Sal

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] Sal@mander.xyz 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

I have changed rate limits / timeouts that I can control, but I still see that this happens when I clear my browser cache and load the front page. I agree that it is quite bothersome. I will need to dive deeper and get in touch with the object store provider again.

[–] Sal@mander.xyz 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Thank you. There was a different error that should have been fixed yesterday (a "too many requests" reply from the object storage provider). But this error is different, and I am not sure yet why it happens. I will change some settings that could have an effect. Please let me know if it happens again!

[–] Sal@mander.xyz 2 points 1 week ago

Should be fixed now!

[–] Sal@mander.xyz 2 points 1 week ago

Good news! Just got a reply from them and they have increased the connection limit. They did not specify what the new number is, but hopefully it is high enough to not be an issue for the foreseeable future.

So, if you do run into other similar reports after this comment I would appreciate it if you tag me again.

[–] Sal@mander.xyz 3 points 1 week ago

Thanks!

Cost is not the bottleneck in this case... The problem is that I am rather ignorant about the options and their benefits/limitations. Moving the images the first time was painfully slow because of those same rate limits, and I expect the next migration to be the same, so I want to make a better choice next time and would rather find a solution with the current provider 😅

[–] Sal@mander.xyz 7 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Thanks for the heads up. I am still trying to resolve this without a migration... I will try again to get a response from them as they have not replied in a week.

[–] Sal@mander.xyz 2 points 1 week ago

If I am not given the ability to improve the rate limits soon I will need to find a different object storage provider. The migration will bring down the instance's images for several days so I am trying to avoid that....

If anyone knows of a good and reliable object storage provider with better limits, I would appreciate the recommendations.

[–] Sal@mander.xyz 4 points 1 week ago

This is the current status:

  • The instance is serving the images via object storage. Specifically, I am making use of Contabo to save and serve the images.

  • I now know that the default limits are 250 requests / second and 80 Mbit/s: https://help.contabo.com/en/support/solutions/articles/103000275478-what-limits-are-there-on-object-storage-

  • It appears to me like when the requests are exceeded, the "Too many requests" error is triggered and it takes a few seconds before the requests are accepted again. This can happen if few users access the front page at once as this will fetch all of the thumbnails and icons on the page.

  • I have been in touch with Contabo's customer support via e-mail. But they mis-understood my original e-mails and thought I was speaking about increasing the maximum number of images that can be stored (3 million by default). I have clarified that I want to increase the rate limit and have been waiting for their response for a few days now.

  • The other solution would be to move the images to a different object storage provider. The migration is also limited to the 250 requests/s and 80 Mbit/s, so it will require turning off the images for 4 - 7 days while all the images are moved... Since I am not familiar with the policies of other object storage providers I would also need to do research to avoid falling into the same trap.

So, I am hoping that Contabo's support will get back to me soon and allow me to increase the rate limits, as this would be the most straight forward approach.

[–] Sal@mander.xyz 5 points 2 weeks ago

And you are doing a great job at that! 😄

Very interesting article, thanks for sharing. I agree that it is a good one to pin!!

[–] Sal@mander.xyz 2 points 2 weeks ago

Mesmerizing!

[–] Sal@mander.xyz 2 points 3 weeks ago

I have been reaching out to the object storage provider to see if I can increase the rate limits... Unfortunately I might need to change to a different provider to overcome this. Since the migration takes several days, especially so because of those same rate limits, I would rather avoid this...

[–] Sal@mander.xyz 7 points 1 month ago

That's an error I had not seen before, but I also just encountered with this specific post. I will investigate, thanks.

 

When a website can be accessed via a clearnet and a .onion url, is there a benefit to making use of the .onion url?


Context:

I am considering pointing a ".onion" url to my instance (mander.xyz).

I did some tests with and it seems like mlmym works well with JavaScript disabled. Since JavaScript is often disabled in the tor browser, I could make the .onion url point at that front-end instead.

This would be fun to do, but I wonder if there is a practical benefit to the ".onion" url as opposed to simply accessing the clearnet url via the tor browser.

EDIT: I went ahead and created an onion URL to try out, but I would still like to know if there is an actual advantage to .onion urls:

http://mandermybrewn3sll4kptj2ubeyuiujz6felbaanzj3ympcrlykfs2id.onion/

view more: next ›