View Full Version : Forums sluggish
P5-133XL
03-24-2003, 02:02 AM
Past few days, the forums seem out right slow. Is there a cause?
Handruin
03-24-2003, 07:56 AM
I've been working on it, I have a support ticket open and I'm trying to figure out this issue. I'm not sure what the cause it us yet, but it has been driving me nuts.
Handruin
03-24-2003, 08:06 AM
What time have you noticed a performance issue? I've been seeing a big problem around 12:30 am to 2:00am -5 GMT. I'm not awake much after 2:00 so I can't tell how the speed is.
I noticed this happeneind the past few days so I've been complaining to the support. I think it has to due with their backup method or something.
I've been noticing load averages such as: load average: 17.63, 13.60, 9.99 on this linux box at times. I don't know how this is in comparision to normal linux machines.
Mercutio
03-24-2003, 09:23 AM
Lower loads are better. A load of about 1 is ideal. Someone you're sharing your box with is creating lots of processes and generally not being a very good neighbor.
P5-133XL
03-25-2003, 01:00 AM
I don't think it is particularly time sensative. It appears at any time.
timwhit
03-25-2003, 02:18 AM
Like right now it is unbearably slow.
blakerwry
03-25-2003, 02:18 AM
yes, it was particularly sluggish this afternoon and then suddenly cleared up.. but alas, it is again slow like the molasses at the bottom of an empty molasses jar... that once contained molasses....
molasses....
Handruin
03-25-2003, 07:11 PM
The high load averages I posted occur late at night and it's because of their backup. They copy one hard drive to another as far as I can tell using rsynch. (I think that's what I saw)
I've been eyeing up an unmanaged dedicated host at rack shack (http://rackshack.net/english/index.asp) (also here (http://rackshack.net/english/amd.asp)) for $99 per month, but the cost is too high at the moment for me. I don't have enough to offset that monthly bill.
Does this site slow down every day at some point as a few of you mentioned? I didn't get a chance to check this afternoon, so I didn't notice.
I know that support is focused right now on another serious issue with a host that has been hacked twice now. They moved everyone off the host and basically reinstalled Linux. The hacked broke in the first time through a kernel exploit on the same day it was found by the public. He then left some type of root kit to gain access at a later date. So they decided to clean the host to remove the possibility of that happening again.
With that said, they haven’t spent much time helping me with the nightly load issue on this site. I’m guessing this server has 40-50 users because everyone on this server is a reseller such as myself. At some point the line has to be drawn were no more clients can have accounts, but where that line is isn’t clear.
Howell
03-25-2003, 07:32 PM
I wonder if they have done something dumb like place both of the drives on the same IDE controller.
SteveC
03-26-2003, 02:30 AM
It's extremely slow right now (around 2:30AM EST), taking a couple of minutes to load a single page.
Handruin
03-26-2003, 08:31 AM
Thanks for the feedback SteveC, I'll let them know the problem still hasn't been fixed.
CityK
03-27-2003, 12:18 AM
Doug,
Off Topic: Love the new theme.
On Topic: 12:13AM EST.....forum...crawling...Must finish...post ....before its too lat.........................
Mercutio
03-27-2003, 12:53 AM
SF is slow? Really? It's just like it always is on my 19.2 aggregate connection...
No, seriously, I'm getting TONS of "the site you're attempting is not responding" messages from Moz, and it's deeply annoying.
P5-133XL
03-27-2003, 01:45 AM
10:45 Pacific - Slow
blakerwry
03-27-2003, 04:07 AM
I got a couple DNS errors inbetween posts in IE.. the site was obvisouly being resolved into an IP, however it didn't appear that the server was responding with anything.
When the site's slow a ICMP ping always returns quite fast (~50ms) It's obviously not network related, simply too much going on in the server I guess.
P5-133XL
03-27-2003, 04:52 AM
1:52am Forums are fast
blakerwry
03-27-2003, 05:35 AM
should you really post the time in PST? the times are automatically posted next to each post with a standard based on GMT.
