this post was submitted on 05 Jul 2023
3372 points (99.4% liked)

Lemmy.World Announcements

29164 readers
25 users here now

This Community is intended for posts about the Lemmy.world server by the admins.

Follow us for server news 🐘

Outages πŸ”₯

https://status.lemmy.world/

For support with issues at Lemmy.world, go to the Lemmy.world Support community.

Support e-mail

Any support requests are best sent to info@lemmy.world e-mail.

Report contact

Donations πŸ’—

If you would like to make a donation to support the cost of running this platform, please do so at the following donation URLs.

If you can, please use / switch to Ko-Fi, it has the lowest fees for us

Ko-Fi (Donate)

Bunq (Donate)

Open Collective backers and sponsors

Patreon

Join the team

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Another day, another update.

More troubleshooting was done today. What did we do:

  • Yesterday evening @phiresky@phiresky@lemmy.world did some SQL troubleshooting with some of the lemmy.world admins. After that, phiresky submitted some PRs to github.
  • @cetra3@lemmy.ml created a docker image containing 3PR's: Disable retry queue, Get follower Inbox Fix, Admin Index Fix
  • We started using this image, and saw a big drop in CPU usage and disk load.
  • We saw thousands of errors per minute in the nginx log for old clients trying to access the websockets (which were removed in 0.18), so we added a return 404 in nginx conf for /api/v3/ws.
  • We updated lemmy-ui from RC7 to RC10 which fixed a lot, among which the issue with replying to DMs
  • We found that the many 502-errors were caused by an issue in Lemmy/markdown-it.actix or whatever, causing nginx to temporarily mark an upstream to be dead. As a workaround we can either 1.) Only use 1 container or 2.) set ~~proxy_next_upstream timeout;~~ max_fails=5 in nginx.

Currently we're running with 1 lemmy container, so the 502-errors are completely gone so far, and because of the fixes in the Lemmy code everything seems to be running smooth. If needed we could spin up a second lemmy container using the ~~proxy_next_upstream timeout;~~ max_fails=5 workaround but for now it seems to hold with 1.

Thanks to @phiresky@lemmy.world , @cetra3@lemmy.ml , @stanford@discuss.as200950.com, @db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com , @jelloeater85@lemmy.world , @TragicNotCute@lemmy.world for their help!

And not to forget, thanks to @nutomic@lemmy.ml and @dessalines@lemmy.ml for their continuing hard work on Lemmy!

And thank you all for your patience, we'll keep working on it!

Oh, and as bonus, an image (thanks Phiresky!) of the change in bandwidth after implementing the new Lemmy docker image with the PRs.

Edit So as soon as the US folks wake up (hi!) we seem to need the second Lemmy container for performance. So that's now started, and I noticed the proxy_next_upstream timeout setting didn't work (or I didn't set it properly) so I used max_fails=5 for each upstream, that does actually work.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] CIA_chatbot@lemmy.world 16 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

It blows my mind with the amount of traffic you guys must be getting that you are only running one container and not running in a k8s cluster with multiple pods (or similar container orchestration system)

Edit: misread that a second was coming up, but still crazy that this doesn’t take some multi node cluster with multiple pods. Fucking awesome

[–] guyman@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

A lot of containerization is unnecessary and perpetuated by people who don't know what they're doing.

[–] CIA_chatbot@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Kinda shitty dig there but whatever, I’m a certified k8s admin, I would say I’m pretty damn good with containers.

With the amount of traffic I’m assuming lemmy.world gets I was just imagining it taking advantage of something more robust than just running Docker. It was more a comment on being impressed that lemmy must be damn efficient.

[–] guyman@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Heck yeah. I didn't mean to cast aspersions. I'm just tired of this trend of using technologies "just because" rather than having a legitimate need for them.

[–] CIA_chatbot@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago