Report performance issues here #221

Closed
jimaek opened this Issue Dec 17, 2013 · 52 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@jimaek
Member

jimaek commented Dec 17, 2013

If you believe jsDelivr is slow please report your findings and data over here.
I will do my best to fix the problem.

Please include your IP address and any other information you have.

@as-com

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@as-com

as-com Jan 28, 2014

Contributor

I noticed that DNS response times are consistently slow, according a couple of testing sites.
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:1
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:2
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:3
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:4
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:6
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:11
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:13
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:14
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:15
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:17
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:18
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:19
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:23
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:43
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:68
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:72
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:73
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:71
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:74
http://www.websitepulse.com/tests/c1f17d00e350bdab.html#HTTP Headers/cdn.jsdelivr.net/jquery/1.11.0/jquery.min.js
http://www.websitepulse.com/tests/83fc5651b7c140ad.html#HTTP Headers/cdn.jsdelivr.net/jquery/1.11.0/jquery.min.js

Webpagetest.org usually says something around 70ms for DNS when in the US, but in Russia: http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140128_E7_12D7/1/details/ and India: http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140128_HE_12EY/1/details/ and especially New Zealand: http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140128_79_12GP/1/details/ the DNS lookup time is unacceptably high. Is it just me, or is it Cedexis?

Contributor

as-com commented Jan 28, 2014

I noticed that DNS response times are consistently slow, according a couple of testing sites.
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:1
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:2
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:3
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:4
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:6
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:11
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:13
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:14
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:15
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:17
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:18
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:19
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:23
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:43
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:68
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:72
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:73
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:71
http://www.dotcom-monitor.com/WebTools/DetailView.aspx?id=D2A7BC2CD8EB4B40939F0FB3301CAF0B:74
http://www.websitepulse.com/tests/c1f17d00e350bdab.html#HTTP Headers/cdn.jsdelivr.net/jquery/1.11.0/jquery.min.js
http://www.websitepulse.com/tests/83fc5651b7c140ad.html#HTTP Headers/cdn.jsdelivr.net/jquery/1.11.0/jquery.min.js

Webpagetest.org usually says something around 70ms for DNS when in the US, but in Russia: http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140128_E7_12D7/1/details/ and India: http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140128_HE_12EY/1/details/ and especially New Zealand: http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140128_79_12GP/1/details/ the DNS lookup time is unacceptably high. Is it just me, or is it Cedexis?

@jimaek

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jimaek

jimaek Jan 29, 2014

Member

Does websitepulse allow testing of URLs with custom HTTP headers?
For example you can test individual locations by replacing the hostname and sending the header: "Host: cdn.jsdelivr.net"

This way we would be able to understand if the issue is with Cedexis or some CDN provider.

Member

jimaek commented Jan 29, 2014

Does websitepulse allow testing of URLs with custom HTTP headers?
For example you can test individual locations by replacing the hostname and sending the header: "Host: cdn.jsdelivr.net"

This way we would be able to understand if the issue is with Cedexis or some CDN provider.

@jimaek

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jimaek

jimaek Jan 31, 2014

Member

Hey, did you see any improvement? I hoped it was a temp DNS issue on their side.
Cedexis does not report any performance issues for MaxCDN at the moment.

Member

jimaek commented Jan 31, 2014

Hey, did you see any improvement? I hoped it was a temp DNS issue on their side.
Cedexis does not report any performance issues for MaxCDN at the moment.

@as-com

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jimaek

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jimaek

jimaek Jan 31, 2014

Member

NZ is served by CDN.NET and not MaxCDN. Interesting why webpagetest shows this performance, RUM data shows that CDN.NET is faster in AU and NZ than MaxCDN at this moment.

What about other locations?

Member

jimaek commented Jan 31, 2014

NZ is served by CDN.NET and not MaxCDN. Interesting why webpagetest shows this performance, RUM data shows that CDN.NET is faster in AU and NZ than MaxCDN at this moment.

What about other locations?

