This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Migrating Critical Traffic At Scale with No Downtime — Part 1 Shyam Gala , Javier Fernandez-Ivern , Anup Rokkam Pratap , Devang Shah Hundreds of millions of customers tune into Netflix every day, expecting an uninterrupted and immersive streaming experience. This approach has a handful of benefits.
Migrating Critical Traffic At Scale with No Downtime — Part 2 Shyam Gala , Javier Fernandez-Ivern , Anup Rokkam Pratap , Devang Shah Picture yourself enthralled by the latest episode of your beloved Netflix series, delighting in an uninterrupted, high-definition streaming experience. This is where large-scale system migrations come into play.
Architecture Comparison RabbitMQ and Kafka have distinct architectural designs that influence their performance and suitability for different use cases. Its partitioned log architecture supports both queuing and publish-subscribe models, allowing it to handle large-scale event processing with minimal latency.
First, it helps to understand that applications and all the services and infrastructure that support them generate telemetry data based on traffic from real users. Latency is the time that it takes a request to be served. So how can teams start implementing SLOs? This telemetry data serves as the basis for establishing meaningful SLOs.
SREs use Service-Level Indicators (SLI) to see the complete picture of service availability, latency, performance, and capacity across various systems, especially revenue-critical systems. Davis will also assist Site Reliability Guardian in recommending relevant objectives and baselines for comparison.
In this case, we have a quite well-defined scenario that can resemble the image below: In this scenario, the proxies must sit inside Pods, balancing the incoming traffic from the Service LoadBalancer connecting with the active data nodes. Let us take a look also the latency: Here the situation starts to be a little bit more complicated.
Perceptual quality measurements are used to drive video encoding optimizations , perform video codec comparisons , carry out A/B testing and optimize streaming QoE decisions to mention a few. This enables us to use our scale to increase throughput and reduce latencies. VQS is called using the measureQuality endpoint.
This approach often leads to heavyweight high-latency analytical processes and poor applicability to realtime use cases. There is a system that monitors traffic and counts unique visitors for different criteria (visited site, geography, etc.) A group of several such sketches can be used to process range query. Case Study. Case Study.
In this comparison of Redis vs Memcached, we strip away the complexity, focusing on each in-memory data store’s performance, scalability, and unique features. Performance Comparison: Redis vs Memcached Although Redis and Memcached are high-performance in-memory data stores, their performance characteristics are distinct.
The chief effect of the architectural difference is to shift the distribution of latency within the loop. Herein lies the source of our collective anxiety about front-end architectures: traversing networks is always fraught, but the costs to deliver client-side logic to cushion users from variable network latency remain stubbornly high.
DLVs are particularly advantageous for databases with large allocated storage, high I/O per second (IOPS) requirements, or latency-sensitive workloads. For write-only traffic, the QPS counters match the performance of standard RDS instances for lower thread counts, though, for higher counters, there is a drastic improvement.
Snappy Data size: 14.95GB Data size after compression: 10.75GB Avg latency: 12.22ms Avg cpu usage: 34% Avg insert ops rate: 16K/s Time taken to import 120000000 document: 7292 seconds Zstd (with default compression level 6) Data size: 14.95GB Data size after compression: 7.69GB Avg latency: 12.52ms Avg cpu usage: 31.72% Avg insert ops rate: 14.8K/s
A quick way to fix this is simply by temporarily changing the TTL (time to live) setting for the DNS record, and route your traffic to the second DNS server until the outage is fixed. Using a fast DNS hosting provider ensures there is less latency between the DNS lookup and TTFB. Speed Speed also plays a role with DNS.
When used in prevention mode (IPS), this all has to happen inline over incoming traffic to block any traffic with suspicious signatures. This makes the whole system latency sensitive. The baseline for comparison is Snort 3.0 , “the most powerful IPS in the world” according to the Snort website.
A Cassandra database cluster had switched to Ubuntu and noticed write latency increased by over 30%. Since instances of both CentOS and Ubuntu were running in parallel, I could collect flame graphs at the same time (same time-of-day traffic mix) and compare them side by side. How long is each time call? us on Centos and 0.68
This is a complex topic, but to borrow from a recent post , web performance expands access to information and services by reducing latency and variance across interactions in a session, with a particular focus on the tail of the distribution (P75+). Consistent performance matters just as much as low average latency.
You’ve probably heard things like: “HTTP/3 is much faster than HTTP/2 when there is packet loss”, or “HTTP/3 connections have less latency and take less time to set up”, and probably “HTTP/3 can send data more quickly and can send more resources in parallel”. HTTP/2 versus HTTP/3 protocol stack comparison ( Large preview ).
