I'm also shocked at the tens of thousands per month, it can't possibly be hosting alone. It has to be that the maintainer had a generous salary or something.
Mediawiki involves edits that users expect to propagate instantly to other pages. Sometimes this can easilt result in cache stampedes if not setup carefully.
MediaWiki supports extensions. Some of the less well architectured extensions add dynamic content that totally destroies cachability.
> Mediawiki involves edits that users expect to propagate instantly to other pages. Sometimes this can easilt result in cache stampedes if not setup carefully.
Most users should not even be hitting MediaWiki. It's ok to show cache entries that are a couple of seconds or even minutes out of date for logged out users.
> MediaWiki supports extensions. Some of the less well architectured extensions add dynamic content that totally destroies cachability.
Again, nothing reasonably needs to update all that often.
That's not what static means in the context of hosting. Static means you upload files by FTP or WebDav or some other API and that's it. Something like hosting on S3. If users can log in, even if they usually don't, it's nothing like static any more.
Doesn’t it make more sense that a media have site would have been paying through the nose for bandwidth, hence the callout for cloudflare which would have made that cost free?