I concurr, the forums are now zipping right along.
Handruin
03-27-2003, 08:03 AM
Can I ask you guys for a little more help. When the forum is running really slow, can you run a tracert.
Can you then copy and past that information for me the next time it happens? XXX out your IP, or if privacy is an issue, don't worry about posting this. If you'd rather not post that info, but would like to help, please send it to me by PM. (if no one wants to I completely understand)
I'm going to do the same thing, but I'm not always awake when the site slows down. (last night for example)
The support for the site has asked me for this information. I'll provide them with mine, but I'd also like to include other people's tracert's if available.
Thanks for the info so far.
SteveC
03-27-2003, 10:51 AM
Here is my tracert from when it's running fast. I'll be sure to post my results from when it's running slow (probably late tonight).
Tracing route to storageforum.net [207.99.69.2]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 192.168.0.3
2 7 ms 7 ms 7 ms 10.104.192.1
3 9 ms 9 ms 14 ms dstswr2-vlan2.rh.cftnnj.cv.net [67.83.244.34]
4 10 ms 9 ms 10 ms r4-ge9-1.mhe.prnynj.cv.net [67.83.244.5]
5 10 ms 12 ms 9 ms ool-4353ef32.dyn.optonline.net [67.83.239.50]
6 11 ms 11 ms 12 ms r1-srp5-0.wan.hcvlny.cv.net [167.206.12.145]
7 12 ms 10 ms 11 ms r2-srp13-0.cr.hcvlny.cv.net [167.206.12.100]
8 29 ms 11 ms 11 ms r2-srp5-0.in.hcvlny.cv.net [167.206.12.2]
9 12 ms 11 ms 11 ms gi4-1.msfc1.tlw.nac.net [167.206.16.130]
10 14 ms 12 ms 14 ms gi4-5.msfc1.nyc.nac.net [209.123.11.229]
11 14 ms 15 ms 12 ms 0094.ge-3-0-0.gbr2.nyc.nac.net [64.21.102.13]
12 22 ms 14 ms 14 ms 1194.at-0-0-0.gbr1.oct.nac.net [209.123.11.10]
13 19 ms 15 ms 14 ms 0095.gi-1-1.msfc1.oct.nac.net [64.21.102.2]
14 16 ms 16 ms 15 ms fa0-0.core1.pwebtech.com [207.99.8.197]
15 16 ms 15 ms 18 ms 207.99.69.2
Trace complete.
I tried to post in the Computer forum, and got a "Page cannot be found" after I hit the submit button. Same thing happened last night, about 9:30 pm PST.
Tracing route to storageforum.net [207.99.69.2]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 <10 ms <10 ms <10 ms 192.168.2.1
2 15 ms 16 ms 16 ms adsl-67-122-167-252.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net [67.122.167.252]
3 16 ms 15 ms 16 ms dist1-vlan60.lsan03.pbi.net [216.102.181.1]
4 16 ms 16 ms 15 ms bb1-g2-1.lsan03.pbi.net [67.116.100.65]
5 15 ms 16 ms 16 ms bb1-p12-0.eqlaca.sbcglobal.net [67.116.100.38]
6 16 ms 31 ms 16 ms lax1-br1-g4-1.gnaps.net [206.223.123.41]
7 16 ms 31 ms 31 ms 199.232.44.6
8 62 ms 78 ms 78 ms chi2-br1-p2-0.gnaps.net [199.232.44.1]
9 94 ms 94 ms 93 ms qcy1-avici1-p1-16-1.gnaps.net [199.232.42.97]
10 94 ms 109 ms 109 ms 199.232.44.25
11 109 ms 94 ms 93 ms 199.232.44.22
12 93 ms 110 ms 109 ms 0504.ge-0-0-0.gbr1.ash.nac.net [209.123.24.173]
13 109 ms 125 ms 110 ms 0195.at-0-1-0.gbr1.oct.nac.net [209.123.11.138]
14 110 ms 109 ms 125 ms 0095.gi-1-1.msfc1.oct.nac.net [64.21.102.2]
15 171 ms 125 ms 110 ms fa0-0.core1.pwebtech.com [207.99.8.198]
16 109 ms 125 ms 110 ms 207.99.69.2
Trace complete.
