21–30 of 112 posts
Interesting how in the graph it looks like some people found out about 25 minutes before it was more publicly found out.
Interesting how in the graph it looks like some people found out about 25 minutes before it was more publicly found out.
Even in peak it's just ~800 hits per second - it shows how is irrelevant the C10k problem (yes, I know it's not exactly about hits per second, but still).
Even in peak it's just ~800 hits per second - it shows how is irrelevant the C10k problem (yes, I know it's not exactly about hits per second, but still).
Interesting how in the graph it looks like some people found out about 25 minutes before it was more publicly found out.
Even in peak it's just ~800 hits per second - it shows how is irrelevant the C10k problem (yes, I know it's not exactly about hits per second, but still).
C10k doesn't come up with Wikipedia because it doesn't do websockets. If it did it would probably have millions of concurrent connections, far over 10k. I dare say 10k is a bit passe. Whatsapp can apparently do 2m/server.
For others who were left scratching their heads at what exactly this pop-sci-explained PoolCounter mechanism actually is: https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/PoolCounter TL;DR: It's a limiter on how many workers start rendering the new page version when the old page version in cache has been invalidated.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
C10k doesn't come up with Wikipedia because it doesn't do websockets. If it did it would probably have millions of concurrent connections, far over 10k. I dare say 10k is a bit passe. Whatsapp can apparently do 2m/server.
2m per second ? These guys must have squeezed every ounce of performance out of Beam.