this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2026
574 points (98.5% liked)
Fediverse
44428 readers
1036 users here now
A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, Mbin, etc).
If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to !moderators@lemmy.world!
Rules
- Posts must be on topic.
- Be respectful of others.
- Cite the sources used for graphs and other statistics.
- Follow the general Lemmy.world rules.
Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration)
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
A slight delay would be perfectly sufficient.
If they're all delayed the same it would have the same effect. In order to prevent that it would require some form of coordination amongst them. And even then would have the same complaint about missing link previews. Better than nothing but not really a "solution", per se.
Random back off is an ancient and very well understood algorithm. This is not exactly rocket science.
No one said anything about random.
"Random back off" is the name of a technique to avoid this exact problem.
Each instance generates a random number of (say) seconds between (say 15 to 120) and schedules the fetch for then. It is extremely unlikely that any two instances select the same second.
Yes I understand. I just don't appreciate the demeaning tone this information was delivered in.
Nobody said the delay had to be fixed instead of random either…
Yes that's the problem...?
A delay randomized within a certain range could accomplish this without needing coordination.
Random numbers exist.
wait 3 //randomlydecidedby fair dice roll
Whoa!