4 ms·
Sure, but if the fetcher is generating "39,000 requests per minute" then surely something has gone wrong somewhere ?
by pm215 1y ago
Sure, but if the fetcher is generating "39,000 requests per minute" then surely something has gone wrong somewhere ?
- miohtama 1y agoEven if it is generating 39k req/minute I would expect most of the pages already be locally cached by Meta, or served statically by their respective hosts. We have been working hard on catching websites and it has been a solved problem for the last decade or so.
- ndriscoll 1y agoCould be serving no-cache headers? Seems like yet another problem stemming from every website being designed as if it were some dynamic application when nearly all of them are static documents. nginx doing 39k req/min to cacheable pages on an n100 is what you might call "98% idle", not "unsustainable load on web servers". The data transfer, on the other hand, could be substantial and costly. Is it known whether these crawlers do respect caching at all? Provide If-Modified-Since/If-None-Match or anything like that?
- mrweasel 1y agoMany AI crawlers seems to go to great length to avoid caches, not sure why.
- andai 1y agoThey're not very good at web queries, if you expand the thinking box to see what they're searching for, like half of it is nonsense. e.g. they'll take an entire sentence the user said and put it in quotes for no reason. Thankfully search engines started ignoring quotes years ago, so it balances out...