> the C10k challenge is solved since a long time

This has nothing to do with that.

Any Node.JS application will happily accept 100K connections. They'll all wait for the under-resourced database behind it. That application "solved" the C10K challenge, but it's still overwhelmed.

> it might be possible that the "LLM agent" is requesting the commit contents to "understand" or refer or explain them. Is it a bad thing if it helps users?

The article describes random algorithmically-generated traffic arriving in batched waves from laundered residential proxy IP addresses, a few unrelated hits in a group then gone. That's not the pattern you'd see if end users were asking their agents for help.

> it is a shame that such talented people would not be able to have a proper optimization

It's mostly not static content in the sense that you're implying.

Routes that access a single commit can be cached. But most of the routes scrapers are hitting are e.g. computing diffs between arbitrary pairs of commits, or other computed-on-the-fly views into history.

I'm sure they're already caching their useful-to-real-humans data. As the article said, the vast majority of their traffic is bots hitting those arbitrary, permuted URLs. So whatever cache they're using is probably a) missed almost every time, and b) constantly getting evicted to make room for data served to bots (unless they eschew caching to avoid this--fair--and are thus back to the original issue regardless).

There is no "proper optimization" here. It's not slow to go compute the diff between a random pair of refs, render that into pretty HTML, and serve it. But it costs something more than a cache hit, and doing that dozens-to-hundreds of times a second constantly consumes resources.