212
UPDATED: lemmony: A (better) better "All" browsing experience for small and large Lemmy instances (github.com)
submitted 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) by to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
72 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

v.0.0.6

v0.0.4 - Per requests and concerns: Defaults changed and options added to prevent overloading servers, hitting rate-limiting, filtering to top x communities, etc!

Thanks for your support!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 0 points 3 years ago (8 children)

Sorry, by comparing now to what; or was as that a superfluous "now," like "come on now?"

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 years ago (7 children)

    Well the last one would have just mass Overloaded instances. Just wondering how this one operates differently to prevent that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 3 years ago (5 children)

    The relevant change is this: https://github.com/jheidecker/lemmony/commit/9b0b7232a1a942615eb67a34f2526328a23fcdd5

    It's not meaningful though. It allows one to optionally limit to the top-n communities by active-user count, but the default is still unlimited and the docs still do nothing to explain the abusive load that excessive subscription puts on instances that host communities.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] -2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (4 children)

    My dude, I appreciate your spirit, but we're not going to focus on your irrational fear of abuse. I'll defend myself for being accused of any such thing, or for being irresponsible. This is intended to make things better, and there's no evidence it's doing anything other than that.

    If you want to contribute, by all means, show us where there is a problem, other than in your imagination, and it will be seriously considered. Until then, your opinion is still valuable, but you are speaking with authority about something you know little of.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (3 children)

    My dude... If you want to contribute, by all means, show us where there is a problem, other than in your imagination, and it will be seriously considered.

    I had no idea we were doing condescending pet names, this is a fun game. My sweet summer child...

    • Federation ain't doing great.
    • Federated replication load scales with the number of instances multiplied by the number of communities they subscribe to.
    • Server counts are growing at ~10x per month.
    • The defaults of this script encourage single-user instances admins to bump their sub count ~70x from something like 100 communities to something more like 7000 communities.
    • Users of this script actually literally don't understand how federation works. They think they're proxying through to the upstream instance while they browse rather than getting firehosed with the entire lemmyverse by they're asleep.

    It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to figure out that global federation worker queues are not in great shape, or that a default that encourages single-user instance owners who have no idea what they're doing to bump their sub count 70x isn't helping the situation. If you think this is in my head I can't help you. But I can help others understand that running this script with default settings is an awful and unnecessary idea.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] -1 points 3 years ago* (2 children)

    Your argument does not gain validity by adding irrelevant verbosity:

    Federation ain’t doing great.

    The linked issue has nothing to do with this script or lemmony.

    Federated replication load scales with the number of instances multiplied by the number of communities they subscribe to.

    That's a hasty generalization that you just made up.

    Server counts are growing at ~10x per month.

    That's great! I hope they keep growing!

    The defaults of this script encourage single-user instances admins to bump their sub count ~70x from something like 100 communities to something more like 7000 communities.

    Nobody is encouraging anyone to do anything.

    Users of this script actually literally don’t understand how federation works. They think they’re proxying through to the upstream instance while they browse rather than getting firehosed with the entire lemmyverse by they’re asleep.

    That single user asked a question and got berated by a jerk.

    It doesn’t take a rocket surgeon to figure out that global federation worker queues are not in great shape, or that a default that encourages single-user instance owners who have no idea what they’re doing to bump their sub count 70x isn’t helping the situation. If you think this is in my head I can’t help you. But I can help others understand that running this script with default settings is an awful and unnecessary idea.

    You can help others understand what it is. That's a great thing to do. It would be nice if you could do that without being a dick.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Federated replication load scales with the number of instances multiplied by the number of communities they subscribe to.

    That's a hasty generalization that you just made that up.

    Sigh. No. No, that's actually how the computational complexity scales and it's not a difficult analysis to perform. Good luck to you though.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •