It sounds a lot, but it's actually averages at only one post every ten to fifteen minutes (depending on if/how much you exclude for sleeping).

So it's definitely believable when you look at it that way.

None of the stuff in the couple of days between the claimed "power failure" and the backup restoration would have been counted, only the stuff before and after.
And as above, it's not as much as you think when you work out the stats.


I've been having slow loading times, but my ISP is shit and I usually have slow loading, so it's hard to notice any difference. :(

A quick look at the server doesn't show anything immediately obvious... except that Swap is listed as 0k in use and 0k free... that doesn't seem right? :S

What's the deal with the swap space then?

It's not normal to be all zeroed is it?

I didn't figure they were, I was just being a dumbass.

 

I can't think that 0 swap is how it should be, but I dunno. It's very hard to compare this to other forums (like mine) because the traffic is much greater here and the database has to be 50X bigger than mine. But I don't know if it's a SQL lag I'm seeing or the actual serving of the pages.

This forum is a demographic timebomb!!

suzanne arundale gets quite a few mentions in all the search lists

Swap is slow and nasty. I don't know why it's been disabled though, certainly wasn't me. As long as we don't hit our memory limit that should be OK.

Ken's load times are probably to do with the location of the server rather than it's current performance. It's quite reasonable for me, I guess my ISP's routing to where-ever-the-fuck-the-server-is-this-month-istan is quite good, as I'm generally seeing no problems.

Aye, s'been good for me lately too.

This has probably already been discussed, and I don't know how beneficial it would be anyway, but....

 

would it be possible to have an 'archive' feature which the forum admin could run whenever, that would take out messages/threads that have been inactive for a given length of time and put them into a flat HTML file to save space/load/complexity on the database?

 

You [by which I mean the beehive devs (by which I mean you :$ )] could set the database to redirect the message numbers to the flat-file with # tags or whatever, and it'd probably be relatively simple to preserve the ability to reply directly to the individual messages too.

Archived posts as HTML files (compare a message's text to the HTML and CSS needed to display it) are probably not that much smaller than the data stored in the database, unless of course the flat files get compressed and then they arguably have a greater impact on the server.

Flat files are harder to index, prone to corruption much more than a database, harder to manage, can't be searched, etc.

So um, no :)

Oh :(

 

But but but.

 

The old stuff is hardly ever looked at, so could be hived off into a seperate folder structure freeing up databse resources for the active content. Wouldn't that help general speed issues/server requirements?

 

And you could integrate a seperate 'search the archive' shit with a custom google search thing or something.

 

I'll shut up now :(

Sounds like a great idea to me too. Take that as I have no idea what the fuck I'm talking about though.

 

Matt is probably right, my bits flow under the ocean and the stoopid ass fish are probably eating the lines or something. I know something is going on because it's very slow. Probably a jive ass sea monster.

Fucking Norwals are at it again!

tbh, I'd just delete most of the old stuff

maybe that could be an admin thing?
say, any thread which hasn't been read for a year is marked for deletion and is deleted a month later unless someone marks it for keeping

I know I'd mark everything for keeps :$

why?

some just don't need to be kept

evidence ~ thread 2

Ken,

Can you try pinging tehforum.co.uk a large number of times (in excess of 100, say) and see if you get any packet loss?

I'm betting the problems you're seeing is due to the wet string between the US and Europe or maybe your ISPs routing partnership(s). I only say that as the server is pretty much idle at the moment, so you shouldn't be seeing any problems like the attached.

Seems much better atm. When I notice it acting funky again I will do that and post the results.

 

I wouldn't get to worried about it on your end. If everyone is seeing good results it can't be you. I can put up with it being slow.

To be fair it has been intermittently slow today for me.

 

Want me to ping the shit out of the server?

Only if you're seeing the same error as Ken, with connection resets etc.