[FFmpeg-devel] [POLL] [VOTE] code.ffmpeg.org

[Timo Rothenpieler]

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.