3 ms·

Woo - nice to see this on HN (I'm one of the creators). EDIT: We're serving this off ec2 + apache. It's all static html + js. Any quick tips for speeding thi

by axylone 16y ago

Woo - nice to see this on HN (I'm one of the creators). EDIT: We're serving this off ec2 + apache. It's all static html + js. Any quick tips for speeding things up?

girasquid 16y ago
You might try nginx instead of apache - it's a lot lighter for serving static content.
risotto 16y ago
If it's static, serve it directly from S3, and turn on cloudfront for even better delivery.
- axylone 16y ago
  ok, I think we managed to switch http://www.kathack.com http://www.kathack.com over to S3. Thanks for the tip!
  - risotto 16y ago
    No problem. Love the script.
- dustingetz 16y ago
  from my understanding, S3 optimizes throughput but not latency. I'm not surprised that his performance serving from S3 is perfectly fine, but I think the "answer" is to skip straight to CloudFront. CloudFront can mirror directly from your appserver, or from S3, it doesn't matter. update: did a little googling, and found only anecdotal evidence that latency to S3 is fine but not awesome: http://www.cloudclimate.com/s3/ http://www.cloudclimate.com/s3/ http://www.codeswimming.com/blog/2010/04/amazon-s3-and-cloudfront-response-time/ http://www.codeswimming.com/blog/2010/04/amazon-s3-and-cloud... http://www.slideshare.net/ehwinter/using-amazon-cloud-front-for-improved-response-time http://www.slideshare.net/ehwinter/using-amazon-cloud-front-...
troutwine 16y ago
Unless you have a very specific need, consider switching to a web server more explicitly designed for static content. Nginx takes minutes to install and configure.
seancron 16y ago
I hope you don't mind, but I just mirrored it on Github (https://github.com/seancron/kathack https://github.com/seancron/kathack). You can use the following javascript to load it from the mirror. javascript:var i,s,ss=['https://github.com/seancron/kathack/raw/master/kh.js','http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.5.1/jquery.min.js'];for(i=0;i!=ss.length;i++){s=document.createElement('script');s.src=ss[i];document.body.appendChild(s);}void(0); P.S. If you do mind, just let me know and I'll take it down.
axylone 16y ago
Ok, we switched everything over to S3. Everything should be much faster now. Looks like we have a ~275MB access.log from before the switch. Over a million requests! $ wc -l access.log 1115447 access.log
- iuguy 16y ago
  To quote the King of all Cosmos: "We are moved to tears by the size of this thing." Really well done, I love it. The only shame was that the music didn't work on Safari, but maybe it's just how I roll.
Esseb 16y ago
This will work in Opera too if you add -o- to the POSSIBLE_TRANSFORM_PREFIXES array.

by axylone 16y ago

Woo - nice to see this on HN (I'm one of the creators). EDIT: We're serving this off ec2 + apache. It's all static html + js. Any quick tips for speeding things up?

girasquid 16y ago

You might try nginx instead of apache - it's a lot lighter for serving static content.

risotto 16y ago

If it's static, serve it directly from S3, and turn on cloudfront for even better delivery.

axylone 16y ago
ok, I think we managed to switch http://www.kathack.com http://www.kathack.com over to S3. Thanks for the tip!
- risotto 16y ago
  No problem. Love the script.
dustingetz 16y ago
from my understanding, S3 optimizes throughput but not latency. I'm not surprised that his performance serving from S3 is perfectly fine, but I think the "answer" is to skip straight to CloudFront. CloudFront can mirror directly from your appserver, or from S3, it doesn't matter. update: did a little googling, and found only anecdotal evidence that latency to S3 is fine but not awesome: http://www.cloudclimate.com/s3/ http://www.cloudclimate.com/s3/ http://www.codeswimming.com/blog/2010/04/amazon-s3-and-cloudfront-response-time/ http://www.codeswimming.com/blog/2010/04/amazon-s3-and-cloud... http://www.slideshare.net/ehwinter/using-amazon-cloud-front-for-improved-response-time http://www.slideshare.net/ehwinter/using-amazon-cloud-front-...

troutwine 16y ago

Unless you have a very specific need, consider switching to a web server more explicitly designed for static content. Nginx takes minutes to install and configure.

seancron 16y ago

I hope you don't mind, but I just mirrored it on Github (https://github.com/seancron/kathack https://github.com/seancron/kathack). You can use the following javascript to load it from the mirror. javascript:var i,s,ss=['https://github.com/seancron/kathack/raw/master/kh.js','http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.5.1/jquery.min.js'];for(i=0;i!=ss.length;i++){s=document.createElement('script');s.src=ss[i];document.body.appendChild(s);}void(0); P.S. If you do mind, just let me know and I'll take it down.

axylone 16y ago

Ok, we switched everything over to S3. Everything should be much faster now. Looks like we have a ~275MB access.log from before the switch. Over a million requests! $ wc -l access.log 1115447 access.log

iuguy 16y ago
To quote the King of all Cosmos: "We are moved to tears by the size of this thing." Really well done, I love it. The only shame was that the music didn't work on Safari, but maybe it's just how I roll.

Esseb 16y ago

This will work in Opera too if you add -o- to the POSSIBLE_TRANSFORM_PREFIXES array.