4 ms·
36/sec but then they're doing 800 http requests per second, not sure what could cause such a big difference (lots of ajax stuff?) but I think 800/sec is an inte
by citricsquid 16y ago
36/sec but then they're doing 800 http requests per second, not sure what could cause such a big difference (lots of ajax stuff?) but I think 800/sec is an interesting thing to see them deal with, that's something in the region of 1bn a month, which fits your requirement for interesting-ness :p
- icey 16y agoPerhaps the 800 req/second number is a peak figure? 36 requests a second average isn't meaningful when your traffic is spiky.
- jonknee 16y agoProbably a combination of other page resources (images, JS, stylesheets, etc), bots and peak access times.
- moe 16y agowhich fits your requirement for interesting-ness Sorry, the threshold of interestingness for serving static assets is even higher. ;) A single nginx on a moderate host will barely warm up before ~10k reqs/sec. The network tends to be the bottleneck here. Anyways, ~800/s should be doable from a $10 VPS.
- dillona 16y agoI don't think they're paying all this money for the fun of it
- moe 16y agoHm, I'm not sure I follow. What money do you mean?
- alextgordon 16y agoThey have 10 web servers. If they could replace all that with a VPS or two, they would.
- moe 16y agoAccording to the article only 3 are dedicated to StackOverflow which sounds about right to me.
- IDisposableHero 16y agoThe VPS figure was for serving static files. So, a lot of the stackoverflow content isn't static.