4 ms·
The site appears to been hugged to death by HN. The rate of such incidents makes me wonder whether there are good reasons for so many websites not to use CloudF
by dpq 7y ago
The site appears to been hugged to death by HN. The rate of such incidents makes me wonder whether there are good reasons for so many websites not to use CloudFlare or if it's the result of plain old incompetence of the respective webmasters.
- lemcoe9 7y agoAs bulky and slow as Wordpress is, it's still dead-simple to set up and start publishing with. Many people value that convenience.
- bananocurrency 7y agoah yes, anyone who doesn't want to be vendor locked into Cloudflare is incompetent.
- cweagans 7y agoI don't see how using Cloudflare = getting locked into using Cloudflare. Can you please elaborate? From my perspective, I could just switch my DNS away from Cloudflare and my site would still continue to be served just fine (albeit without a CDN).
- zzzcpan 7y ago> The rate of such incidents makes me wonder whether there are good reasons for so many websites not to use CloudFlare Not using something that cannot help in such situations is a good reason or even merely sanity. The problem is websites want to feed you some cookies and generate pages dynamically for each visitor, so things like full page caching don't just work, they require special considerations. At which point setting up such set-cookie stripping caching on the webserver would solve the problem anyway.
- oarsinsync 7y agoCentralising all web sites by proxying them all through Cloduflare doesn't seem like a great idea either.
- dpq 7y agoDoes this problem have a solution that you would approve of (aside from switching the CDN from CloudFlare to some competitor)?
- oarsinsync 7y agoI think adjustment of expectations that all sites (including personal websites) need to achieve five 9's of reliability / availability is the way I'd go. Sometimes websites go offline. It's okay, there are plenty more, and they'll be back later anyway.