On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 11:10 AM, Roman Ovseitsev <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thanks everyone! That explains it then. > > It interesting how the cached version is actually slower to download than > the non-cached. > I haven't noticed the speed difference prior to Michael mentioning it, but > now after some random tests the behaviour seems to be consistent with other > sites as well. Too bad not everyone provides secure versions... > > Not too surprising. Nodejs uses Joyent as a provider. Likely they have ample bandwidth capacity and common-use objects (and I am guessing the main downloadables of latest versions are THE most commonly downloaded file from NodeJS's servers) which are likely in RAM cache of the server. Compare with an Israeli ISP that would try to squeeze any cent it can when utilizing their international links (which is why I left them) and just put everything on some huge cache machine, likely with not-so-fast-disks (i.e. disks with notiacable seek time, i.e. not SSDs) because they're trying to save money, remember, and the fact that while 'all the cool kids use node.js', comparing to the rest of your ISP customers, it is likely not a popular choice as compared to things like Torrent sites, etc, so likely not in RAM cache, so it must load from a busy disk, and... there you have it :) Your solution is to switch ISP, so they'll learn not to mess with their customers.
_______________________________________________ Linux-il mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.cs.huji.ac.il/mailman/listinfo/linux-il
