Such speculation. When I said commons dosen't account for much I was including only traffic from users visiting "commons.wikimedia.org" not project images.
... And I was using numbers sourced from the squid logs, so caching isn't an issue. ;)
On 10/10/07, Platonides Platonides@gmail.com wrote:
David Gerard wrote:
On 09/10/2007, Gregory Maxwell wrote:
Wikimedia is reaching a point where increases in bandwidth usage *may* actually result in reductions the total bandwidth costs. I'm not too concerned there. Certainly, Commons itself isn't a major bandwidth user.
I'm surprised, given images are large. I suppose thumbnails would be counted against the wiki they're generated on.
I also was when i knew. Almost every image is cached on the squids. The thumbnails are per image, unique when the image is at commons.
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l