[SOLVED] We'd like your help - LQ is choosing a CDN
LQ Suggestions & FeedbackDo you have a suggestion for this site or an idea that will make the site better? This forum is for you.
PLEASE READ THIS FORUM - Information and status updates will also be posted here.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Most interesting.. I ENVY you people on high-speed!!!!!!!! Blah!
Well, my very unscientific testing involved the clock in my browser-- remember, I am getting less than 28.8kbps so it was not difficult to time the loads, unlike YOU PEOPLE :finger-pointing: with your fancy high-speed lol
The 3 links from the CDN places took around 28-29 seconds to load fully, with link #3 once taking up to 34 seconds.
The direct link from LQ took 20 seconds consistently.
I cleared my cache before each test.
Sasha
PS - no bigger images! It'll take me an hour to test.
PPS - And here I thought 'CDN layer' was the 'Canadian layer'
Downloaded: 17 files, 34K in 0.08s (420 KB/s)
Very strange! That second one had a noticeable pause in the middle, maybe a quarter second, but at the end wget reports the whole thing only took .08s. What am I misunderstanding?
Downloaded: 17 files, 34K in 0.2s (184 KB/s)
This was third best: A little slower than the first, significantly faster than the second. wget was flat out wrong about how long the second was, but the other numbers are all plausible.
Retrying the second (I don't know what caching gets used)
Downloaded: 17 files, 34K in 0.07s (464 KB/s)
That time it was true. It was instant.
Retrying the fourth
Downloaded: 17 files, 34K in 0.2s (210 KB/s)
I guess that's why you want a non local server? The local one didn't get faster on retry.
Seeing as how I've been one who has complained about cdnlayer since the move off cachefly, here are my numbers:
0.4
0.03
0.5
0.4
Orders of magnitude tend to become noticable. Those are wget numbers - I'm getting "400 Bad request" from nginx trying to load the pages in F/F. I'll try later from home.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.