Lemmy

12548 readers

49 users here now

Everything about Lemmy; bugs, gripes, praises, and advocacy.

For discussion about the lemmy.ml instance, go to !meta@lemmy.ml.

founded 4 years ago

MODERATORS

nutomic@lemmy.ml

167

What is the long-term storage plan for Lemmy instances? (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by Kalcifer@lemmy.world to c/lemmy@lemmy.ml

83 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Over time, Lemmy instances are going to keep aquiring more, and more data. Even if, in the best case, they are not caching content and they are just storing the data posted to communities local to the server, there will still be a virtually limitless growth in server storage requirements. Eventually, it may get to a point where it is no longer economically feesible to host all of the infrastructure to keep expanding the server's storage. What happens at this point? Will servers begin to periodically purge old content? I have concerns that there will be a permanent horizon (as Lemmy becomes more popular, the rate of growth in storage requirements will also increase, thereby reducing the distance to this horizon) over which old -- and still very useful -- data will cease to exist. Is there any plan to archive this old data?

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

[–] SeeJayEmm@lemmy.procrastinati.org 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

@ubergeek77@lemmy.ubergeek77.chat @lodion@aussie.zone Can either of you link to that discussion please?

[–] ubergeek77@lemmy.ubergeek77.chat 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It looks like the issue I was referring to has since been edited, as it's not actually relevant to clearing this database bloat:

https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/issues/3103

[–] SeeJayEmm@lemmy.procrastinati.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I mean, that post is exactly about clearing database bloat. The bulk of the bloat is in the activity table (going by the comments in the thread).

[–] ubergeek77@lemmy.ubergeek77.chat 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, I meant the comments that have been hidden previously made it seem like clearing it would be an issue, so I hesitated to clear it. Now that those comments have been edited, it looks like it won't break anything after all.

[–] SeeJayEmm@lemmy.procrastinati.org 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Gotcha. Thanks for pointing me in that direction. Seems like that table's only useful for debugging federation issues. Not sure why they'd want to keep it for 6 months.

[–] ubergeek77@lemmy.ubergeek77.chat 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It seems like lots of design choices were made with pre-Reddit-exodus usage in mind 😅

[–] SeeJayEmm@lemmy.procrastinati.org 1 points 1 year ago

That's for sure. Hopefully they can pivot and start thinking about how to scale better. On one hand I don't envy the developers but it's gotta be kind exciting.