TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Jetstream: Shrinking the AT Protocol Firehose by >99%

163 pointsby keybits8 months ago

14 comments

out_of_protocol8 months ago
Why providing non-compressed version at all? This is new protocol, no need for backwards compatibility. Dictionary may be baked into protocol itself, being fixed for specific version. E.g. protocol v1 uses that fixed v1 dictionary. Useful for replaying stored events on both sides
评论 #41637899 未加载
评论 #41636103 未加载
评论 #41637212 未加载
Ericson23148 months ago
I gotta say, I am not very excited about &quot;let&#x27;s throw away all the security properties for performance!&quot; (and also &quot;CBOR is too hard!&quot;)<p>If everyone is on one server (remains to be seen), and all the bots blindly trust it because they are cheap and lazy, what the hell is the point?
评论 #41638175 未加载
评论 #41638174 未加载
评论 #41640638 未加载
评论 #41638430 未加载
评论 #41637689 未加载
madduci8 months ago
Nice feat!<p>I wonder if a rewrite of this in C++ would even bump further the performance and optimise the overall system.
评论 #41638549 未加载
pohl8 months ago
The &quot;bring it all home&quot; screenshot shows a CPU Utilization graph, and the units of measurements on the vertical axis appears to be milliseconds. Could someone help me understand what that measurement might be?
评论 #41636270 未加载
S0y8 months ago
&gt;Before this new surge in activity, the firehose would produce around 24 GB&#x2F;day of traffic. After the surge, this volume jumped to over 232 GB&#x2F;day!<p>&gt;Jetstream is a streaming service that consumes an AT Proto com.atproto.sync.subscribeRepos stream and converts it into lightweight, friendly JSON.<p>So let me get this straight. if you did want to run Jetstream yourself you&#x27;d still need to be able to handle the 232 GB&#x2F;day of bandwidth?<p>This always has been my issue with Bluesky&#x2F;AT Protocol, For all the talk about their protocol being federated, It really doesn&#x27;t seem realistic for anyone to run any of the infrastructure themselves. You&#x27;re always going to be reliant on a big player that has the capital to keep everything running smoothly. At this point I don&#x27;t really see how it&#x27;s any different then being on any of the old centralized social media.
评论 #41638927 未加载
评论 #41637608 未加载
评论 #41637507 未加载
评论 #41637638 未加载
评论 #41639938 未加载
评论 #41637614 未加载
gooseus8 months ago
I thought this was going to be about NATS Jetstream, but it is not.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;docs.nats.io&#x2F;nats-concepts&#x2F;jetstream" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;docs.nats.io&#x2F;nats-concepts&#x2F;jetstream</a>
评论 #41637661 未加载
评论 #41635981 未加载
评论 #41635933 未加载
wrigby8 months ago
I thought this was going to be a strange read about the Hayes command set[1] at first glance.<p>1: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.m.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Hayes_AT_command_set" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.m.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Hayes_AT_command_set</a>
评论 #41635875 未加载
评论 #41635931 未加载
评论 #41635850 未加载
xbar8 months ago
I&#x27;m never not going to look for Hayes command set topics when people talk about BlueSky.
评论 #41637375 未加载
评论 #41637618 未加载
londons_explore8 months ago
&gt; Before this new surge in activity, the firehose would produce around 24 GB&#x2F;day of traffic.<p>The firehose is all public data going into the network right?<p>Isn&#x27;t that pretty tiny for a worldwide social network?<p>And the fact one country can cause a 10x surge in traffic also suggests its worldwide footprint must be tiny...
评论 #41639451 未加载
评论 #41639322 未加载
评论 #41639475 未加载
评论 #41639636 未加载
hinkley8 months ago
Given that “AT Protocol” already has a definition in IT that’s as old as OP’s grandma, what is this AT Protocol they are talking about here?<p>Introduce your jargon before expositing, please.
评论 #41638085 未加载
评论 #41637920 未加载
评论 #41638440 未加载
评论 #41644323 未加载
评论 #41639575 未加载
评论 #41639973 未加载
评论 #41639641 未加载
scirob8 months ago
Was expecting Nats Jetstream but this is also cool
评论 #41636290 未加载
评论 #41636259 未加载
ChicagoDave8 months ago
I&#x27;m just popping in here to say this (and BlueSky and atproto) are two of the coolest technical feats in today&#x27;s tech world.
JoshMandel8 months ago
Server-Sent Events (SSE) with standard gzip compression could be a simpler solution -- or maybe I&#x27;m missing something about the websocket + zstd approach.<p>SSE Benefits: Standard HTTP protocol, Built-in gzip compression, Simpler client implementation
评论 #41636090 未加载
评论 #41636107 未加载
bcrl8 months ago
I find it baffling that the difference in cost of serving 41GB&#x2F;day vs 232GB&#x2F;day is worth spending any dev time on. We&#x27;re talking about a whopping 21.4Mbps on average, which costs me roughly CAD$3.76&#x2F;month in transit (and my transit costs are about to be cut in half for 2 x 10Gbps links thanks to contracts being up and the market being very competitive). 1 hour of dev time is upwards of 2 years of bandwidth usage at that rate.
评论 #41640574 未加载
评论 #41640209 未加载
评论 #41640386 未加载