I'm on ADSL (1500 down / 128 up).
blakerwry
03-27-2003, 03:33 PM
Can I ask you guys for a little more help. When the forum is running really slow, can you run a tracert.
Can you then copy and past that information for me the next time it happens? XXX out your IP, or if privacy is an issue, don't worry about posting this. If you'd rather not post that info, but would like to help, please send it to me by PM. (if no one wants to I completely understand)
I'm going to do the same thing, but I'm not always awake when the site slows down. (last night for example)
The support for the site has asked me for this information. I'll provide them with mine, but I'd also like to include other people's tracert's if available.
Thanks for the info so far.
handruin, goto http://www.visualware.com/visualroute/livedemo.html you can selecct from any of the 16 servers located around the globe and do visual traces to the site originating from the visualroute server you're connected to... it's truely neat.
in any event, as you may know by now it's probably not a network issue(i havent tried really large ping sizes yet though)... it's probably a server load issue...
blakerwry
03-27-2003, 03:34 PM
just have them bump storageforum.net to realtime priority right?
Handruin
03-27-2003, 11:03 PM
They can't bump us to realtime priority. :)
Right now the forums seem to be running good. How's it everywhere else?
Handruin
03-27-2003, 11:04 PM
This is what I have so far:
Tracing route to storageforum.net [207.99.69.2]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 19 ms 38 ms 11 ms 10.195.0.1
2 36 ms 13 ms 28 ms rtr01-bgp.townisp.com [216.195.0.17]
3 13 ms 10 ms 10 ms 12.125.39.25
4 10 ms 9 ms 10 ms gbr2-p70.cb1ma.ip.att.net [12.123.40.102]
5 14 ms 11 ms 14 ms tbr1-p013701.cb1ma.ip.att.net [12.122.11.197]
6 24 ms 36 ms 18 ms tbr2-p013701.n54ny.ip.att.net [12.122.10.22]
7 20 ms 18 ms 18 ms gar1-p340.nwrnj.ip.att.net [12.123.214.185]
8 16 ms 19 ms 15 ms att.ge-0-0-0.gbr1.nwr.nac.net [12.119.140.30]
9 22 ms 19 ms 19 ms 1189.at-0-1-0.gbr1.oct.nac.net [209.123.11.69]
10 28 ms 19 ms 20 ms 0095.gi-1-1.msfc1.oct.nac.net [64.21.102.2]
11 82 ms 19 ms 22 ms fa0-0.core1.pwebtech.com [207.99.8.198]
12 27 ms 22 ms 23 ms 207.99.69.2
Trace complete.
Howell
03-27-2003, 11:29 PM
It got laggy on me there for a second.
1 <10 ms 15 ms <10 ms smoothwall [192.168.0.1]
2 16 ms <10 ms 16 ms adsl-34-154-1.cha.bellsouth.net [67.34.154.1]
3 <10 ms 15 ms 16 ms 209.215.10.1
4 16 ms <10 ms 16 ms 205.152.151.248
5 31 ms 31 ms 32 ms axr00asm-7-0-0-2.bellsouth.net [65.83.237.28]
6 31 ms 31 ms 32 ms pxr00asm-0-0-0.bellsouth.net [65.83.236.0]
7 32 ms 31 ms 31 ms 0.so-0-0-0.GW13.ATL5.ALTER.NET [157.130.73.97]
8 47 ms 31 ms 31 ms 0.so-0-1-0.XL2.ATL5.ALTER.NET [152.63.84.102]
9 32 ms 47 ms 31 ms POS7-0.BR2.ATL5.ALTER.NET [152.63.82.193]
10 32 ms 32 ms 31 ms 204.255.174.150
11 32 ms 31 ms 31 ms tbr1-p012402.attga.ip.att.net [12.122.12.29]
12 47 ms 47 ms 47 ms tbr2-p013801.wswdc.ip.att.net [12.122.10.69]
13 * * * Request timed out.
