Since FeedLounge is a bootstrapped operation, we wanted to make sure we could deliver what we promised. This meant being conservative to start, in several areas. One of these was our feed refresh schedule.
Though we are already trying a faster schedule, we are also trying to think of other ways to be bandwidth friendly, yet attempt to provide the best possible service to our users. Oh, the conflict.
One option we’re looking at is to reward content that is naturally bandwidth friendly.
If a feed serves up 304 Not Modified HTTP response when there is nothing new (saving bandwidth on both ends and processing time for FeedLounge), FeedLounge could reward the subscribers of that feed by updating that feed more often.
Some examples:
- Let’s assume that this theoretical feed is about 20KB, and FeedLounge has decided to update it every 8 hours. In any given day, this feed may max out at about 62KB of bandwidth if it changed every time FeedLounge checked. If the feed does not respond with a 304, then FeedLounge has spent (wasted, really) 62KB of bandwidth for nothing. If the feed does report a 304, then the bandwidth per check is only ~1K.
- Assuming that a non-changing feed reports a 304 when asked by FeedLounge for content, we then have some room to spend bandwidth and gain faster content refreshes. In this latter example, let’s say that FeedLounge updated the schedule to check every 30 minutes. We are now talking about 50K per day in bandwidth, assuming no changes, and only 70KB if the feed changed once per day.
The result is that we could well be refreshing about ~60% of our feeds every 30 minutes. This is something we’ll likely be testing over the next couple of weeks - any initial thoughts?