In contrast, tools like DebugBear and WebPageTest use more realistic throttling that accurately reflects network round trips on a higher-latency connection. It’s another type of real-user monitoring takes real traffic from your site and sends the information over for extremely accurate results.
Meanwhile, on Android, the #2 and #3 sources of web traffic do not respect browser choice. On Android today and early iOS versions, WebViews allow embedders to observe and modify all network traffic (regardless of encryption). Users can have any browser with any engine they like, but it's unlikely to be used. How can that be?
TTFB mobile speed distribution comparison between all web and CMS (CrUX, July 2019). And here are the FCP results: FCP mobile speed distribution comparison between all web and CMS (CrUX, July 2019). At least the FID results are a bit better: FID mobile speed distribution comparison between all web and CMS (CrUX, July 2019).
Finally, not inlining resources has an added latency cost because the file needs to be requested. Note that there is an Apache Traffic Server implementation, though.). Traffic for one connection must, of course, always be routed to the same back-end server (the others wouldn’t know what to do with it!).
Test how user-friendly an application is: Google search engine gives high priority to websites in comparison to desktop apps. Testing helps in finding latency time of an application: Users prefer to use mobile phones over desktop when they are looking for any query, booking flight/movie ticket.
A Cassandra database cluster had switched to Ubuntu and noticed write latency increased by over 30%. Since instances of both CentOS and Ubuntu were running in parallel, I could collect flame graphs at the same time (same time-of-day traffic mix) and compare them side by side. us on Centos and 0.68 us on Ubuntu. Ubuntu is 5x slower.
With a simple example such as this, it would not necessarily be expected for the additional network traffic to be significant between the 2 approaches. Stored Procedures and Client SQL comparison To test the stored procedures and client implementations, we ran both workloads against a system equipped with Intel Xeon 8280L.
A Cassandra database cluster had switched to Ubuntu and noticed write latency increased by over 30%. Since instances of both CentOS and Ubuntu were running in parallel, I could collect flame graphs at the same time (same time-of-day traffic mix) and compare them side by side. us on Centos and 0.68 us on Ubuntu. Ubuntu is 5x slower.
Here's some output from my zfsdist tool, in bcc/BPF, which measures ZFS latency as a histogram on Linux: # zfsdist. Tracing ZFS operation latency. Oracle have a similar useful page as well: the Linux to Oracle Solaris 11 comparison, as well as a [procedure] for migrating from Solaris to Linux. Hit Ctrl-C to end. ^C
Especially if going into or out of storage types that may throttle bandwidth/network traffic. Storage destination: Backups stored on the same disk as the database can impact read and write operations, while backups stored on a remote server can increase network traffic and cause latency.
Because we are dealing with network protocols here, we will mainly look at network aspects, of which two are most important: latency and bandwidth. Latency can be roughly defined as the time it takes to send a packet from point A (say, the client) to point B (the server). Two-way latency is often called round-trip time (RTT).
â€What Comprises Video Streaming - Traffic CharacteristicsWith the emphasis on a high-quality streaming experience, the optimization starts from the very core. Fundamentally, internet traffic can be broadly categorized into static and dynamic content. Let’s analyze how you can achieve this win-win as effectively as possible!â€What
What Comprises Video Streaming - Traffic CharacteristicsWith the emphasis on a high-quality streaming experience, the optimization starts from the very core. Fundamentally, internet traffic can be broadly categorized into static and dynamic content. Let’s analyze how you can achieve this win-win as effectively as possible!What
Using this approach, we observed latencies ranging from 1 to 10 seconds, averaging 7.4 However, when we captured packets on the ZeroMQ socket while reproducing the issue, we didn’t observe heavy traffic on this socket that could cause such blocking. Meanwhile, traffic from other ports, such as port 22 for SSH, remained unaffected.
Alternatively, you can also use Speed Scorecard (also provides a revenue impact estimator), Real User Experience Test Comparison or SiteSpeed CI (based on synthetic testing). Paddy Ganti’s script constructs two URLs (one normal and one blocking the ads), prompts the generation of a video comparison via WebPageTest and reports a delta.
To get a good first impression of how your competitors perform, you can use Chrome UX Report ( CrUX , a ready-made RUM data set, video introduction by Ilya Grigorik), Speed Scorecard (also provides a revenue impact estimator), Real User Experience Test Comparison or SiteSpeed CI (based on synthetic testing). Large preview ).
Alternatively, you can also use: Addy Osmani’s Chrome UX Report Compare Tool , Speed Scorecard (also provides a revenue impact estimator), Real User Experience Test Comparison or SiteSpeed CI (based on synthetic testing). CrUX generates an overview of performance distributions over time, with traffic collected from Google Chrome users.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 5,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content