What a day we are testing a system which was supposed to handle 10 maybe twenty user to handle 12k users.
And i am being lectured this system is using way more resources as it is supposed to be 😔. At design time the same people just wanted to save time.

Client: What's the problem?
Me / Manager: You forgot to add some zeroes in your calculation... Did you know that 10_000 is a little bit higher than 10?

Sheesh... Sounds like fun.

Serverless FTW

@dan-pud it is on asp.net legacy

Good luck 🙏

If someone's lecturing you about that, just present the facts. "The original spec didn't have this in scope, this is new functionality. So it can use x resources as is, or we can spend y time re-engineering it to use z resources instead. How would you like to proceed?"

Ain't the devs job to overengineer everything by 3 orders of magnitude, it's the client's job to spec it properly. If they fail to do that, they reap the consequences.

@AlmondSauce wish I could ++ your comment more than once. I had my fair share of this event happening to me.

@AlmondSauce that's still only 30 users not 12k users 😅

There's over engineering and there's going well and truely beyond scope.

But these days, anything should be able to handle thousands of concurrent users by default before even thinking of falling over.

@C0D4 Nah, order of magnitude means add a zero 😁

Depends on the project though. Anything running on a single node in a "classic" thread per request model (which classic asp will use) may only be able to handle a few hundred concurrent users at most, especially with older hardware. So it could well be they just need to spin up about 30 separate nodes with a load balancer if nothing else changes to get the volume, which is probably what they're whining about.

@AlmondSauce thanks did that.
Have your cake and eat it too. Found original spec :) and my concerns, which were shot down.
I told them the model will save dev time but wont be able to scale.