[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Discourse proposal status
From: |
Valentin Petzel |
Subject: |
Re: Discourse proposal status |
Date: |
Mon, 06 Mar 2023 11:20:17 +0100 |
But that is exactly my point. A system that does require much more resources
to set up is a bit fishy in my eyes.
Also my point still stands:
As far as I see discourse uses docker containers for deployment. Wouldn’t it
be possible to set up the container on a local machine, export the set up
container and load that on the server, which I believe is more or less what
David enquired about.
Setting everything up on a local server might also be a good idea before
spending money just to try out how it works.
Cheers,
Valentin
Am Montag, 6. März 2023, 03:29:43 CET schrieb Andrew Bernard:
> No. You misunderstand. Discourse is quite compact. The 8GB of RAM is
> only required temporarily for importing 20+ years worth of mbox files.
> My Discourse servers all run fine in 2GB of RAM, with unlimited posts,
> which are just in a database on disk.
>
> On 6/03/2023 3:04 am, Valentin Petzel wrote:
> > I suppose a system that requires by a large factor more resources for
> > installation that it requires to run is not really a good way to do it.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
- Discourse proposal status, Andrew Bernard, 2023/03/05
- Re: Discourse proposal status, Valentin Petzel, 2023/03/05
- Re: Discourse proposal status, Andrew Bernard, 2023/03/05
- Re: Discourse proposal status, Andrew Bernard, 2023/03/05
- Re: Discourse proposal status, David Kastrup, 2023/03/05
- Re: Discourse proposal status, Andrew Bernard, 2023/03/05
- Re: Discourse proposal status, David Kastrup, 2023/03/05
- Re: Discourse proposal status, David Wright, 2023/03/06
- Re: Discourse proposal status, David Kastrup, 2023/03/06
- Re: Discourse proposal status, Wol, 2023/03/06
- Re: Discourse proposal status,
Valentin Petzel <=