www.paradiseroasters.com: passion for coffees of distinction and quality

Page timed out hassles when composing long posts - Page 4

Postby HB on Sun Oct 22, 2006 3:52 pm

Faster page loading wasn't our imagination. The chart below shows the average load time dropped suddenly in late September, right around the time that the site was moved to another server. At the time I didn't expect any performance improvement from this so-called "upgrade," but evidently it was the major contributor to zippier pages.

Image
Time spent downloading a page (in milliseconds), according to google's webmaster tools
Dan Kehn
User avatar
HB
 
Posts: 13170
Joined: Apr 29, 2005
Location: Cary, NC

Postby another_jim on Sun Oct 22, 2006 4:55 pm

Hope this lasts and isn't like a new road -- no traffic jams for the first 3 months, then back to normal.
User avatar
another_jim
Team HB
 
Posts: 7490
Joined: May 05, 2005
Location: Chicago

Postby HB on Sun Nov 26, 2006 12:14 pm

After weeks of blazing performance, I've noticed a distinct slowdown the last few days. Queries to my host provider yielded the usual "It looks fine from here." If you see consistently poor performance, please run tracert home-barista.com and post the results. The output will look something like this:
D:\>tracert home-barista.com

Tracing route to home-barista.com [316.129.48.91]
over a maximum of 30 hops:

  1     7 ms     5 ms     5 ms  16.48.0.1
  2     6 ms     7 ms     6 ms  gig2-4.rlghncj-rtr3.nc.rr.com [24.29.1.49]
  3     8 ms     6 ms     7 ms  srp5-0.rlghncg-rtr1.nc.rr.com [24.29.2.148]
  4     8 ms     9 ms     7 ms  pos1-1.rlghnca-rtr1.nc.rr.com [24.29.20.29]
  5     8 ms     7 ms     8 ms  pos14-0.rlghncrdc-rtr1.nc.rr.com [24.29.0.5]
  6     9 ms     8 ms     7 ms  son0-0-3.rlghncrdc-rtr3.nc.rr.com [24.93.64.34]
  7    17 ms    20 ms    18 ms  pop1-rdu-P3-2.atdn.net [67.185.134.157]
  8    20 ms    17 ms    18 ms  bb2-rdu-P0-0.atdn.net [67.185.134.146]
  9    17 ms    19 ms    19 ms  bb2-atm-P6-0.atdn.net [67.185.152.30]
 10    19 ms    18 ms    17 ms  pop2-atm-P5-0.atdn.net [67.185.138.43]
 11    17 ms    17 ms    17 ms  ATT-ATM.atdn.net [67.185.147.222]
 12    60 ms    59 ms    58 ms  tbr2032401.attga.ip.att.net [15.122.81.154]
 13    58 ms    59 ms    59 ms  tbr1-cl13.dlstx.ip.att.net [15.122.2.89]
 14    58 ms    73 ms    59 ms  tbr2-cl25.dlstx.ip.att.net [15.122.9.162]
 15    59 ms    60 ms    58 ms  tbr2-cl1592.phmaz.ip.att.net [15.122.10.82]
 16    56 ms    56 ms    58 ms  12.128.108.65
 17    57 ms    59 ms    58 ms  12.128.255.106
 18    58 ms    59 ms    58 ms  mdf001c7613r0003-gig-10-1.phx1.attens.net [63.249.130.170]
 19    84 ms    83 ms    85 ms  63.249.180.254
 20    84 ms    83 ms    83 ms  linhost241.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net [208.109.78.21]
 21    87 ms    83 ms    84 ms  linhost241.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net [208.109.78.21]

Trace complete.
Dan Kehn
User avatar
HB
 
Posts: 13170
Joined: Apr 29, 2005
Location: Cary, NC

Postby another_jim on Sun Nov 26, 2006 2:09 pm

I got indefinite hangups (more than a minute) earlier today; right now it's blazing fast again. I assume it was just a bunch of prize frenzies at it like on a Las Vegas slot farm.
User avatar
another_jim
Team HB
 
Posts: 7490
Joined: May 05, 2005
Location: Chicago

Postby HB on Mon Jan 15, 2007 7:40 pm

another_jim wrote:Hope this lasts and isn't like a new road -- no traffic jams for the first 3 months, then back to normal.

You said it first:

Image
Time spent downloading a page (in milliseconds), according to google's webmaster tools

That's exactly what has happened. There is more traffic than back in September, but I believe the added shared server load is at fault. According to whois records, there are over 1600 sites on this same server. That explains the uneven performance. A dedicated server is probably in the future, but they're unfortunately more expense and admin work. :roll:
Dan Kehn
User avatar
HB
 
Posts: 13170
Joined: Apr 29, 2005
Location: Cary, NC

Postby another_jim on Mon Jan 15, 2007 9:25 pm

HB wrote:You said it first:

That's exactly what has happened. There is more traffic than back in September, but I believe the added shared server load is at fault. According to whois records, there are over 1600 sites on this same server. That explains the uneven performance. A dedicated server is probably in the future, but they're unfortunately more expense and admin work. :roll:


:P I wonder when we'll see the first anti-development coalitions for the internet
User avatar
another_jim
Team HB
 
Posts: 7490
Joined: May 05, 2005
Location: Chicago

Previous

Return to News and Suggestion Box