> Well, the ruby-lang site runs on Radiant.. wonder what configuration it >>> uses. >>> >>> That said, if your content doesn't change too rapidly, you can increase >>> the cache timeout to a good large number.. my sites are not high volume >>> - more like niche technology sites, so I wouldn't know for sure. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Mohit. >>> 12/24/2009 | 9:47 PM. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Radiant mailing list >>> Post: [email protected] >>> Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/ >>> Site: http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Radiant mailing list >> Post: [email protected] >> Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/ >> Site: http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant >> > _______________________________________________ > Radiant mailing list > Post: [email protected] > Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/ > Site: http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant _______________________________________________ Radiant mailing list Post: [email protected] Search: http://radiantcms.org/mailing-list/search/ Site: http://lists.radiantcms.org/mailman/listinfo/radiant
