News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Post mortem of a failed HackerNews launch. Parent comment

Re:Post mortem of a failed HackerNews launch by thaumaturgy on Thursday November 29, 2012 @05:17PM (#4850606)
Actually, I've tested this. You get 10ms of extra delay per request, not 150.

There might be some magic value at which KeepAlive will be helpful during non-peak periods without crippling the server during peak periods, but for a well-engineered site, the extra 10ms delay per request shouldn't be a big enough deal to warrant risking a full-on site outage later on.

Also, this has already been discussed to death on HN: http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=keepalive&#...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Post mortem of a failed HackerNews launch by prodigal_erik on Thursday November 29, 2012 @09:19PM (#4851510)
Light travels less than two thousand miles in 10 ms, and TCP requires three one-way trips before starting the first request on a new connection. Anybody more than 620 miles away (about half a time zone) is guaranteed to have a higher ping time than that.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Post mortem of a failed HackerNews launch by thaumaturgy on Friday November 30, 2012 @02:06AM (#4852207)
You're absolutely right, I didn't think about that. However, I did perform the test(s) from Sacramento, CA to a server in Newark, New Jersey -- a distance of 2,810 miles according to Google.

I was fairly careful with the test(s), and the 10ms difference seemed to be consistent. So that's odd. I need to investigate that further.

[ Parent | on HN ]