Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I've used Meteor. I thought it was a good system. It didn't have offline capability, at least not back when I used it. It really needed to be connected to work. But conceptually, yes, it had a very similar system.


If Meteor could scale, we'd probably hear about it way more these days.

I remember having problems with 200 users serving from my above average dev pc for testing internal tools.

It's a DX dream though.


Yeah, faced the scaling challenges. What was recommended was using the "methods" which was basically RPC to fetch the data, rather than using the PubSub data syncing. Meteor maintained a full copy of what data each client had in memory, so this made it use a lot of RAM, and it did some kind of diffing for these on each update to only send the required updates over the wire, so this made it have high CPU utilisation. I had to move the chat portion of my app over to SocketIO which scaled wonderfully, but the DX was not quite as nice.

Rails and Phoenix are doing something similar (kind of) these days, and those seem to scale better, you just move all the data heavy lifting to the server and do almost nothing on the client.


Meteor works fine. We've served tens of thousands of concurrent connections on a low grade EC2 instance with some apps.


Well perhaps it got better recently. Not sure if worth giving it another try though. What is your experience?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: