3 ms·
Maybe I'm missing something, but 500 qps for serving static files seems supremely unimpressive. Fair play about it being more fun, or saving some money from AWS
by Reubend 4y ago
Maybe I'm missing something, but 500 qps for serving static files seems supremely unimpressive. Fair play about it being more fun, or saving some money from AWS, but I am not convinced that this setup is a good achievement in terms of performance.
- zinodaur 4y agoHe mentioned one of the pages was querying a db
- benhoyt 4y agoOnly 1 out of 4 URLs in the test was static. The others are rendered HTML templates (using Go's html/template -- I'll update the article to make that clearer), and one page does two SQL queries. Note that my load test wasn't to see how much I could squeeze out of this, but to determine that it's "more than good enough" for this use case. The typical qps I get from real customers on the site is about 0.5 qps, so I think I'm good. :-)