We handle 80TB and 5M page views a month for under $400 • Hacker News Board

Re: We handle 80TB and 5M page views a month for under $400

#371

Post by spiffytech » Thu, Jan 06, 2022, 3:33 PM UTC

ThinkBeat wrote: post #367

I dont understand this entirely . A lot of the article is spent talking about how great and fast Cloudflare is. Then at the end he says he uses Bunny as the CDN for images. Why use Bunny instead of Cloudflare? One more moving part. I presume it is cost related?

I too wish they'd spelled out that choice.

I speculate it's because Cloudflare's TOS prohibits you from using their CDN to serve "video or a disproportionate percentage of pictures, audio files, or other non-HTML content" on typical plans. See section 2.8 on https://www.cloudflare.com/terms/ . Since PolyHaven seems to be a purveyor purveyor of 3D assets and they use Bunny to host "all of our images shown on the website (thumbnails, renders, previews, etc.)", I'm guessing a lot of their assets exceed Cloudflare's TOS.

PolyHaven mentions using Bunny's image optimization service, so that'd factor into the decision too.

Re: We handle 80TB and 5M page views a month for under $400

#372

Post by metadat » Thu, Jan 06, 2022, 3:51 PM UTC

metadat wrote: post #61

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you referring to the linked article? It literally explains what Cloudflare does for them. Everything might make more sense if you visit their website: https://polyhaven.com/ It's not just a dumb, static file server. EDIT: The questions below are literally explained in the article, so I'm going to give up on this thread.

Yes, and if they could pay 1/20th of their current bill to solve it, I'm sure they would. I feel like we're heading into the weeds. Do you get the broader point I'm trying to make?

Note: my comment is no longer relevant and looks insane because Badwolff made edits to completely change their message.

Re: We handle 80TB and 5M page views a month for under $400

#373

Post by maxclark » Thu, Jan 06, 2022, 3:59 PM UTC

The important thing here is caching/static delivery

I've had this argument too many times to count. Every page view does not need to be dynamic per user request. Creating a sane cache policy reduces origin resources, servers, cost, etc... and surprise gives a better user experience at the same time.

Re: We handle 80TB and 5M page views a month for under $400

#374

Post by gionn » Thu, Jan 06, 2022, 4:33 PM UTC

xurukefi wrote: post #353

> This website blog.polyhaven.com/how-we-handle-80tb-and-5m-page-views-a-month-for-under-400/ is currently offline. Cloudflare's Always Online™ shows a snapshot of this web page from the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine. To check for the live version, click Refresh. oh the irony

I bet it's powered by wordpress.

Re: We handle 80TB and 5M page views a month for under $400

#375

Post by lelandfe » Thu, Jan 06, 2022, 4:39 PM UTC

hansel_der wrote: post #292

lelandfe wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Poly Haven is reading this: you nearly have an amazing FCP on the models browser but the external normalize.css file is killing you.[0] Self-hosting would drastically improve your 75p paint time. I'd also encourage you load your fonts late via JS. Your main JS package competes right now with WOFF files from Google Fonts for priority and there's no need for that. [0] https://www.webpagetest.org/result/220106_BiDc42…

> I'd also encourage you load your fonts late via JS can't tell if joke, so: there are already enough sites that display content for a split second and then some script runs (or fails?) and there is either nothing on screen or an error message. this is ridiculous - please stop!

Loading experience for this would be that a fallback font loads first and is later replaced. If something errors, it’s not replaced.

What you’re describing has been thankfully avoidable for many years.

Re: We handle 80TB and 5M page views a month for under $400

#376

Post by lelandfe » Thu, Jan 06, 2022, 4:40 PM UTC

austinpena wrote: post #328

lelandfe wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Poly Haven is reading this: you nearly have an amazing FCP on the models browser but the external normalize.css file is killing you.[0] Self-hosting would drastically improve your 75p paint time. I'd also encourage you load your fonts late via JS. Your main JS package competes right now with WOFF files from Google Fonts for priority and there's no need for that. [0] https://www.webpagetest.org/result/220106_BiDc42…

Why not just font-display:swap? Seems like the simpler solution.

optional would be more along the lines of what we want, but loading with JS let’s us load even later. They’re using swap today.

Re: We handle 80TB and 5M page views a month for under $400

#377

Post by pcj-github » Thu, Jan 06, 2022, 5:03 PM UTC

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #322

BiteCode_dev wrote: post #226

Honestly you can go very far with unmettered data plans. We consume 2GB/S, maxed out, which ends up being 5184TB a month. We have millions on users a day, all on a streaming video platform. It cost less than $2K/Month. The cloud is crazy expensive. Private servers are beasts, and they are cheap. Of course, for this price, you don't have redundancy and horizontal scaling. You also don't have to maintain and debug a sy…

> We consume 2GB/S, maxed out, which ends up being 5184TB a month. We have millions on users a day, all on a streaming video platform. > It cost less than $2K/Month. The solution in this article is serving on the order of 100TB/month for $400/month including a high speed global CDN, their API and database servers being hosted reliably, and redundancy and backup being handled by someone else. Your solution is hosting…

Whether or not a site is hosted in the cloud, it will break from time to time. S** invariably happens, no matter what. So, even if you host in the cloud, you're going to have problems, but they will be different problems. A developer to backup and support the site will be required, one way or the other. Case in point: polyhaven.com (the subject of this article) is not reachable as I write this.

Re: We handle 80TB and 5M page views a month for under $400

#378

Post by moralestapia » Thu, Jan 06, 2022, 5:05 PM UTC

tyingq wrote: post #370

moralestapia wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's super nice that you're here and your transparency is appreciated, but don't waste time in people like GP. Just walk your way and don't mind the naysayers. My two cents from a regular guy to a billionaire, :).

>don't mind the naysayers Noting they are operating at a slight loss, during a period where they want to drive growth, isn't "naysaying". The question is whether the current pricing is tied at all to the "operating at a slight loss". He replied to say it mostly wasn't. Remember, for example, when Uber rides were really cheap?

You're right about that but in this case I think they have that covered. Bandwidth is not really that expensivea and they already have the network and scale effects on their favor; so, if anything, I believe their opex (per customer or w/e) will continue to go down.

Re: We handle 80TB and 5M page views a month for under $400

#379

Post by aasasd » Thu, Jan 06, 2022, 5:07 PM UTC

sp332 wrote: post #111

aasasd wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please tell more about this ‘MacOS broke Gimp’ thing, because it's the first time I hear of that and I'd like to dodge a firsthand experience.

In November 2020, Gimp 2.10.14 didn't work well or at all on Big Sur. The issues got workarounds and bugfixes, but there are still complaints about performance. https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gimp/-/issues/5917

Thanks for the straightforward answer.

Re: We handle 80TB and 5M page views a month for under $400

#380

Post by ksec » Thu, Jan 06, 2022, 5:49 PM UTC

jleahy wrote: post #306

YetAnotherNick wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which "commodity server" could serve 2GB/s(16gbps) to public internet?

Pretty much anything. How about a Dell R340 with a dual-10G NIC and some SSDs? That's not commodity, that's cheap, a commodity server would be a dual-Xeon but that's overkill for serving 16gbps.

I think that is the problem with modern day's Web Dev. ( Sorry )

With Cloud and SaaS. They are so abstracted from Hardware that their knowledge on basic hardware and server, everything from CPU, Storage I/O and Network are close to zero.