but yeah, 100 requests per second coming from headphones and beets-via-headphones
2012-11-27 33208, 2012
ianmcorvidae
since the latter wasn't being throttled, it wasn't getting ratelimited *at all* until fifteen minutes ago or whatever it was, because it was under the 50/s limit for python-musicbrainz/0.7.3
2012-11-27 33229, 2012
reosarevok
heh
2012-11-27 33237, 2012
ianmcorvidae
which is where it was getting binned, though apparently clients *actually* using that UA are now only about 3 requests per second :P
2012-11-27 33243, 2012
reosarevok
So tomorrow we'll have some people dropping by like "you broke our stuff again!"
2012-11-27 33201, 2012
ianmcorvidae
to which I think we respond "no, that was you, with ours" :P
2012-11-27 33238, 2012
reosarevok
We respond "implement a latest-changed in MB and then we'll see"
2012-11-27 33246, 2012
reosarevok
(if nobody wants to, bad luck for them :p)
2012-11-27 33250, 2012
ianmcorvidae
heh
2012-11-27 33259, 2012
ianmcorvidae
well, we have that partly done, I think rob's working further on it
2012-11-27 33212, 2012
reosarevok
Yeah, I guess it is useful for others too, not just headphones
2012-11-27 33215, 2012
ianmcorvidae
this doesn't solve the problem completely, of course -- ideally we'd be able to support our capacity
2012-11-27 33237, 2012
reosarevok
which means? :)
2012-11-27 33244, 2012
reosarevok
Not break up as we approach 10?
2012-11-27 33249, 2012
reosarevok
down rather than up :p
2012-11-27 33259, 2012
ianmcorvidae
ideally we wouldn't need to ratelimit people because we'd have enough money to pay for enough bandwidth :P
2012-11-27 33205, 2012
reosarevok
yes
2012-11-27 33218, 2012
reosarevok
Ideally people wouldn't make absolutely ridiculous requests and that wouldn't ever be a problem :p
2012-11-27 33234, 2012
ianmcorvidae
etc.
2012-11-27 33240, 2012
reosarevok
(and our replies wouldn't be ridiculously detailed without need, and the problem would be smaller)
2012-11-27 33245, 2012
ianmcorvidae
yeah
2012-11-27 33200, 2012
ianmcorvidae
there's many ways for us to fit better into our capacity, more money or better use of resources :P
2012-11-27 33205, 2012
reosarevok
But from what we have, I'm happy with the "throttle and let them pay for free WS" :p
2012-11-27 33222, 2012
reosarevok
I mean, since they're not paying any artist, they might as well pay someone :p
2012-11-27 33227, 2012
ianmcorvidae
:P
2012-11-27 33244, 2012
reosarevok
(or find stuff the slow way like the rest of us)
2012-11-27 33258, 2012
ianmcorvidae
also: anyone else who uses python-musicbrainz/0.7.3: a.) god damn upgrade your thing, and b.) you're welcome :P
2012-11-27 33239, 2012
reosarevok wonders how big their userbase is
2012-11-27 33244, 2012
ianmcorvidae
heh, now it is actually blocking more than it's letting through
2012-11-27 33248, 2012
ianmcorvidae
they're not going to be pleased :P
2012-11-27 33250, 2012
reosarevok
How many of the requests come from unique sources?
2012-11-27 33203, 2012
ianmcorvidae
I'd need to do some log analysis to tell you that, heh
2012-11-27 33208, 2012
reosarevok
Is it a relatively small amount of people going nuts, or a huge amount of people going slightly less nuts?
2012-11-27 33218, 2012
ianmcorvidae
luckily my copy of the log is going a lot faster now at least
2012-11-27 33219, 2012
ianmcorvidae
well
2012-11-27 33227, 2012
ianmcorvidae
any individual IP can still only make one request per second
2012-11-27 33233, 2012
ianmcorvidae
we are getting 100 requests per second
2012-11-27 33237, 2012
ianmcorvidae
:P
2012-11-27 33246, 2012
ianmcorvidae
the per-IP ratelimit comes into effect *before* this one
2012-11-27 33248, 2012
ianmcorvidae
but they're using python-musicbrainz-ngs which deals with that ratelimit anyway, so
2012-11-27 33220, 2012
reosarevok
Well, 100 people aren't that many :p
2012-11-27 33228, 2012
reosarevok
So it can be 100, or it can be 10000 :p
2012-11-27 33235, 2012
reosarevok
We just know it's not less than 100
2012-11-27 33243, 2012
ianmcorvidae
yeah, fair enough
2012-11-27 33244, 2012
reosarevok
Which would be absolutely nuts
2012-11-27 33248, 2012
reosarevok
So it's good it isn't :p
2012-11-27 33209, 2012
ianmcorvidae
heh
2012-11-27 33200, 2012
Freso
reosarevok: RE: "latest-changed", if the Bottle ends up caching WS data anyway, the "latest-changed" could be utilised to selectively update the cache as-needed.
2012-11-27 33220, 2012
reosarevok
Certainly, that's what I mean with it having other uses
2012-11-27 33225, 2012
Freso
(Of course, being able to just cache properly in the first place would also be good...)