4 ms·
I think it's only loading the URL to the profile photo image, which is stored in the CDN. Calculating the URL is, apparently, the slow factor. Maybe it requires
by sloanesturz 11y ago
I think it's only loading the URL to the profile photo image, which is stored in the CDN. Calculating the URL is, apparently, the slow factor. Maybe it requires some type of cryptographic operation that results in heavy CPU use?
- sigmar 11y ago>I think it's only loading the URL to the profile photo image Sorry, by "it" I should have written "the client." I meant to suggest my question of whether that is where their client OOM errors are coming from.
- mikeyk 11y agoWe load a small thumbnail; it's the extra memory allocated to strings that was the main factor that helped when we reduced the # of comments sent down.
- madeofpalk 11y agoMany 'big operations' will use some sort of image-resizer CDN, whether something custom made in-house, off-the-shelf/open source (like thumbor), or a CDN like Imgix. To prevent anyone from fiddling with the URL to generate thousands of differently sized images, they'll often have a way to 'sign' the URL to ensure people can't do this sort of attack. This can be expensive, depending on how its done I guess.
- x1024 11y agoIt could be a hash operation, yes. But would it really be necessary to make it a cryptographic hash? It would explain the performance issues, yes. But who uses cryptographically-secure hashing for use-cases where the answer is "MD5"?