this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2023
454 points (98.9% liked)

Lemmy

523 readers
2 users here now

Everything about Lemmy; bugs, gripes, praises, and advocacy.

For discussion about the lemmy.ml instance, go to [email protected].

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 59 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (29 children)

My thoughts exactly. You should not be choosing TLDs that are volatile to upsets like this. Stick with the tried and true .com or .net, or one of the new TLDs that are not bound to a nation (unless you can comply with the stipulations) or particular type of organization.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 year ago (12 children)

Or if you absolutely have to, choose the TLD of a country you live in.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Agreed. I went with lemmy.ca since I'm Canadian and the instance is in my country.

I also heard Lemmy should perform a little quicker for me too this way.

[–] savedbythezsh 22 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No, practically speaking the domain name should have no effect on access time. DNS has so many layers of caching that as long as SOMEONE has accessed the website nearby (including you), the domain lookup will be local and therefore fast.

Anyway, DNS lookup times, even slow ones, are still not going to be noticable to the end use originally.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No, I meant the instance itself. The server. The one who runs lemmy.ca is here in Canada with me.

It's like when playing a game; You choose servers closet to you for the lowest ping time.

The other reason I neglected to mention was I like to support local. 😎

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It makes a difference for a game, but it's not really significant for a website.

The server load and resources will have a much bigger impact on performances than geographic proximity.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And you spread that server load by selecting different servers. While what you're saying is technically true, in a practical sense if everyone picked a more local server that would be one way to achieve what you're saying.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

No because the population is not even close to being uniformly distributed geographically.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 9 months ago

you don't need a uniform distribution. if the server distribution mirrors the population distribution (and why wouldn't it?), that will still achieve the desired effect.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (25 replies)