# ScaleWay review?

**URL:** <https://meta.discourse.org/t/scaleway-review/40916>\
**Category:** Self-hosting\
**Tags:** hosting\
**Created:** [March 11, 2016, 7:08pm UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/scaleway-review/40916 "2016-03-11T19:08:23Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 11

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![probus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/67e7ee/32.png) [@probus](https://meta.discourse.org/u/probus)\
**Post date:** [May 12, 2016, 12:08pm UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/scaleway-review/40916/11 "2016-05-12T12:08:35Z")

</div>

We use DO currently.

I know that’s the only supported install and all forums are (somewhat) different, but it would be great if we could get some more general guidelines on Discourse performance on different hardware. Or a way to run some kind of Discourse-benchmark to compare.

This is great info:

> [@mpalmer](#):
>
> in general: get a fast (single-core performance) CPU, fast disks, lots of RAM, and a low-latency network. The CPU’s single-core performance is the limiting factor for a lot of the page generation time (page render isn’t multi-threaded, so lots of slow cores isn’t useful), while most of the rest is down to how quickly the DB can service requests, which is helped by fast disks (so data gets loaded and saved quickly) and lots of RAM (so you never have to touch those fast disks in the first place). A low-latency network means you’re not left sitting around all day waiting for the packets to get from column A to column B.

But what kind of numbers are we talking about here? What would the 2-3 fold cpu speed difference do in terms of latency or concurrent users for example? What about having 2, 4 or 8 cores instead of one? Or doubling or quadrupling the RAM?

I can tell you Discourse runs fine on ScaleWay (x64) and the install is as easy as any. I have no idea of the performance, even in theory.

---

_[View the full topic](https://meta.discourse.org/t/scaleway-review/40916)._