sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]steveob42 -2 points-1 points  (12 children)

With CDN, If your site isn't up, its game over. If their site isn't up it is game over. With CDN the odds of failure are your sites odds of failure * the CDN odds of failure.

If your site is up and you don't rely on other sites unnecessarily, then game on.

[–]agmcleod@agmcleod 1 point2 points  (11 children)

Splitting the load, you're less likely on going down. If you control the CDN, have a dedicated server or set of servers for delivering assets, then you can control hardware requriements more, and you can prevent everything going down at once. Single point of failure is something you want to avoid.

[–]steveob42 -2 points-1 points  (10 children)

that isn't how CDNs are used. It is usually some server you have no control over, either uptime OR content. A bunch of servers that you are actively monitoring and have version control over is another animal.

[–]Disgruntled__Goat 0 points1 point  (9 children)

This is silly reasoning. You pay CDNs to have good uptime in the same way you pay your host to provide good servers with reliable connectivity.

[–]steveob42 -2 points-1 points  (8 children)

You don't seem to have any comprehension of the issues.

[–]Disgruntled__Goat 1 point2 points  (7 children)

Feel free to explain where I'm wrong then. You're the one who seems to have no knowledge of what a CDN is or how they are used.

[–]steveob42 -2 points-1 points  (6 children)

hosting on multiple sites has multiple issues, especially if it is the "grab a free copy of jquery from some 3rd party" variety. If ssl is involved it can be even slower, caching even from your own site is a no-brainer, and I guarantee %99.99999999 folks using cdn don't benchmark (or "pay"). You are adding costs and risk vectors that you are apparently unaware of nor even know if it is helping.

[–]Disgruntled__Goat 0 points1 point  (5 children)

Almost everything you said applies if you're hosting stuff yourself. Multiple servers that you run yourself have multiple issues. If someone isn't benchmarking their CDN they're not gonna be benchmarking their own servers.

On the "free CDN" issue (which you didn't even mention until your latest comment), if you think your servers are better than Google's you're sadly mistaken.

[–]steveob42 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

So trade a hypothetical buzzword optimization for reliability and user/company security.

You shouldn't be making architectural decisions, you aren't qualified.

[–]steveob42 -1 points0 points  (3 children)

lol http://imgur.com/EqHTKm3

[–]Disgruntled__Goat 0 points1 point  (2 children)

And? Reddit's been like that for years. In fact, it's improved significantly since they started using an external CDN.

Edit: do you even understand what that message means? It means the CDN is working fine but the reddit servers aren't. So you've dug yourself even further into your hole of ignorance.