@as-com

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@as-com

as-com Jan 31, 2014

Contributor

Dublin, Ireland: http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_HT_31N/
Dulles, VA: http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_TG_325/

That's all I have time for...I'll try more later.

Contributor

as-com commented Jan 31, 2014

Dublin, Ireland: http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_HT_31N/
Dulles, VA: http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_TG_325/

That's all I have time for...I'll try more later.

@jimaek

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jimaek

jimaek Jan 31, 2014

Member

These 2 look pretty good. Let me know when you have more data :)

Member

jimaek commented Jan 31, 2014

These 2 look pretty good. Let me know when you have more data :)

@as-com

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@as-com

as-com Jan 31, 2014

Contributor

North America
Miami, FL - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_FX_TMJ/
Denver, CO - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_PK_TMQ/
Phoenix, AZ - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_AK_TMS/ (yuck!)
Boardman, OR - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_SB_TMX/ (ick!)
Los Angeles, CA - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_8E_TMZ/
Chicago, IL took too long...
Montreal, Canada - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_E3_TN1/
Toronto, Canada - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_TY_TN3/

South America
Buenos Aires, Argentina tester not responding...
Sao Paulo, Brasil - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_J9_TQA/

Europe
Manchester, UK - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_9W_TQD/
London, UK took too long...
Madrid, Spain - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_0G_TTJ/
Paris, FR - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_V1_TTT/
Brussels, BE not working...
Amsterdam, NL - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_RG_TW5/
Vianen, NL - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_GT_TWD/
Geneva, Switzerland - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_G5_TWJ/
Falkenstein, Germany - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_DP_TWP/
Vienna, Austria - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_C5_TWW/
Stockholm, Sweden - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_87_TX0/ (yuck!)
Petach-Tikva, Israel - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_R1_TX3/
Moscow, Russia took too long...
Saint Petersburg, Russia - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_KR_V00/

Asia
Indore, India - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_NB_V0B/
Singapore - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_RE_V1J/
Tokyo, Japan - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_HF_V1T/
Shanghai, China took too long...

Oceania
Sydney, Australia - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_ZJ_V52/
Wellington, NZ - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_PS_V4V/

Contributor

as-com commented Jan 31, 2014

North America
Miami, FL - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_FX_TMJ/
Denver, CO - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_PK_TMQ/
Phoenix, AZ - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_AK_TMS/ (yuck!)
Boardman, OR - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_SB_TMX/ (ick!)
Los Angeles, CA - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_8E_TMZ/
Chicago, IL took too long...
Montreal, Canada - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_E3_TN1/
Toronto, Canada - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_TY_TN3/

South America
Buenos Aires, Argentina tester not responding...
Sao Paulo, Brasil - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_J9_TQA/

Europe
Manchester, UK - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_9W_TQD/
London, UK took too long...
Madrid, Spain - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_0G_TTJ/
Paris, FR - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_V1_TTT/
Brussels, BE not working...
Amsterdam, NL - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_RG_TW5/
Vianen, NL - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_GT_TWD/
Geneva, Switzerland - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_G5_TWJ/
Falkenstein, Germany - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_DP_TWP/
Vienna, Austria - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_C5_TWW/
Stockholm, Sweden - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_87_TX0/ (yuck!)
Petach-Tikva, Israel - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_R1_TX3/
Moscow, Russia took too long...
Saint Petersburg, Russia - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_KR_V00/

Asia
Indore, India - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_NB_V0B/
Singapore - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_RE_V1J/
Tokyo, Japan - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_HF_V1T/
Shanghai, China took too long...

Oceania
Sydney, Australia - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_ZJ_V52/
Wellington, NZ - http://www.webpagetest.org/result/140131_PS_V4V/

@jimaek

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jimaek

jimaek Jan 31, 2014

Member

Do you experience the same issue from your home connection or servers?

Member

jimaek commented Jan 31, 2014

Do you experience the same issue from your home connection or servers?

@as-com

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@as-com

as-com Jan 31, 2014

Contributor

No, I don't. I think this is really strange, too.

