4 ms·
not the CDN going down. the client being unable to reach the CDN. the http request the cdn to get the file is not a 'free' operation. network timeouts take tim
by AdrianRossouw 13y ago
not the CDN going down. the client being unable to reach the CDN.
the http request the cdn to get the file is not a 'free' operation. network timeouts take time.
- oinksoft 13y agoI mean the CDN going down from the end user's point of view. Why the host is unreachable is a moot point.
- lerouxb 13y agoI see this daily, but then I don't have a sub-20ms ping time and a cable modem where I live. The CDN doesn't have to go down. The user's connection doesn't even have to go down. Things just have to get momentarily flaky _somewhere_. I'm working on a project that uses google fonts and the page loads with fonts timing out multiple times per day. I get to sites where just the html loads and none of the css (or worse: just some of the css) all the time. Especially on 3G, but regularly on ADSL too. Or what if you're sharing a saturated line? (And waiting for a timeout to kick in before you trigger a callback is just not an option. By then the user probably closed the page anyway. Rather just make it work in the first place.)
- xtreme 13y agoYou should optimize the common path, not the edge cases. Most of the time the user would be benefited (cached content = faster load) from using CDN. On the other hand, CDN being unreachable is not a very common scenario, so it is acceptable to be a little slower.
- Jach 13y agoCDNs are already an edge-case optimization, provided that unique visitors is less than number of visits.