2 ms·
Why did you skip the final step? You were like 90 seconds away from having it deployed on CloudFront, and thus quickly served anywhere in the world on a real C
by jasonkester 17y ago
Why did you skip the final step? You were like 90 seconds away from having it deployed on CloudFront, and thus quickly served anywhere in the world on a real Content Delivery Network.
It would have taken something on the order of one right-click in your S3 organizer of choice, followed by a CNAME record.
S3 has about 300-800ms latency on average. CloudFront's latency is 46ms. (exactly, every single time, 46ms. It's spooky).
So close... and yet so far!
- ckinnan 17y agoAdditionally, Cloudfront is cheaper than S3!
- pjhyett 17y agoUnless I'm missing the sarcasm, you still pay for your S3 usage when you're using CloudFront.
- tlrobinson 17y agoAs I understand it not every request will hit S3, only cache misses on the edge servers. "Amazon CloudFront uses Amazon S3 as the origin server to store the original, definitive versions of your files. Normal fees will apply for Amazon S3 usage, including “origin fetches” – data transferred from Amazon S3 to edge locations."
- jasonkester 17y agoAll together, it comes in as a little less than double the cost of S3 alone. Here are a my observed numbers (for cost and performance, respectively): http://www.expatsoftware.com/articles/2009/01/cloudfront-costs-compared-to-s3.html http://www.expatsoftware.com/articles/2009/01/cloudfront-cos... http://www.expatsoftware.com/articles/2008/11/cloudfront-performance-numbers.html http://www.expatsoftware.com/articles/2008/11/cloudfront-per...
- stephenjudkins 17y agoWe've gotten consistently sub-100ms latencies from EC2 instances, relatively predictably.