5 ms·
True, which is why I said "CDN-like functions" because, for smaller web applications and websites, having paralleled downloads would increase performance (witho
by 127001brewer 15y ago
True, which is why I said "CDN-like functions" because, for smaller web applications and websites, having paralleled downloads would increase performance (without having to use a CDN service).
Also, what about hosting your static scripts and style sheets on a service like Google Code or GitHub? Would that give you a "CDN-like" performance increase as well?
I'm advocating non-CDN services through other techniques that can provide increase performance for smaller web application and websites.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]
- LogicX 15y agoI don't believe any such static host would necessarily improve your performance over your own host or s3. Cloudfront is surprisingly inexpensive, especially for smaller web applications and websites: http://aws.amazon.com/cloudfront/pricing/ http://aws.amazon.com/cloudfront/pricing/ You probably have only a few MBs of static content, cloudfront can be configured to have a cloudfront URL that just fetches from http://yournormalwebsite.com http://yournormalwebsite.com. No S3 bucket involved, no uploading content. Just change your static content URLs to be http://cloudfrontURL/static http://cloudfrontURL/static content. Even with tens of thousands of visitors a month, you'll owe... < $5. Or as suggested elsewhere here, just use cloudflare, which is $0.