Contributor

as-com commented Jan 31, 2014

No, I don't. I think this is really strange, too.

@jimaek

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jimaek

jimaek Jan 31, 2014

Member

The problem can always be on their side. I'm trying to debug it but can't find anything.

Member

jimaek commented Jan 31, 2014

The problem can always be on their side. I'm trying to debug it but can't find anything.

@jimaek

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jimaek

jimaek Feb 19, 2014

Member

Closing this issue because infrastructure will dramatically change in the next few days. All new issues will be tagged with a "Performance" label.

Member

jimaek commented Feb 19, 2014

Closing this issue because infrastructure will dramatically change in the next few days. All new issues will be tagged with a "Performance" label.

@jimaek jimaek closed this Feb 19, 2014

@as-com

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@as-com

as-com Feb 19, 2014

Contributor

Oooh, I'm excited! I hope there will be MORE CDN SPEED! 😄

Contributor

as-com commented Feb 19, 2014

Oooh, I'm excited! I hope there will be MORE CDN SPEED! 😄

@jimaek

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jimaek

jimaek Feb 19, 2014

Member

Me too :)

Member

jimaek commented Feb 19, 2014

Me too :)

@jhiswin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jhiswin

jhiswin Oct 12, 2015

221.221.150.151
In China. It appears to be throttled or something.

jhiswin commented Oct 12, 2015

221.221.150.151
In China. It appears to be throttled or something.

@jimaek

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jimaek

jimaek Oct 12, 2015

Member

I need more information than that.

  1. Give me your results link from this test http://www.jsdelivr.com/tools/debug-tool
  2. Send me more information why you believe its throttled.
Member

jimaek commented Oct 12, 2015

I need more information than that.

  1. Give me your results link from this test http://www.jsdelivr.com/tools/debug-tool
  2. Send me more information why you believe its throttled.
@jhiswin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jhiswin

jhiswin Oct 12, 2015

It's exhibiting similar behavior to what trying to access Google did/does. Sometimes works, sometimes doesn't, sometimes unbearably slow/throttled.

jhiswin commented Oct 12, 2015

It's exhibiting similar behavior to what trying to access Google did/does. Sometimes works, sometimes doesn't, sometimes unbearably slow/throttled.

@jhiswin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jhiswin

jhiswin Oct 12, 2015

Debugging tool seems to get stuck forever. So, I can't really provide its output.

jhiswin commented Oct 12, 2015

Debugging tool seems to get stuck forever. So, I can't really provide its output.

@jimaek

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jimaek

jimaek Oct 12, 2015

Member

Disable AdBlock and the tool will work

Member

jimaek commented Oct 12, 2015

Disable AdBlock and the tool will work

@jhiswin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jhiswin

jhiswin Oct 13, 2015

@jimaek
Okay got the results, I'll post them next. I want to note that unfortunately tests like these don't reflect the actual performance, as was the case when Google was first being "throttled" or other sites that just had/have similar bad performance. If you were to use a VPN through other channels (usually datacenters with "channels" because they have agreements) performance improves.

My knowledge of how these things work is limited, however, what I do know is that the internet situation here with the ISPs (and other reasons) is pretty problematic especially to anything foreign related. Don't know if it's just an issue with bad routing.
It's somewhat sporadic, so it has to be captured while it happens.

I'm currently at a public hotspot where I was also seeing very poor performance, dropped requests.
IP address here: 222.128.170.153
It's okay now. Note there are very few other people here, and I am viewing other sites concurrently while connected to a business related VPN for certain tasks, so I am able to actively see what is responsive.
jsdelivr is definitely fast when it works, but often will have requests that just never finish. Upon which I have to switch to cdnjs temporarily that, while slower, won't just stop working. Later cdnjs will start the same and I switch back to jsdelivr. (I'm currently just doing testing to see how viable using it in China will be).

