Asklemmy

43907 readers

956 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

How will lemmy scale? (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 year ago by phoneymouse@lemmy.world to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

63 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I already get rate-limited like crazy on lemmy and there are only like 60,000 users on my instance. Is each instance really just one server or are there multiple containers running across several hosts? I’m concerned that federation will mean an inconsistent user experience. Some instances many be beefy, others will be under resourced… so the average person might think Lemmy overall is slow or error-prone.

Reddit has millions of users. How the hell is this going to scale? Does anyone have any information about Lemmy’s DB and architecture?

I found this post about Reddit’s DB from 2012. Not sure if Lemmy has a similar approach to ensure speed and reliability as the user base and traffic grows.

https://kevin.burke.dev/kevin/reddits-database-has-two-tables/

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] aaron@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

When the protocol favors monoliths, we're right back to the Reddit problem

[–] GoodEye8@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Scalability doesn't mean "favoring monoliths". It's just scalability and honestly, 60k users shouldn't bring a service down. 60k users is not even close to being a monolithic instance.

[–] aaron@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Scalability does mean favoring monoliths because it costs money to scale and scaling here isn't proportional to your instance's users, it's proportional to the size of the entire network.

60k users is today, not tomorrow. I'm thinking forward to 6000k users.