nodeBB forum software

zoogs

zoogs

New member
As we've been following the long, slow development of Invision Power Board 4, the possibility has occurred to me that IPB and its ilk (closed source, PHP-on-SQL board software) are becoming a thing of the past.

Here are two open source projects to keep an eye on:

nodeBB (built on Node.js)

discourse (built on Ruby on Rails)

nodeBB example

https://community.nodebb.org/

discourse example

http://try.discourse.org/t/what-does-the-admin-interface-look-like/261

I'm especially taken with nodeBB.

Given that we have dedicated hosting, we can try setting up RoR or Node.js and playing around with either of these options -- although at least for me, there'd be a lot of learning required first.

Lastly, a "cloud" host (?) for possible future reference: https://www.digitalocean.com

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wow - a steep learning curve when it comes to modification, for me at least.

What are the benefits over IPB or VBulletin? Responsiveness? Pricing?

 
Yeah, on second thought, it would probably be too big a change to do for the forseeable future. Anything that involves a migration, you'd probably have to be really sure about it long term. And for a big site, it's probably better to be a later adapter than an earlier one?...

I think IPB has advantages in some areas: they're a big company with a good-sized community, so they aren't likely to go anywhere. And we are probably best served by just waiting and migrating to IPB 4.0 (preview: https://community.invisionpower.com/). I really haven't been too pleased with its templating system, but I suppose we're stuck with it.

The key difference to me is that 1) nodeBB is not built on the AMP (Apache/MySQL/PHP) stack, and 2) they're new, so they're free to approach things differently from the start. It's exciting. Regarding the first point, there are (apparently) some performance benefits -- nodeBB runs on Node.js and can use MongoDB for a database. It's said to be *very fast* and blurs the distinction between a static forum and a chat experience -- which feels to me more of what "online discussion boards" ought to be. But, to be fair, that's not a great reason to change as a lot of people are familiar with the traditional BBS.

Regarding pricing: well, it's free and open source, which I suppose is a blessing as well as a curse. However, it could be fair to ask exactly what we are getting for regularly paying for that IPB license + Nexus, et cetera. The ability to download a Twitter extension that is no less dependent on an active development community, and one where we have you and Dave go in and fix it to our liking anyway? Support Tickets? The Nexus store for sure, is one thing.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
By the way, another note on pricing. I mentioned this before to you, Chad, and Eric but it may have gotten lost in the shuffle. I feel that dedicated hosting is very much more than we need. Certainly storage wise, and bandwidth wise.

Today I checked -- current memory usage: ~1.5GB currently; maybe higher at peak. Current CPU load: 0.76 (the number is very low; one site I read recommends keeping it below 10). If we set the memory requirement at 4GB (I think 2GB might be enough), a survey of 4GB VPS options yields:

http://asmallorange.com/hosting/cloud/ -- $60/mo

http://www.bluehost.com/vps -- $60/mo.

http://www.tmdhosting.com/ (Our current hosting company) -- $117/mo.

https://www.digitalocean.com/pricing/ -- $40/mo. (* we'd have to set up everything on our own. No cPanel. Possible drawback/dealbreaker?)

(A monthly $50 donation drive that has a 60% yield would cover half of a $60/mo server cost hosting package)

This is a bit of a separate discussion and of course, other issues would have to be explored with any migration (I'm not sure what). But it seems like a worthwhile thing to explore. Of course, it's Chad and Eric's site and their call in the end.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
zoogs has worked with TMD to evaluate our hosting. They suggested we stay with a physical server after looking at the state of the machine today. I agree with them after doing a little digging myself.

I'm not sure where you got your memory stat from, zoogs, but it's more like 7-8GB used like they said. Where did you get the 1.5GB number?

Memory is going to drive how responsive the site is so we don't want to be short there. The more we can shove into memory, the network will become the slow point which we don't really control.
As far as cpu we'll probably always be over provisioned just because our workload isn't really CPU intensive when compared to the power of today's CPU's. I am sure things are busier during football season, but still..

Our DB has grown pretty large over the years as, to my knowledge, we do no pruning. Like most folks, we hoard everything forever
default_smile.png
However, our "everything" isn't that much.. our current server is more than sufficient in that arena.

So if we can move to another server that has the same or more memory, the same or more storage and a similar CPU AND save money it's sort of a no brainer. Assuming they can move the site for us seamlessly.

stats.PNG

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thanks for looking into it as well, Dave -- I'll defer to you here
default_smile.png


And yeah, the current issue is that the host has been offering the same server as we have (except fitted with twice as much memory and storage) for a price that's 25% lower than what they have been charging us.

If they can rectify that at least, that'd be great.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Great job uncovering this, Alex. I'm with you - kind of sh**ty that the host never notified us that they had more powerful hardware for a lower price. Still, like Dave said, if we can keep current specs and increase RAM while paying less, we'll really be ahead of the game.

While we can't really control the network, in my (limited) experience, another component that can play a real role is disk read/writes. I wonder if the host has any servers that have enterprise SSDs as well? And if so, what the cost would be for that?

 
Back
Top