• Daniyyel@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Arstechnica runs on WordPress on AWS, and they have a really nice series of articles about it. Sure, you could use just one EC2 instance for everything, but on a high traffic website you would need a bit more.

    • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      But how many sites really are high traffic?

      That’s the thing with almost all of the cloud stuff: reasonable at scale, but overcomplicated garbage for 95% of the users.

      • gornius@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        95%? More like 99.999%, considering how many Wordpress sites are there.

        And in many of these 0.001% cases, simple horizontal scaling would do the trick.

        And if you need more than that, just use something that can work on the edge.

        • thejodie@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          There’s a big chunk of sites that have WP running but are mostly just static content, confusingly. If you update the content once a month and disable all comments, maybe another tool could fit better there. ¯\(ツ)

          • henfredemars@infosec.pub
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I thought the same thing and tried to do a static site generator for a while, but I just liked the WordPress UI too much for composing and editing vs manually placing my images in an assets folder and remembering the file names to add them in my markdown.

            Besides, with a good caching solution, isn’t WordPress effectively a static site with extra steps for many use cases?