14 62 ms 47 ms 63 ms tbr1-p012201.n54ny.ip.att.net [12.122.10.17]
15 62 ms 47 ms 62 ms gar1-p3100.nwrnj.ip.att.net [12.123.214.181]
16 47 ms 47 ms 62 ms att.ge-0-0-0.gbr1.nwr.nac.net [12.119.140.30]
17 62 ms 47 ms 63 ms 1189.at-0-1-0.gbr1.oct.nac.net [209.123.11.69]
18 78 ms 78 ms 63 ms 0095.gi-1-1.msfc1.oct.nac.net [64.21.102.2]
19 47 ms 62 ms 63 ms fa0-0.core1.pwebtech.com [207.99.8.198]
20 47 ms 63 ms 62 ms 207.99.69.2
Trace complete.
Howell
03-27-2003, 11:30 PM
Otherwise I've had no problems on any day.
Handruin
03-27-2003, 11:57 PM
I've setup a tracert task to run every ten minutes from my machine all night long. Can you guys let me know what time the site slows down if at all.
I have to get some sleep so I won't be able to tell what time it happens. Once I hear what time this happens, I can then give them the tracert from that time.
SteveC
03-28-2003, 01:17 AM
No problems so far tonight. Like all computer gremlins, it won't show up when you're ready for it. :)
Handruin
03-28-2003, 01:23 AM
I noticed a major slow down a couple times but it only laster for a minute or two. Figures it won't show up when I'm ready. :) Ah well, it's way later than I meant to be up.
Handruin
03-28-2003, 01:38 AM
We just went through a weird phase for about 10 minutes I couldn't get the page to load.... I submitted this as an issue.
Handruin
03-28-2003, 01:41 AM
Arg...now the site is insanely fast for me...WTH.
blakerwry
03-28-2003, 01:53 AM
The site's a little slower than it should be(slower than earlier) since I got on about 5-10 minutes ago... but i haven't gotten any errors.
Tracing route to storageforum.net [207.99.69.2]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 192.168.0.100
2 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms 10.62.16.1
3 10 ms 7 ms 7 ms pos6-1.kscyksgibb-rtr1.kc.rr.com [24.94.161.137]
4 8 ms 10 ms 9 ms pos1-0.lvwoksleav-rtr1.kc.rr.com [24.94.161.25]
5 9 ms 9 ms 10 ms pos1-0.kscymonort-rtr1.kc.rr.com [24.94.161.21]
6 9 ms 10 ms 11 ms pos6-0.kscymordc-rtr1.kc.rr.com [24.94.161.17]
7 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms srp14-0.kscymordc-rtr3.kc.rr.com [24.94.160.193]
8 10 ms 11 ms 9 ms srp14-0.kscymordc-rtr4.kc.rr.com [24.94.160.194]
9 61 ms 121 ms 10 ms pop1-kcy-P3-0.atdn.net [66.185.137.237]
10 14 ms 11 ms 11 ms bb1-kcy-P0-0.atdn.net [66.185.137.224]
11 24 ms 24 ms 24 ms bb1-chi-P6-0.atdn.net [66.185.152.124]
12 25 ms 23 ms 23 ms bb2-chi-P7-0.atdn.net [66.185.152.131]
13 43 ms 43 ms 43 ms bb2-vie-P10-0.atdn.net [66.185.152.215]
14 46 ms 43 ms 44 ms bb2-ash-P15-2.atdn.net [66.185.152.20]
15 44 ms 44 ms 44 ms pop2-ash-P1-0.atdn.net [66.185.139.211]
16 49 ms 49 ms 50 ms NetAccess.atdn.net [66.185.151.158]
17 52 ms 51 ms 62 ms 0195.at-0-1-0.gbr1.oct.nac.net [209.123.11.138]
18 50 ms 52 ms 51 ms 0095.gi-1-1.msfc1.oct.nac.net [64.21.102.2]
19 51 ms 52 ms 52 ms fa0-0.core1.pwebtech.com [207.99.8.198]
20 52 ms 52 ms 52 ms 207.99.69.2
Trace complete.