I'll try my best to provide as much information as I can.

jhiswin commented Oct 13, 2015

@jimaek
Okay got the results, I'll post them next. I want to note that unfortunately tests like these don't reflect the actual performance, as was the case when Google was first being "throttled" or other sites that just had/have similar bad performance. If you were to use a VPN through other channels (usually datacenters with "channels" because they have agreements) performance improves.

My knowledge of how these things work is limited, however, what I do know is that the internet situation here with the ISPs (and other reasons) is pretty problematic especially to anything foreign related. Don't know if it's just an issue with bad routing.
It's somewhat sporadic, so it has to be captured while it happens.

I'm currently at a public hotspot where I was also seeing very poor performance, dropped requests.
IP address here: 222.128.170.153
It's okay now. Note there are very few other people here, and I am viewing other sites concurrently while connected to a business related VPN for certain tasks, so I am able to actively see what is responsive.
jsdelivr is definitely fast when it works, but often will have requests that just never finish. Upon which I have to switch to cdnjs temporarily that, while slower, won't just stop working. Later cdnjs will start the same and I switch back to jsdelivr. (I'm currently just doing testing to see how viable using it in China will be).

I'll try my best to provide as much information as I can.

@jhiswin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jhiswin

jhiswin Oct 13, 2015

http://goo.gl/Ug3IPg
Note that it gets stuck at the end for a long time while loading that tool. Note: google-analytics.com is stuck loading forever, because it is not accessible in China.

Here's a screenshot of the very long waits:
image
I've also tried non-bundled files to the same effect. Will sporadically not be able to download files (wait forever for dl, or pending forever).

jhiswin commented Oct 13, 2015

http://goo.gl/Ug3IPg
Note that it gets stuck at the end for a long time while loading that tool. Note: google-analytics.com is stuck loading forever, because it is not accessible in China.

Here's a screenshot of the very long waits:
image
I've also tried non-bundled files to the same effect. Will sporadically not be able to download files (wait forever for dl, or pending forever).

@jimaek

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jimaek

jimaek Oct 13, 2015

Member

When these drops and problems happen you are always hitting Quantil? (you can check in your HTTP headers or just do a ping)
Can you also test this URL http://quantil.jsdelivr.net/g/underscorejs@1.5.2,restangular@1.2.2 ?
If it fails try to open https://www.quantil.com/ as well.

Member

jimaek commented Oct 13, 2015

When these drops and problems happen you are always hitting Quantil? (you can check in your HTTP headers or just do a ping)
Can you also test this URL http://quantil.jsdelivr.net/g/underscorejs@1.5.2,restangular@1.2.2 ?
If it fails try to open https://www.quantil.com/ as well.

@jhiswin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jhiswin

jhiswin Oct 13, 2015

@jimaek It's hard to reproduce, because it doesn't always happen. I'll try to catch it the next time it happens. Right now it is fast (about 800 ms for that quantil link).
Is there a script of some sort I can use to test it over a longer period of time?
I can just set a wget polling script. Is there a polling interval I should set to prevent it from being flagged as suspicious?

jhiswin commented Oct 13, 2015

@jimaek It's hard to reproduce, because it doesn't always happen. I'll try to catch it the next time it happens. Right now it is fast (about 800 ms for that quantil link).
Is there a script of some sort I can use to test it over a longer period of time?
I can just set a wget polling script. Is there a polling interval I should set to prevent it from being flagged as suspicious?

@jimaek

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jimaek

jimaek Oct 13, 2015

Member

There are no limits, you can setup a script with no issues. Just make sure the script get give us the needed information. For example the full HTTP headers. Otherwise its impossible to debug

Member

jimaek commented Oct 13, 2015

There are no limits, you can setup a script with no issues. Just make sure the script get give us the needed information. For example the full HTTP headers. Otherwise its impossible to debug

@jhiswin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jhiswin

jhiswin Oct 13, 2015

deleted har file content

jhiswin commented Oct 13, 2015

deleted har file content

@jimaek

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jimaek

jimaek Oct 13, 2015

Member

Can you email me the HAR file at dakulovgr@gmail.com ?

