5 ms·
This is less of an article, and more of an advertisement for cloudflare.. No, you don't need a CDN for your lightweight static site. nginx and your home fiber
by dusted 4y ago
This is less of an article, and more of an advertisement for cloudflare..
No, you don't need a CDN for your lightweight static site. nginx and your home fiber gigabit connection will do _JUST_FINE_ (tm), even when slashdotted or getting on frontpage at HN.
Also, just drop the generators and write your html already.. Sure, it's fun to learn a new toy, but in end, any abstraction between your content and the HTML being served is just another link in the chain of things that can break.
Organize your HTML files well, use minimal styling and it becomes quite managable, you literally don't have a technology stack.. just dump the files on ANYTHING IN THE UNIVERSE that has a webserver and a file system, and you're good to go.
- rsolva 4y agoA modest middleway is using Server Side Includes (SSI) to do simple templating stuff. It works on Apache, nginx — and Caddy as well. Its a nice combo of "no stack" and some dynamic elements in your HTML and CSS.
- ciprian_craciun 4y ago[the author here] Indeed I mention Cloudflare quite a lot, and that is for two reasons: (A) If you do want to have a performant website (be it static or dynamic) you do need a CDN with edge caching; else the physics with it's insistence on a cap for the light speed will put a minimum theoretical latency of 25ms say between Bucharest and Toronto, which in practical terms translates towards at least 100ms one way, or 300ms just to establish a TCP connection, and around 500 for a complete TLS handshake... And no amount of bandwidth can solve that. (B) Cloudflare is the only free choice that allows you to use your own domain and that doesn't impose any (published) limits on your usage. If you know of other CDN providers that give you this for free please let me know and I'll add their link to the article.