4 ms·

I don't really find Mastodon that slow. I do think it's got a lot, lot of sharp edges that need smoothing out before it's really viable. But speed isn't a prob

by shakna 3y ago

I don't really find Mastodon that slow. I do think it's got a lot, lot of sharp edges that need smoothing out before it's really viable. But speed isn't a problem, and it's decentralised.

warkdarrior 3y ago
Mastodon is not P2P/decentralized, it's federated.
- dumpsterlid 3y ago
  [dead]
- bheadmaster 3y ago
  > Mastodon is not P2P/decentralized Mastodon is decentralized, because there is no central server. However, it is not distributed.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - nine_k 3y ago
    It is both decentralized and distributed. It's not P2P though, it's a hub-and-spokes architecture with several interconnected (federated) hubs. Hubs can have decent uptime and thick internet connections. Hubs are relatively few so they replicate state quickly between themselves, and then more locally between spokes when they come online. Most natural structures are more tree-form, like that.
    - bheadmaster 3y ago
      That just depends on how you define "distributed". If it means "running on multiple machines", then even centralized protocols are distributed, since a part of the computation is running on your computer. In context of protocols like Mastodon, if the end-user devices aren't primary holders of data, then I don't call it distributed. It's just decentralized. I guess that way, "distributed" necessarily implies peer-to-peer.
      - wuiheerfoj 3y ago
        Postgres in leader/follower config = centralised Cassandra = distributed Bitcoin = decentralised The crux comes down to the consensus model for state
- Culonavirus 3y ago
  Basically the difference between connecting to datacenter-residing apps that internally share data between each other and connecting to 10 random guy's basement PCs. Everyone who played any P2P multiplayer shooter in their life knows P2P sucks... on the other hand, dedicated server based shooters and MMOs (generally) work great. You don't have to be an IT professional to know this. Similar concepts (speed of light and multiplicative effects of multiple slow connections) apply here. P2P is only great for uses where latency doesn't matter. See: Torrents.
  - BlackLotus89 3y ago
    That's too broad of a generalization. p2p is AWESOME for latency since every server added adds latency. What you are talking about are probably p2p networks with multiple users (based on your shooter reference) and the problem is of home connections and bandwidth since multiple users that all need to connect to everyone doesn't scale. So for your example: One on ones over p2p are optimal, but p2p matches with more than 8 players are suboptimal (I pulled the number out of my ass it depends on the protocol and usecase)
Semaphor 3y ago
> I don't really find Mastodon that slow. Not generally, but many servers. Which results in me avoiding clicking on any links to mastodon because I expect it to be extremely slow.
- julianlam 3y ago
  Which I find frankly ironic because I dread clicking on Twitter links for that same reason. It takes 10 seconds to load a tweet, and I have to click through the "view in app" nag, to boot. Using Mastodon servers have been a breath of fresh air in comparison.
  - Semaphor 3y ago
    I use nitter, the right servers are fast ;)
    - nicce 3y ago
      Too much content is blocked for nitter this days. At least on my experience.
      - Semaphor 3y ago
        Huh? Like what? Never had that happen.
        bmacho 3y ago
        Some servers/instances maybe are less reliable than others. Same for teddit and invidious.
        Semaphor 3y ago
        Ah, well, luckily it’s easy to switch servers. But that’s the issue with Mastodon, you have to view the content on the instance it’s posted on.
pwdisswordfishc 3y ago
Nitter page: full page layout with all text loads in about half a second, images load in the next three https://nitter.it/rauschma https://nitter.it/rauschma Mastodon page: requires unblocking JavaScript, takes one second just to load the basic layout (without post contents), then takes four to ELEVEN seconds to fully load https://fosstodon.org/@rauschma https://fosstodon.org/@rauschma I expected better.
- nicce 3y ago
  Hmm, compare for https://elk.zone https://elk.zone , is it still slow? For me it is almost instant.
  - pwdisswordfishc 3y ago
    With an empty cache, five seconds for the full layout, one further second for images. With a populated cache, four seconds to load everything at once. And also requires unblocking JavaScript for no good reason. Sure, not as bad as twitter.com, but that’s damning with faint praise.
- shakna 3y ago
  https://mastodon.social https://mastodon.social loads in under a second, for me.
- gobip 3y ago
  Now use nitter and create your account, login, and tweet something. If you can't, you didn't compare.
- rapnie 3y ago
  Weird. Anecdotal I think. Maybe something with your instance. Mastodon UI is quick and snappy for me. I migrated away from mastodon.social when the influx from Twitter made that server very slow (it has since scaled up significantly).
- mft_ 3y ago
  > https://fosstodon.org/@rauschma https://fosstodon.org/@rauschma Took between 1.2 and 1.8s for a full fresh load, for me.

