Live data from Hacker News

Benchmarking static website hosting providers

savjee.be

41–50 of 66 posts

Re: Benchmarking static website hosting providers

#41
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No idea frate, though I use a wired desktop for the test, so wifi latency isn't a consideration.

I have 10 ms to 1.1.1.1 in RO/RDS on wired. I blame their idiotic pppoe.

I'm getting single digits from Finland:

    $ ping 1.1.1.1
    PING 1.1.1.1 (1.1.1.1): 56 data bytes
    64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=0 ttl=58 time=3.766 ms
    64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=58 time=4.120 ms
    64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=58 time=4.636 ms
    64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=58 time=3.587 ms
    64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=58 time=5.370 ms
    64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=58 time=3.286 ms
    64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=58 time=4.084 ms
    64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=7 ttl=58 time=3.766 ms
    64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=8 ttl=58 time=3.548 ms
    64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=9 ttl=58 time=6.760 ms
    64 bytes from 1.1.1.1: icmp_seq=10 ttl=58 time=3.667 ms
    ^C
    --- 1.1.1.1 ping statistics ---
    11 packets transmitted, 11 packets received, 0.0% packet loss
    round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 3.286/4.235/6.760/0.973 ms
And this is on wifi.

Re: Benchmarking static website hosting providers

#43

I'd like to see a comparison among Netlify, Vercel, and Render.com as they all offer free hosting for static sites with similar usability. It's a growing service category (free hosting for static sites deployed from GitHub). Are there others (besides GitHub Pages) I don't know about?

There is also fast.io - from Mediafire. What i like there is their dropbox interaction. Basically your dropbox folder becomes website with few clicks.

Re: Benchmarking static website hosting providers

#44
How was CloudFlare set up on the workers and CDN side? If it’s not set to cache everything, the origin server will still need to be contacted, and each edge will need to contact the origin when the cache expires (which is defaulted to 4 hours). This feels like it’s configuration related. CF is very fast in my experience, but I haven’t done similar tests so I can’t know for sure.

Re: Benchmarking static website hosting providers

#45
post #17

Vaguely related: We use AWS S3 to poll for changes in a file from dozens of deployed devices regularly (polling is not the smartest way...). We get failures that the file header cannot be retrieved many times a week. Well, one could guess it's a connectivity problem of the device. Most are on cellular networks, but the problem also occurs from devices connected to one of the top US universities' network. The devices…

Am I understanding this right. You get several read failures per week from various devices trying to access a rarely/infrequent updated s3 object?

(Ouch if this is right)

Re: Benchmarking static website hosting providers

#47
Cloudflare doesn’t cache HTML pages by default only static files https://support.cloudflare.com/hc/en-us/articles/200172516. You need to specifically tell Cloudflare to cache HTML pages via page rules etc https://support.cloudflare.com/hc/en-us/articles/202775670

Cloudflare Workers don’t cache by default either for HTML pages only static files unless you write the Worker to cache HTML pages.

So if they tested on default index.html page then it would of been a Cloudflare Cache miss/bypass which may explain their results.

Re: Benchmarking static website hosting providers

#48
I must be a bit old-fashioned but I would love to see comparisons against running a simple VM with Nginx.

> Google Cloud’s regional and multi-regional buckets perform fairly alike. Interestingly, both are much faster than S3, which is a comparable service. Is Google doing some caching behind the scenes?

These are both incredibly complicated services and describing what they do as “caching” would be too much of a simplification.

Re: Benchmarking static website hosting providers

#49

I must be a bit old-fashioned but I would love to see comparisons against running a simple VM with Nginx. > Google Cloud’s regional and multi-regional buckets perform fairly alike. Interestingly, both are much faster than S3, which is a comparable service. Is Google doing some caching behind the scenes? These are both incredibly complicated services and describing what they do as “caching” would be too much of a simp…

Agreed. In many cases sites are serving local customers and a CDN is overkill, simply hosting nearby and having a half decent hosting provider is suffice. I've used OVH a number of years for small sites with UK customers, a couple of bucks a month for a reasonably specced VPS.

Pinging it just now, 20ms and since it's non-static, 50ms to fetch with curl. Fairly miniscule times.

Re: Benchmarking static website hosting providers

#50

I'd like to see a comparison among Netlify, Vercel, and Render.com as they all offer free hosting for static sites with similar usability. It's a growing service category (free hosting for static sites deployed from GitHub). Are there others (besides GitHub Pages) I don't know about?

Shameless plug for my static website service: https://perspect.com/

Worth mentioning: my service is also wire compatible with Wordpress mobile clients.

Post reply on HN