Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Site Support & Announcements' started by FactionOne, Jun 30, 2009.
..and I was going to say exactly the same thing!
Log in or Sign up to hide this advert.
Great minds ....
We had a good giggle about this last night...
I was up in the clouds somewhere on Tuesday following our all-nighter doing the upgrade, and I received a text message from MB pointing the issue out - but being up in the clouds, I couldn't get my head around what I was looking at!
Anyway, a lot of the buttons are going to be tweaked or replaced to make them more appealing/easier to see and use. I'm just engrossed in another couple of issues which have a larger impact on user experience first, but keep your eyes peeled over the next few days...
Good effort lads, looks cool now.
I'm glad something was finally done about the old box, but i have to say i'm not particularly impressed with the performance of the new one...
For starters, the box is in the states, meaning instead of 20ms round trip to a UK datacentre your looking at an average of 120.
There are no longer the random errors the previous machine was having, but it still feels sluggish. I'm not sure if this entirely due to its geographic location, or if there are load issues with the server itself though?
What are the servers load averages?
How does its Outstanding IO queues look?
How does everyone else find the speed of the site?
I must admit I find it painfully slow compared to the old site, am I unique in this?
We're aware that performance of the site is rather low (particularly at peak times as you would expect).
Geography is one factor, but not actually one which is so siginificant. At the end of the day, folks all over the world hit sites outside their own country/continent all the time, and that doesn't guarantee poor performance. While pings are of course slower than to that of a UK based machine, they've never been terrible as far as I've seen, and when they've been a little slow, it hasn't been terribly slow.
Now we've got the facilities to monitor the server and traffic more closely, we've had quite a surprise - all you four-rings fanatics are gobbling up quite a resource (and of course we're more than happy for that to be the case), and certainly more than we had previously thought.
We've suffered a few 'crashes' since the upgrade, and we tracked the cause to scripts running during peak periods 'pushing us over the edge' - that's been sorted, so reliability should be improved.
We're no longer seeing huge spikes in server load, but there are certainly quite steep curves at certain parts of the day. Connections were surpassing limits in the lunchtime rush, which is when we were suffering the most. That's been resolved now, so again, reliability should be improved, and performance should take a little lift too.
My spare 'tinkering time' has been taken up sorting out the email issues we've had, now that's resolved I'll have more time to continue investigation/resolution work on performance issues.
Thanks for your patience,
Cool, emails are working great now, just as you say performance is tad slow, at least it works now which is a drastic improvement albeit slow at times but I'm sure this will improve as time goes on.
The last couple of evenings this forum has been painfully slow, I know it's peak time etc but my other sites have been ok.
Is it just me?
No its slow tbh & has been since upgrade, but robs working on IIRC, had few database errors & thats usually also associated with the slowness aswell, would be nice to get it upto speed, but having used ED38 today thats unreal slow aswell so used to it now lol.
I'm finding a lot of sites slow, it's the amount of traffic going through the information highway isn't it? All this faster broadband speed is nullified with the amount of data we need to open a page compared to 5 years ago!
jojo: Not so much.
If the website your accessing has enough resources, and the broadband connection you have is actually good (read: not provided by BT) then things should be speedy.
The site is better for sure, but it does still feel like somethings holding it back. Either the disks arent fast enough, it doesnt have enough ram, or the CPU's are sitting at 100% during peak times. Its quite surprising just how huge a site like this can be, but i'm a bit confused why the new server has been speced so close to the limits.
Surely you had the specs of the old box, and would have baught something that was a LOT faster than it to give you a nice bit of headroom. It seems that instead you've got something thats only just a little faster, which seems to make the whole move pointless, especially if you plan for the site to grow at all?
The cost difference between say a entry level dual core CPU, and a tasty quad core Opteron/Xeon isnt really all that great, when you consider the overall expense of a dedicated machine.
It's ridiculously slow tonight, virtually unusable at times
the server is well specced but we encounter up to 30GB a day traffic so it hits hard. The discs are not the fastest, so Rob is still optomising things as we type
It's all Greek to me mate! I'm just offering feedback though, not criticism :thumbsup: