On 7/13/2025 6:07 PM, Timo Rothenpieler wrote:
On 7/13/2025 5:57 PM, Michael Niedermayer wrote:
Hi
On Sun, Jul 13, 2025 at 01:58:44PM +0200, Timo Rothenpieler wrote:
[...]
Just want to note that hosting Gitlab is quite a bit more expensive than
Forgejo, for which I'm currently just paying out of pocket.
So for an official Gitlab test setup, I'd occasionally forward
accumulated
bills for refund by SPI.
Can you elaborate on the source of this additional cost ?
It's written in Ruby, which is not exactly fast or light on resources.
The recommended minimum instance Gitlab defines is one with 16GB RAM and
8 cores.
Gitlab also does not officially support running on aarch64, though it
does supposedly work, you'd be on your own supporting that setup.
So while a Forgejo instance suitable for our expected usage can run on
an CAX21 instance (4 CPUs, 8GB RAM, aarch64) which costs 7,13€ a month,
the Gitlab minimum specs demand a CX42 or CPX41 instance for 18,92€ or
29,39€ a month (both are 8CPU, 16GB RAM, the more expensive "P" one
being faster AMD CPUs, the non P one Intel).
The Intel CPUs are likely fine, performance wise, but it's still almost
triple the cost at a minimum.
If Gitlab could run on aarch64 the respective CAX31 instance would cost
only 14,27€ a month.
Actually, I just noticed there are aarch64 packages and images now,
since the very latest version apparently:
https://hub.docker.com/r/gitlab/gitlab-ce/tags?name=18
So the cost difference is a bit smaller, but still there. It costs
roughly double to host Gitlab vs. Forgejo, though that double boils down
to something like ~7€ a month extra.
_______________________________________________
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org
https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email
ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