Member

jimaek commented Oct 13, 2015

Can you email me the HAR file at dakulovgr@gmail.com ?

@jhiswin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment

jhiswin commented Oct 13, 2015

edit

@jhiswin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jhiswin

jhiswin Oct 16, 2015

Just an update: I get average response times ~300ms (big improvement over the 900ms before), and the occasional 1s request (instead of >30s requests), and haven't seen a 504 error for a while now.
Thanks @jimaek

jhiswin commented Oct 16, 2015

Just an update: I get average response times ~300ms (big improvement over the 900ms before), and the occasional 1s request (instead of >30s requests), and haven't seen a 504 error for a while now.
Thanks @jimaek

@jimaek

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jimaek

jimaek Oct 17, 2015

Member

Its not 100% fixed yet. They found another small bug that they are currently fixing :)
Thanks for reporting

Member

jimaek commented Oct 17, 2015

Its not 100% fixed yet. They found another small bug that they are currently fixing :)
Thanks for reporting

@jhiswin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jhiswin

jhiswin Oct 17, 2015

@jimaek Ah, I was just about to post. It's happening again :(
Response times jumped to around 4-10s today (when it works) for a 250kb file, with mostly connection time-outs to cache.51cdn.com. I also got a SSL certificate error.
I even got a 504 timeout after a 1.5 minute request

jhiswin commented Oct 17, 2015

@jimaek Ah, I was just about to post. It's happening again :(
Response times jumped to around 4-10s today (when it works) for a 250kb file, with mostly connection time-outs to cache.51cdn.com. I also got a SSL certificate error.
I even got a 504 timeout after a 1.5 minute request

@jhiswin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jhiswin

jhiswin Oct 18, 2015

@jimaek Found that it wasn't because it was fixed, but because I had inadvertently been using a VPN, which caused all requests to be within 300ms and stable. Is there any information I can provide to help?

jhiswin commented Oct 18, 2015

@jimaek Found that it wasn't because it was fixed, but because I had inadvertently been using a VPN, which caused all requests to be within 300ms and stable. Is there any information I can provide to help?

@jimaek

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jimaek

jimaek Oct 19, 2015

Member

Not yet. Once we fix this issue I will ask you to re-test from both the VPN and non-VPN.
Thank you

Member

jimaek commented Oct 19, 2015

Not yet. Once we fix this issue I will ask you to re-test from both the VPN and non-VPN.
Thank you

@jimaek

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jimaek

jimaek Oct 22, 2015

Member

@jhiswin How about now?

Member

jimaek commented Oct 22, 2015

@jhiswin How about now?

@jhiswin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jhiswin

jhiswin Oct 23, 2015

@jimaek still the same problem with different timings. Still getting 504 gateway errors, and generally getting a lot of 10sec requests. Best case requests are around 2-4s and worst is around 1.5min, so it seems to have actually regressed.
quantil fares better than cdn, and ping times are better, but still getting 504 errors.

jhiswin commented Oct 23, 2015

@jimaek still the same problem with different timings. Still getting 504 gateway errors, and generally getting a lot of 10sec requests. Best case requests are around 2-4s and worst is around 1.5min, so it seems to have actually regressed.
quantil fares better than cdn, and ping times are better, but still getting 504 errors.

@as-com

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@as-com

as-com Oct 23, 2015

Contributor

@jhiswin We should start using #BlameGFW. 😄

Contributor

as-com commented Oct 23, 2015

@jhiswin We should start using #BlameGFW. 😄

@jhiswin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jhiswin

jhiswin Oct 23, 2015

@as-com sigh, It'd be easier to laugh if it wasn't so fact of life over here :( #lifewithoutgoogle

@jimaek Just now seeing big improvement (and definitely not going through VPN this time). Was hitting a maximum of 5seconds early on, then 200ms, and has now stabilized around 170ms.
Interesting bit, incognito mode stabilizes around 100ms.
Note: tests with cache off and refreshing in browser

