101–110 of 426 posts
We have an incredibly similar stack for attic.city, aside from the application layer. We lean heavily on CF (edge caching, Argo and page rules). But we’ve recently changed our image assets from S3 to CF R2. Anyone else put that side by side with Bunny?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The bulk of the traffic is serving static files. The bulk of the data transferring is static files because they're hosting large assets, but the rest of the article is about their API, database, etc. A single server in a single datacenter isn't comparable to a global CDN. They made it clear in the article that they value global latency, and they're willing to pay more for it. > Here is a 3.3 GHz Xeon, 24 GB of RAM,…
What's wrong with a spinning hard disk? The files are super easy to read, we're talking milliseconds, and once done it stays in the page cache in RAM... that completely negates any SSD advantage. SSDs have little to no benefit in serving static files. If you're really strict on this it's trivial to preload these files in RAM after compiling your assets so you don't have to wait for a request.
If you have 2.75TB of files to serve and have a bunch of simultaneous requests for different files:
- everything doesn't fit into the RAM page cache, unless you have 3TB of RAM in your server
- for files that aren't cached, you have to read from the drive
- when you have a bunch of different requests for different files, you're going to have a lot of disk seeks. Seeks are expensive on rotating media.
Serving a large collection of static files at scale can be quite challenging. At my previous e-commerce company, back in the early 2000's, we did our own image serving with RAID1 multiply-mirrored drives (before SSDs!) so we could multiply the seek capacity by the number of drives.
Seems like they could pratically host everything on Cloudflare and save even more money. Asset storage: Backblaze B2 – $11 (replace with Cloudflare R2) Web hosting: Vercel – $20 (replace with Cloudflare Pages, $0 cost) Database: Firestore – $100 (replace with Cloudflare) API: Vultr – $5 Image hosting & optimization: Bunny.net – $27 (replace with Cloudflare) Domains: Cloudflare – $4 Email fees: MXroute – $3
Does Cloudflare have a database offering? Do you just mean the Worker KVs, or is there a full relational database?
If you were OK with your content only updating periodically you might be able to do away with Firestore, Argo, and Vultr.
You definitely do a great job of mitigating db hits. Consider publishing all the data to a CDN using something like Gatsby.
In this scenario your CI/CD would build a static website from all the assets and publish it to a static server.
You mentioned that only your view counts are the only really dynamic part. You could just estimate and emulate those or design them a different way.
Martin Fowler has an article on this: https://martinfowler.com/bliki/EditingPublishingSeparation.h...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
> If you're going to centralize in Cloudflare you might as well just skip the hosting the website bit entirely and make a business account on Facebook as your host. These responses are getting bizarre. Facebook pages have nothing to do with web hosting or Cloudflare. Also, hosting on a single server in a single datacenter is, literally, the definition of centralized. Cloudflare distributes the content to a huge numbe…
Seems like they could pratically host everything on Cloudflare and save even more money. Asset storage: Backblaze B2 – $11 (replace with Cloudflare R2) Web hosting: Vercel – $20 (replace with Cloudflare Pages, $0 cost) Database: Firestore – $100 (replace with Cloudflare) API: Vultr – $5 Image hosting & optimization: Bunny.net – $27 (replace with Cloudflare) Domains: Cloudflare – $4 Email fees: MXroute – $3
> Database: Firestore – $100 (replace with Cloudflare) Does Cloudflare have a database offering? Do you just mean the Worker KVs, or is there a full relational database?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If you're going to centralize in Cloudflare you might as well just skip the hosting the website bit entirely and make a business account on Facebook as your host. These responses are getting bizarre. Facebook pages have nothing to do with web hosting or Cloudflare. Also, hosting on a single server in a single datacenter is, literally, the definition of centralized. Cloudflare distributes the content to a huge numbe…
Yup, I’m still wrapping my head reading these comments, “bizarre” is the word I was looking for.
"Non-commercial" might be a better way to understand this point of view. Instead of prioritizing profit (the reason for people using cloudflare, it's cheap and good) the idea is to minimize the damage done by large centralizing forces on the internet. So, in the above comment I suggest Facebook as an equal option because it is analogous to using Cloudflare. The intent was to get you to think like a human person and not a business owner or employee on the clock. It's short term gain for long term damage to the internet.
This reads like a paid marketing post for Cloudflare.
It's astonishing how many times the author conflates browser cache-able assets with cached assets on a CDN. When a browser downloads a static asset if the web server is configured properly those files will be cached and there won't be a need to re-download them for a very long time.
There is of course the issue with modern web frameworks like React generating a single massive js/css file that bundles everything all over again in a unique file busting all previous cached versions across all users' browsers just because a comma was added to a sentence.
Keep your js/css files small, serve them from your own web server and set a reasonable expire header, no need to pay Cloudflare $40/mo to continue gatekeeping the internet.