hyperknot

> GPT‑5.6 also introduces more predictable prompt caching, including support for explicit cache breakpoints (opens in a new window) and a 30-minute minimum cache life.

Great to read they are moving away from the 5 minute cache defaults. Hopefully other providers follow soon!

Add this to fix the contrast in all your dark themes:

  "experimental.theme_overrides": {
    "background": "#111",
    "panel.background": "#111",
    "text": "#eee",
    "text.muted": "#ccc",
    "title_bar.background": "#111",
    "tab_bar.background": "#111",
    "toolbar.background": "#111",
    "status_bar.background": "#111",
    "element.selected": "#333",
    "editor.background": "#000",
    "editor.gutter.background": "#000"
  }

Use a simple block rule, not a WAF rule, those are free.

Yes, wplace could solve their whole need by a single, custom-built static pmtile. No need to serve 150 GB of OSM data for their use-case.

You are correct. I was putting "a caching server on their side" in the context of their side being a single dev hobby project running on a VPS, exploding on the weekend. I agree that these servers do exist and some companies do pay for this bandwidth as part of their normal operations.

I'm sure the server hardware is not a problem. The full dataset is 150 GB and the server has 64 GB RAM, most of which will be never requested. So I'm sure that the used tiles would actually get served from OS cache. If not, it's on a RAID 0 NVME SSD, connected locally.

What I've been referring to is the fact that even unlimited 1 Gbps connections can be quite expensive, now try to find a 2x40 gig connection for a reasonable money. That one user generated 200 TB in 24 hours! I have no idea about bandwidth pricing, but I bet it ain't cheap to serve that.

OK, technically there might exist such server, I guess Netflix and friends are using those. But we are talking about a community supported, free service here. Hetzner servers are my only options, because of their unmetered bandwidth.

They are actually static files. There is just too many of them, about 300 million. You cannot put that in Pages.

Yes, that's a good idea. But we are talking about 90+% of the titles being empty (I might be wrong on that), that's a lot of hard links. I think the nginx config just need to be fixed, I hope I'll receive some help on their forum.

We are talking about an insane amount of data here. It was 56 Gbit/s (or 56 x 1 Gbit servers 100% saturated!). This is not something a "caching server" could handle. We are talking on the order of CDN networks, like Cloudflare, to be able to handle this.

What if one user really wants to browse around the world and explore the map. I remember spending half an hour in Google Earth desktop, just exploring around interesting places.

I think referer based limits are better, this way I can ask high users to please choose self-hosting instead of the public instance.