Will keep you updated

jhiswin commented Oct 23, 2015

@as-com sigh, It'd be easier to laugh if it wasn't so fact of life over here :( #lifewithoutgoogle

@jimaek Just now seeing big improvement (and definitely not going through VPN this time). Was hitting a maximum of 5seconds early on, then 200ms, and has now stabilized around 170ms.
Interesting bit, incognito mode stabilizes around 100ms.
Note: tests with cache off and refreshing in browser

Will keep you updated

@jhiswin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jhiswin

jhiswin Oct 23, 2015

Hm, spoke too soon, it's back to what I was seeing before :\ Happened right after I posted

jhiswin commented Oct 23, 2015

Hm, spoke too soon, it's back to what I was seeing before :\ Happened right after I posted

@jhiswin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jhiswin

jhiswin Oct 25, 2015

@jimaek is it possible that there is some kind of throttling going on? I noticed that if I enable caching (read: 304 requests) performance improves for a while even after disabling caching again. But if I try to just use pure get requests for too long (or after a long period of time of inactivity), performance drops again and I'll get 504 errors.

tl;dr
If my first or second request returns a 304 response, performance stabilizes for a while for subsequent requests (http 200 responses).
It will then degrade again after many requests, or after a period of inactivity.

jhiswin commented Oct 25, 2015

@jimaek is it possible that there is some kind of throttling going on? I noticed that if I enable caching (read: 304 requests) performance improves for a while even after disabling caching again. But if I try to just use pure get requests for too long (or after a long period of time of inactivity), performance drops again and I'll get 504 errors.

tl;dr
If my first or second request returns a 304 response, performance stabilizes for a while for subsequent requests (http 200 responses).
It will then degrade again after many requests, or after a period of inactivity.

@jimaek

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jimaek

jimaek Oct 25, 2015

Member

I will forward this information as well. Thanks

Member

jimaek commented Oct 25, 2015

I will forward this information as well. Thanks

@jhiswin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jhiswin

jhiswin Oct 26, 2015

@jimaek Don't know why I didn't notice this before, but it only seems to be affecting https and not http right now. http stays stable at ~200ms.

jhiswin commented Oct 26, 2015

@jimaek Don't know why I didn't notice this before, but it only seems to be affecting https and not http right now. http stays stable at ~200ms.

@as-com

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@as-com

as-com Oct 26, 2015

Contributor

200 ms is still pretty terrible. HTTPS... #blameGFW.
On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 10:09 PM jhiswin notifications@github.com wrote:

@jimaek https://github.com/jimaek Don't know why I didn't notice this
before, but it only seems to be affecting https and not http right now.
http stays stable at ~200ms.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#221 (comment).

Contributor

as-com commented Oct 26, 2015

200 ms is still pretty terrible. HTTPS... #blameGFW.
On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 10:09 PM jhiswin notifications@github.com wrote:

@jimaek https://github.com/jimaek Don't know why I didn't notice this
before, but it only seems to be affecting https and not http right now.
http stays stable at ~200ms.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#221 (comment).

@jhiswin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jhiswin

jhiswin Oct 27, 2015

@as-com I know right? At one point I was getting 27-50ms, but of course it just degraded afterwards; however, this indicates that 27-50ms should be attainable and the expectation under good conditions.

Which brings another observation:
@jimaek Is it possibly related to the globalsign ssl cert? I have observed that ssl certs from some foreign CAs will exhibit strange stability problems. Often when these ssl sites have sudden increased traffic.

jhiswin commented Oct 27, 2015

@as-com I know right? At one point I was getting 27-50ms, but of course it just degraded afterwards; however, this indicates that 27-50ms should be attainable and the expectation under good conditions.

Which brings another observation:
@jimaek Is it possibly related to the globalsign ssl cert? I have observed that ssl certs from some foreign CAs will exhibit strange stability problems. Often when these ssl sites have sudden increased traffic.

@jimaek

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jimaek

jimaek Oct 27, 2015

Member

It should not be the SSL cert, OCSP checks are non-blocking as far as I know, it would not impact the HTTP request.
Quantil reported a few changes that should improve your performance. Can you run your tests again please?

