[yupyup54133]

Someone asked them in their comments section:

> Have you considered switching to a Static Site Generator? Write your posts in Markdown, push the change to your Git repo, have GitHub/GitLab automatically republish your website upon push, and end up with a very cacheable website that can be served from any simple Nginx/Apache. In theory this scales a lot better than a CMS-driven website.

Admins Response:

> That would be too much of a hassle. A proper CMS allows us to focus on writing.

[kevincox]

Switching to a different backend seems overly dramatic. But configuring some caching seems like a pretty obvious improvement.

[em-bee]

and i agree with them. static site generators are nice for people who like that kind of workflow, but when you have a team with different personal preferences you need something that is easy to access and doesn't require much learning to get used to.

what would be ideal is a CMS that can separate content editing and serving it. iaw a kind of static site generator that is built into a CMS and can push updates to the static site as they happen.

[ehutch79]

A quick google search turns up several tools to generate static sites from a ghost instance.

[mingus88]

It’s been a long time since I’ve been in the CMS space but I thought Wordpress had dozens of plugins for caching even 10 years ago.

I mean, even just hopping over to host your site in Wordpress.com was a viable option if you were in that middle ground between personal blog and having a dedicated server admin to handle your traffic

Hard to believe that you’d be in the business of serving content in 2024 and have to deal with the slashdot effect from 1999 for your blog of articles and images.

[joshspankit]

WordPress does have bunches of caching plugins. Some VPS hosts (shout out SiteGround) also have multiple layers of server-level caching that they will apply automatically.

You can take most WordPress websites from multi-second load times to 750ms or less (in fact as a regular exercise I set up fresh WordPress installs on dirt-cheap VPS hosts and see how low I can get them while still having a good site. 250ms to display is not uncommon even without CDNs)

[em-bee]

true, but i suspect that wanting to self-host the content is a factor (at least it would be for me). and as others have mentioned, there seem to be issues with the cloudflare setup that should have helped here too, so even with self-hosting, it should be possible to handle this.

[alavry]

This is already possible using a headless CMS

[em-bee]

can you elaborate on this? my understanding was that headless CMS means that it has no frontend at all, and you build your own using whatever web dev tools you like. iaw it is used to integrate CMS functionality into my website without hosting the full website inside the CMS.