3 ms·
SSR would be more accurate definition than static.
by hackonr 6y ago
SSR would be more accurate definition than static.
- brian_cloutier 6y agowikipedia pages are very easy to cache and caching them likely provides a massive benefit, so if we're talking about uptime static is probably a better description of what is happening than SSR. You are right that technically it's SSR, but that's not what's relevant here.
- jshen 6y agoI don't think they are mutually exclusive. I have no idea how wikipedia works, but I've run a lot of high volume relatively static sites. A simple thing that works very well is to do SSR, but serve it through a CDN like akamai, then configure akamai to serve a static/cached version if the backend is down. Assuming everything is working, you get a semi dynamic SSR model, but if something goes down, the site is still served and you have no customer facing downtime.
- bawolff 6y agoWikipedia basically uses varnish as their own CDN (they having caching servers in SF, texas, Virginia, singapore and amsterdam. Backend servers are in Virginia with hot backup in texas)
- jshen 6y agoThanks for sharing. We did it that way for a site I worked on until a ddos brought varnish down. Then we put Akamai in front and never had a problem again. This was over a decade ago, it’s wasn’t as easy back then to auto scale a varnish layer in the cloud.
- bawolff 6y agoWikipedia generally tries to take the approach of doing things they can themselves and using open source whereever possible. Most of the setup is documented at https://wikitech.wikimedia.org https://wikitech.wikimedia.org and there is a public puppet repo with all the server configs https://github.com/wikimedia/puppet https://github.com/wikimedia/puppet That said, i think they do now use cloudflate's bgp based magic transport ddos protection product to help against ddos