Member

jimaek commented Oct 27, 2015

It should not be the SSL cert, OCSP checks are non-blocking as far as I know, it would not impact the HTTP request.
Quantil reported a few changes that should improve your performance. Can you run your tests again please?

@jhiswin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jhiswin

jhiswin Oct 27, 2015

@jimaek Looking very good so far. Stable around 200-300ms for a 250kb bundle. 304 requests stable around 20-30ms (might be better because our connection is slightly saturated right now). Will keep you updated.

jhiswin commented Oct 27, 2015

@jimaek Looking very good so far. Stable around 200-300ms for a 250kb bundle. 304 requests stable around 20-30ms (might be better because our connection is slightly saturated right now). Will keep you updated.

@jhiswin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jhiswin

jhiswin Oct 27, 2015

Appears to have degraded again.
Strange in that this url is fast:
https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/g/pouchdb@5.0.0,fetch@0.9.0,plupload@2.1.2(moxie.min.js)
But everything else is slow (around 30s to 1min requests).

jhiswin commented Oct 27, 2015

Appears to have degraded again.
Strange in that this url is fast:
https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/g/pouchdb@5.0.0,fetch@0.9.0,plupload@2.1.2(moxie.min.js)
But everything else is slow (around 30s to 1min requests).

@jimaek

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jimaek

jimaek Oct 27, 2015

Member

Can you send me har files with the slow requests please?

Member

jimaek commented Oct 27, 2015

Can you send me har files with the slow requests please?

@as-com

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@as-com

as-com Oct 27, 2015

Contributor

At the time of the performance degradation for jhiswin, it was peak
Internet time in China. China's Internet backbone can be really congested
during that time.
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 8:54 AM Dmitriy Akulov notifications@github.com
wrote:

Can you send me har files with the slow requests please?


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#221 (comment).

Contributor

as-com commented Oct 27, 2015

At the time of the performance degradation for jhiswin, it was peak
Internet time in China. China's Internet backbone can be really congested
during that time.
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 8:54 AM Dmitriy Akulov notifications@github.com
wrote:

Can you send me har files with the slow requests please?


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#221 (comment).

@jhiswin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jhiswin

jhiswin Oct 27, 2015

@as-com Although that is true, it doesn't seem like the case here.
I concurrently tried cdnjs (hosted on CloudFlare). While cdnjs is always slow, it never really degrades like that. It always stays around TTFB 300ms-1s.
Also strange that that one url above is always fast now. As if that single URL was cached just for me. Note it is fast on multiple connections (from restaurant wifi to company line to residential line, caching is off using multiple browsers and wget). While everything else continues the tendency to have TTFB drag to 30sec or timeout.
Anyhow, http is now also having performance problems.

jhiswin commented Oct 27, 2015

@as-com Although that is true, it doesn't seem like the case here.
I concurrently tried cdnjs (hosted on CloudFlare). While cdnjs is always slow, it never really degrades like that. It always stays around TTFB 300ms-1s.
Also strange that that one url above is always fast now. As if that single URL was cached just for me. Note it is fast on multiple connections (from restaurant wifi to company line to residential line, caching is off using multiple browsers and wget). While everything else continues the tendency to have TTFB drag to 30sec or timeout.
Anyhow, http is now also having performance problems.

@as-com

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@as-com

as-com Oct 27, 2015

Contributor

Is your ISP running a caching proxy?

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 12:20 PM jhiswin notifications@github.com wrote:

@as-com https://github.com/as-com Although that is true, it doesn't
seem like the case here.
I concurrently tried cdnjs (hosted on CloudFlare). While cdnjs is always
slow, it never really degrades like that. It always stays around TTFB
300ms-1s.

Also strange that that one url above is always fast now. As if that single
URL was cached just for me. Note it is fast on multiple connections (from
restaurant wifi to company line to residential line, caching is off using
multiple browsers and wget). While everything else continues the tendency
to have TTFB drag to 30sec or timeout.
Anyhow, http is now also having performance problems.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#221 (comment).

