I recently started showing images of my site on a cloud CDN instead of S3, thinking that it would be much faster. Is not. In fact, it is much slower. After much investigation, I hint that setting an expiration date on image objects is the key, as Cloudfront will know how long to store cached static content. Has the meaning. But this is poorly documented by AWS, and I cannot figure out how to change the expiration date. people said that “you can change this on the aws console” Please show how dumb I am because I don’t see it. he had several hours. Needless to say, I'm very upset about this. In any case, any hints that might be small would be awesome. I like AWS and what Cloudfront promised, but so far this is not what it seems.
EDIT MORE INFO: Added expiration date headers for each response. In my case, I had no headlines. My hypothesis was that my slow images working with the cloud were due to the lack of expiration in the header. By setting the expiration date, as shown in the screenshot and described in the answer, I do not see a noticeable difference in performance (switching from headers to adding only the expiration date). My site takes an average of 7 seconds to download 10 basic images (each of which is 60 Kbps). These 10 images (served across the cloud) account for 60-80% of the download waiting time, depending on the performance tool used. Obviously something is wrongbecause file service on my VPS is faster. I hate to conclude that cloud mode is a problem, given that so many people use it, and I wouldn’t like to interrupt with EC2 and S3, but now testing MAxCDN shows better results. I will be testing over the next 24 hours, but my conclusion is that the expiration date heading is just a confusing detail without any beneficial effect. I hope I'm wrong because I would like to keep all this in the AWS family. Perhaps I'm sneaking the wrong tree to the expiration date?I will be testing over the next 24 hours, but my conclusion is that the expiration date heading is just a confusing detail without any beneficial effect. I hope I'm wrong because I would like to keep all this in the AWS family. Perhaps I'm sneaking the wrong tree to the expiration date?I will be testing over the next 24 hours, but my conclusion is that the expiration date heading is just a confusing detail without any beneficial effect. I hope I'm wrong because I would like to keep all this in the AWS family. Perhaps I'm sneaking the wrong tree to the expiration date?