by shakna 3y ago

I don't really find Mastodon that slow. I do think it's got a lot, lot of sharp edges that need smoothing out before it's really viable. But speed isn't a problem, and it's decentralised.

warkdarrior 3y ago

Mastodon is not P2P/decentralized, it's federated.

dumpsterlid 3y ago
[dead]
bheadmaster 3y ago
> Mastodon is not P2P/decentralized Mastodon is decentralized, because there is no central server. However, it is not distributed.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- nine_k 3y ago
  It is both decentralized and distributed. It's not P2P though, it's a hub-and-spokes architecture with several interconnected (federated) hubs. Hubs can have decent uptime and thick internet connections. Hubs are relatively few so they replicate state quickly between themselves, and then more locally between spokes when they come online. Most natural structures are more tree-form, like that.
  - bheadmaster 3y ago
    That just depends on how you define "distributed". If it means "running on multiple machines", then even centralized protocols are distributed, since a part of the computation is running on your computer. In context of protocols like Mastodon, if the end-user devices aren't primary holders of data, then I don't call it distributed. It's just decentralized. I guess that way, "distributed" necessarily implies peer-to-peer.
    - wuiheerfoj 3y ago
      Postgres in leader/follower config = centralised Cassandra = distributed Bitcoin = decentralised The crux comes down to the consensus model for state
Culonavirus 3y ago
Basically the difference between connecting to datacenter-residing apps that internally share data between each other and connecting to 10 random guy's basement PCs. Everyone who played any P2P multiplayer shooter in their life knows P2P sucks... on the other hand, dedicated server based shooters and MMOs (generally) work great. You don't have to be an IT professional to know this. Similar concepts (speed of light and multiplicative effects of multiple slow connections) apply here. P2P is only great for uses where latency doesn't matter. See: Torrents.
- BlackLotus89 3y ago
  That's too broad of a generalization. p2p is AWESOME for latency since every server added adds latency. What you are talking about are probably p2p networks with multiple users (based on your shooter reference) and the problem is of home connections and bandwidth since multiple users that all need to connect to everyone doesn't scale. So for your example: One on ones over p2p are optimal, but p2p matches with more than 8 players are suboptimal (I pulled the number out of my ass it depends on the protocol and usecase)

Semaphor 3y ago

> I don't really find Mastodon that slow. Not generally, but many servers. Which results in me avoiding clicking on any links to mastodon because I expect it to be extremely slow.

julianlam 3y ago
Which I find frankly ironic because I dread clicking on Twitter links for that same reason. It takes 10 seconds to load a tweet, and I have to click through the "view in app" nag, to boot. Using Mastodon servers have been a breath of fresh air in comparison.
- Semaphor 3y ago
  I use nitter, the right servers are fast ;)
  - nicce 3y ago
    Too much content is blocked for nitter this days. At least on my experience.
    - Semaphor 3y ago
      Huh? Like what? Never had that happen.
      - bmacho 3y ago
        Some servers/instances maybe are less reliable than others. Same for teddit and invidious.
        Semaphor 3y ago
        Ah, well, luckily it’s easy to switch servers. But that’s the issue with Mastodon, you have to view the content on the instance it’s posted on.

pwdisswordfishc 3y ago

Nitter page: full page layout with all text loads in about half a second, images load in the next three https://nitter.it/rauschma https://nitter.it/rauschma Mastodon page: requires unblocking JavaScript, takes one second just to load the basic layout (without post contents), then takes four to ELEVEN seconds to fully load https://fosstodon.org/@rauschma https://fosstodon.org/@rauschma I expected better.

nicce 3y ago
Hmm, compare for https://elk.zone https://elk.zone , is it still slow? For me it is almost instant.
- pwdisswordfishc 3y ago
  With an empty cache, five seconds for the full layout, one further second for images. With a populated cache, four seconds to load everything at once. And also requires unblocking JavaScript for no good reason. Sure, not as bad as twitter.com, but that’s damning with faint praise.
shakna 3y ago
https://mastodon.social https://mastodon.social loads in under a second, for me.
gobip 3y ago
Now use nitter and create your account, login, and tweet something. If you can't, you didn't compare.
rapnie 3y ago
Weird. Anecdotal I think. Maybe something with your instance. Mastodon UI is quick and snappy for me. I migrated away from mastodon.social when the influx from Twitter made that server very slow (it has since scaled up significantly).
mft_ 3y ago
> https://fosstodon.org/@rauschma https://fosstodon.org/@rauschma Took between 1.2 and 1.8s for a full fresh load, for me.