Comment by davidmurdoch
10 hours ago
But now it's that fast from almost everywhere on the planet, with nearly zero effort from the developer. We've been limited by light speed here, not compute.
10 hours ago
But now it's that fast from almost everywhere on the planet, with nearly zero effort from the developer. We've been limited by light speed here, not compute.
I get 381ms/401ms on first load and not the claimed ~30ms. I'm not really sure what the point is here though. CDNs and browser cache headers work? Static sites are fast to paint?
Yeah, I'm not seeing fast uncached times either. I usually hit Cloudflare's Miami datacenter, which is only about 200 miles and very low latency. But I'm seeing 200+ms on this site right now.
Most cloudflare products are very slow / offer very poor performance. I was surprised by this but that’s just how it is. It basically negates any claimed performance advantage.
Durable objects, r2 as well as tunnel have been particularly poor performing in my experience. Workers has not been a great experience either.
R2 in particular has been the slowest / highest latency s3 alternative I ever had experience with, falling behind backblaze b2, wasabi and even hetzner’s object storage.
1 reply →
I also got initial load times in that range.
The site should be faster, though. I’ve had a small CF workers project that works correctly with quick load times.
The circumference of Earth at the equator is about 40,000 km and the speed of light is about 300,000 km/s. The appropriate division results in about 0.13 s.
That seems to track. The vast majority of requests won’t go half way around the Earth, so maybe halving that time at 0.06 seems like a reasonable target.
Light travels at about 0.69c in fiber optic cables (c being the speed of light in vacuum, which, as you stated, is about 300,000 km/s).
Not to mention that device count went up million fold.
Great point!
nah, most sites are fat enough that both bandwidth and compute is the limit.
Getting it closer can save you 50-150ms, but if whole load takes 1s+ that's minuscule
I only meant in this example. I agree, sites in general are fat.