Contributor

as-com commented Oct 27, 2015

Is your ISP running a caching proxy?

On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 12:20 PM jhiswin notifications@github.com wrote:

@as-com https://github.com/as-com Although that is true, it doesn't
seem like the case here.
I concurrently tried cdnjs (hosted on CloudFlare). While cdnjs is always
slow, it never really degrades like that. It always stays around TTFB
300ms-1s.

Also strange that that one url above is always fast now. As if that single
URL was cached just for me. Note it is fast on multiple connections (from
restaurant wifi to company line to residential line, caching is off using
multiple browsers and wget). While everything else continues the tendency
to have TTFB drag to 30sec or timeout.
Anyhow, http is now also having performance problems.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#221 (comment).

@as-com

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@as-com

as-com Oct 28, 2015

Contributor

In that case...try appending a cachebuster query string to the end of your
testing URLs.

On Oct 27 2015, at 9:06 pm, jhiswin <notifications@github.com> wrote:

@as-com Yes: a stealthy transparent proxy that
behaves poorly (which as you probably know is the norm over here).
And, this applies to multiple networks I have used (public wifi, corporate,
personal).


Reply to this email directly or [view it on GitHub](https://github.com/jsdeliv
r/jsdelivr#221#issuecomment-151688343).![](https://github.com/notificat
ions/beacon/ADpIabUrT8feMik6nNffwlX8AZWTP8qXks5pABb2gaJpZM4BUv10.gif)

Contributor

as-com commented Oct 28, 2015

In that case...try appending a cachebuster query string to the end of your
testing URLs.

On Oct 27 2015, at 9:06 pm, jhiswin <notifications@github.com> wrote:

@as-com Yes: a stealthy transparent proxy that
behaves poorly (which as you probably know is the norm over here).
And, this applies to multiple networks I have used (public wifi, corporate,
personal).


Reply to this email directly or [view it on GitHub](https://github.com/jsdeliv
r/jsdelivr#221#issuecomment-151688343).![](https://github.com/notificat
ions/beacon/ADpIabUrT8feMik6nNffwlX8AZWTP8qXks5pABb2gaJpZM4BUv10.gif)

@jhiswin

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@jhiswin

jhiswin Oct 28, 2015

Appears to be the same or worse. Tried from both public wifi and company
line.

On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 9:23 AM, Andrew Sun notifications@github.com
wrote:

In that case...try appending a cachebuster query string to the end of your
testing URLs.

On Oct 27 2015, at 9:06 pm, jhiswin <notifications@github.com>
wrote:

@as-com Yes: a stealthy transparent proxy
that
behaves poorly (which as you probably know is the norm over here).
And, this applies to multiple networks I have used (public wifi, corporate,
personal).


Reply to this email directly or [view it on GitHub](https://github.com/jsdeliv
r/jsdelivr#221#issuecomment-151688343).![](https://github.com/notificat
ions/beacon/ADpIabUrT8feMik6nNffwlX8AZWTP8qXks5pABb2gaJpZM4BUv10.gif)


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#221 (comment).

jhiswin commented Oct 28, 2015

Appears to be the same or worse. Tried from both public wifi and company
line.

On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 9:23 AM, Andrew Sun notifications@github.com
wrote:

In that case...try appending a cachebuster query string to the end of your
testing URLs.

On Oct 27 2015, at 9:06 pm, jhiswin <notifications@github.com>
wrote:

@as-com Yes: a stealthy transparent proxy
that
behaves poorly (which as you probably know is the norm over here).
And, this applies to multiple networks I have used (public wifi, corporate,
personal).


Reply to this email directly or [view it on GitHub](https://github.com/jsdeliv
r/jsdelivr#221#issuecomment-151688343).![](https://github.com/notificat
ions/beacon/ADpIabUrT8feMik6nNffwlX8AZWTP8qXks5pABb2gaJpZM4BUv10.gif)


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#221 (comment).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment