I have a hard time finding out the Meteor hosting costs to know if I should continue my app with Meteor or just move to PHP.
Lets say I will have a collection with 10000 documents , no files…no need for users to add more to the collection, its a “static” collection…and a simple site with table showing those collection and their fields and they will be able to sort through those fields…
Lets say I have 1 million page views a month, how much the hosting could end up being? I saw in modulus they use the term servos but not sure what that is.
You’re going to hate the barrage of “It depends on how the app is written” answers. But really, it all depends on you. Don’t publish all 10,000 documents of course.
Meteor is data-on-the-wire, so it should be less resource intensive that most platforms.
Also, Meteor is more CPU dependant than RAM. CPU is going to be your deciding factor on hosting providers. I would avoid using things like modulus. Or if you must, at least wait until Galaxy comes out with smaller plans for startups.
It also really depends on the app itself.
For example, if you develop a point of sale app, 1M ‘pageviews’ would be easily racked up if you had 100 clients, that’s 10,000 pages a month each. Those pageviews would not be very expensive on your server at all because the way Meteor doesn’t need to send those ‘pages’ with every click. The dataset that the clients are subscribed to would not change too much (inventory and sale data). I would think that in comparison, Meteor would be simpler and easier than PHP in that scenario…
Other use cases like forums and blogs would not stack up so nicely I don’t think… because the users would be changing and updating their subscriptions often.
sounds like you are better off with simply a static html based site which you can http serve off AWS S3 or Google Storage, and you can merge the data into the html files with a simple script. In that case you need not nodejs, nor php.
- no users
- no updates
- no etc…
and then your req/spec change