It's FOSS (@[email protected])
mastodon.social
We need to talk about this! 😟 https://news.itsfoss.com/mastodon-link-problem/ #mastodon
  • Handles@leminal.spaceEnglish
    2·
    6 months ago

    There’s another reason I don’t share “It’s FOSS” links anywhere: this should have been a github issue but it’s turned into a clickbaity headline. Every othe article coming out of “It’s FOSS” is either low effort, sensationalist, or both.

  • Tag365@lemmy.worldEnglish
    1·
    6 months ago

    So why doesn’t a random follower posting a link on Mastodon cause server load issues, but a popular follower does?

  • SatyrSack@lemmy.oneEnglish
    1·
    6 months ago

    Direct link to article:

    https://news.itsfoss.com/mastodon-link-problem/

    TL;DR:

    When you share a link on Mastodon, a link preview is generated for it, right?

    With Mastodon being a federated platform (a part of the Fediverse), the request to generate a link preview is not generated by just one Mastodon instance. There are many instances connected to it who also initiate requests for the content almost immediately.

    And, this “fediverse effect” increases the load on the website’s server in a big way.

    Does Lemmy not cause this issue? Other federated software was not mentioned in the article at all.

    • iltg@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      0·
      6 months ago

      thanks for saying this! i really don’t want to victim blame itsfoss for getting traffic spikes but if you cant handle ~20MB in one minute (~400kbps) of traffic you’re doing something really really wrong and you really should look into it, especially if you want to distribute content. crying “dont share our links on mastodon” also sounds like hunting windmills, block the mastodon UA and be done with it, or stop putting images in your link previews for mastodon, or drop link previews completely. a “100 mb DDOS” is laughable at best, nice amplification calculation but that’s still 100 megs

        • chiisana@lemmy.chiisana.netEnglish
          0·
          6 months ago

          AWS charges $0.09/GB. Even assuming zero caching and always dynamically requested content, you’d need 100x this “attack” to rack up $1 in bandwidth fees. There are way faster ways to rack up bandwidth fees. I remember the days where I paid $1/GB of egress on overage, and even then, this 100MB would’ve only set me back $0.15 at worst.

          Also worth noting that those who’d host on AWS isn’t going to blink at $1 in bandwidth fees; they’d be hosting else where that offers cheaper egress (I.e. billed by megabits or some generous fixed allocation); those that are more sane would be serving behind CDNs that’d be even cheaper.

          This is a non-issue written by someone who clearly doesn’t know what they’re talking about, likely intended to drum up traffic to their site.

  • cbarrick@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    6 months ago

    Just put the site behind a cache, like Cloudflare, and set your cache control headers properly?

    They mention that they are already using Cloudflare. I’m confused about what is actually causing the load. They don’t mention any technical details, but it does kinda sound like their cache control headers are not set properly. I’m too lazy to check for myself though…

      • cbarrick@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        6 months ago

        If caching is properly configured, the cache (Cloudflare) will see thousands of requests, but the VPS should only see one request.

      • tacofox@lemm.eeEnglish
        0·
        6 months ago

        This should be front and center, caching won’t be able to make up for that…

        • breakingcups@lemmy.worldEnglish
          1·
          6 months ago

          Of course it will, cloudflare is in front of it, they can definitely handje this traffic as long as itsfoss bothers to set correct caching headers for cloudflare to use. That’s the entire point of cloudflare…