I know there’s donations and the owners can use their own money, but there’s a limit. I doubt a platform with hundreds of thousands of daily users can survive with only donations.

62 points

By having more instances and better user distribution. Running a small-ish instance isn’t very expensive, around 5-10 euro a month (some VPS providers are cheaper, etc). As Lemmy development continues, and more optimizations come in, these smaller lemmy instances will be able to support more users.

There is also a discussion on GitHub to introduce user and community migrations between instances. So once that feature is implemented, it will be easier to redistribute everything across all Lemmy instances.

permalink
report
reply
20 points

Is there a point where there are so many instances that propagating all that data is too taxing and worse than having fewer bigger instances?

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

Is there a point where there are so many instances that propagating all that data is too taxing

Yes, that becomes a concern as the network size grows and the amount of aggregate replication traffic increases. Mastodon has like 10x the server count of Lemmy, though… so that’s hopeful. They do use ActivityPub differently though, it possible that federation scales differently between them.

This GitHub issue has a lot of good (but rough and high-level) thoughts on future scaling techniques: https://github.com/LemmyNet/lemmy/issues/3062

permalink
report
parent
reply
57 points

Most instances will hit a hard cap where the user support can’t scale anymore. Admins will have to close sign-ups and force new users to other instances to distribute the load. That’s the point of federation.

The issue is admins do not yet know where the limits are, and Lemmy still needs a lot more backend optimization work.

permalink
report
reply
27 points

Why? A single Linux server has been able to support tens of thousands of simultaneous clients for many years now.

permalink
report
reply
24 points

Bandwidth is not free.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

Text is small.

permalink
report
parent
reply
70 points
*

Bandwidth is not free.

Better?

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

The €5/mo VPS my instance runs on has 20TB bandwidth included.

So while it is not free, it can certainly be very, very inexpensive.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points
*

It’s super cheap. A lot of us nerds have very good incomes and can pay for an instance that has like 20 TB of network traffic for less than 10 dollars per month.

It’s our way to try and contribute to the growth of Lemmy and also it’s fun to run our own instance.

Edit: Corrected network bandwidth amount.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

What? Did you mean 40Gbps for less than 10 dollars/mo? Or did you mean 40GB of traffic total monthly? Huh?

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

Are you talking about a specific server or just Linux servers in general?

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

I’m referring to the old “c10k problem”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point
*

I think this doesn’t apply? Aren’t they talking about 10k simultaneously connected users here? With http you connect and disconnect for every request.

Also the database is likely to give timeout errors way before you reach the socket limits.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

That sort of thing should be a self-correcting problem to an extent - when performance drops, people will (hopefully) move to other intances. Also, a well-managed instance would stop accepting new members before it go to that point.

permalink
report
reply
4 points

Also, there would be developers watching https://fediverse.observer to see if few registrations are open, but sign-ups are climbing in all open instances. Of course they are going to jump in if there’s an opportunity.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

People will only do that if they can migrate all the past history to a new instance and the syncing issues between instances are fixed

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Until people start donating to instance owners, and instance owners continuously scale up the servers, thus inviting even more people to centralised on the biggest few instances.

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

I think we’ll see a variety of servers with different funding models, similar to how radio and tv stations in the us can have a variety of funding models. NPR has a network of member stations that all carry their content (if the stations want, or they can get content from another station, or they can make it themselves).

Threads is an example of a federated service with a corporate funding model. I definitely think it’ll survive since they have as much money as Facebook wants to sink into it.

But we’ll probably also see servers that run on donations by a dedicated community.

If Threads is the NBC/CBS/ABC of the federated landscape, then those small servers will be like public radio stations, which operate on donations and the occasional government grant.

I think there are people who would chip in a little bit to fund a non-commercial server just the same as there are people who chip in money to NPR.

permalink
report
reply
11 points
*

I’m posting from a self hosted server running on a raspberry pi! While no long term test has been carried out yet, it’s really snappy :3

I wonder how the network will scale if more and more would self-hosts small instances with just 2-4 users. If it would decrease load or increase load on the instances that hold popular communities.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
*

I’m pretty sure it’s a net increase in load, saying this from my own small instance here. I don’t want to primarily use the big instances - that’s why I started my own. But lemmy.world encompasses so much that any load I would’ve prevented by subscribing to communities outside of lemmy.world is probably negated by lemmy.world already being subscribed to that community. And even if we’re just counting lemmy.world content, pretty sure it’s a net increase because browsing lemmy.world just shows aggregate votes and paginated lists. When federating they’re sending everything, even the 90% of stuff I and my users never even see. I wonder what the tipping point is, where the load of federating communities is outweighed by the load saved by not constantly reloading lists and whatnot. I bet it’s at least 10.

EDIT: Also wanted to add there’s proposals for how to spread out the load without having to switch protocols or anything. I certainly wouldn’t mind my own instance being used to forward stuff on.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points

I agree, I would like to contribute cpu and memory from my instance to the Lemmy network somehow, without users needing to have an account on my instance.

But it doesn’t work that way currently. Lemmy.world became the largest instance and then we have hundreds of small ones hardly being used at all.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I guess you’re a HAM radio operator in this analogy

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Love this analogy!

permalink
report
parent
reply

Asklemmy

!asklemmy@lemmy.ml

Create post

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

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

  1. Open-ended question
  2. 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.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Icon by @Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de

Community stats

  • 10K

    Monthly active users

  • 5.9K

    Posts

  • 319K

    Comments