blakerwry
03-28-2003, 02:10 AM
I take that back, it's ass slow now.. pages are taking very long to load.. but it seems to vary( I timed opening the home page... took just under 4 minutes... next link took about 10 seconds.. next too something like 1 minute)... still not getting errors in IE though.
Pinging storageforum.net [207.99.69.2] with 3000 bytes of data:
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=3000 time=131ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=3000 time=132ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=3000 time=130ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=3000 time=131ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=3000 time=139ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=3000 time=136ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=3000 time=134ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=3000 time=134ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=3000 time=133ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=3000 time=131ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=3000 time=129ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=3000 time=139ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=3000 time=138ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=3000 time=137ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=3000 time=126ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=3000 time=125ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=3000 time=114ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=3000 time=112ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=3000 time=89ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=3000 time=130ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=3000 time=138ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=3000 time=136ms TTL=47
Ping statistics for 207.99.69.2:
Packets: Sent = 39, Received = 39, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 89ms, Maximum = 140ms, Average = 127ms
Control-C
^C
C:\Documents and Settings\blakerwry>ping storageforum.net -l 1000 -t
Pinging storageforum.net [207.99.69.2] with 1000 bytes of data:
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=1000 time=58ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=1000 time=58ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=1000 time=59ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=1000 time=59ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=1000 time=61ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=1000 time=57ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=1000 time=57ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=1000 time=61ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=1000 time=58ms TTL=47
Ping statistics for 207.99.69.2:
Packets: Sent = 9, Received = 9, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 57ms, Maximum = 61ms, Average = 58ms
Control-C
^C
C:\Documents and Settings\blakerwry>ping storageforum.net -l 2000 -t
Pinging storageforum.net [207.99.69.2] with 2000 bytes of data:
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=2000 time=100ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=2000 time=107ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=2000 time=77ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=2000 time=105ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=2000 time=103ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=2000 time=112ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=2000 time=102ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=2000 time=91ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=2000 time=88ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=2000 time=107ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=2000 time=107ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=2000 time=106ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=2000 time=102ms TTL=47
Reply from 207.99.69.2: bytes=2000 time=102ms TTL=47
Ping statistics for 207.99.69.2:
Packets: Sent = 14, Received = 14, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 77ms, Maximum = 112ms, Average = 100ms
Tracing route to storageforum.net [207.99.69.2]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 192.168.0.100
2 8 ms 9 ms 7 ms 10.62.16.1
3 9 ms 9 ms 10 ms pos6-1.kscyksgibb-rtr1.kc.rr.com [24.94.161.137]
4 10 ms 8 ms 9 ms pos1-0.lvwoksleav-rtr1.kc.rr.com [24.94.161.25]
5 10 ms 10 ms 9 ms pos1-0.kscymonort-rtr1.kc.rr.com [24.94.161.21]
6 17 ms 10 ms 11 ms pos6-0.kscymordc-rtr1.kc.rr.com [24.94.161.17]
7 11 ms 10 ms 11 ms srp14-0.kscymordc-rtr3.kc.rr.com [24.94.160.193]
8 9 ms 9 ms 9 ms srp14-0.kscymordc-rtr4.kc.rr.com [24.94.160.194]
9 10 ms 14 ms 58 ms pop1-kcy-P3-0.atdn.net [66.185.137.237]
10 83 ms 11 ms 11 ms bb1-kcy-P0-0.atdn.net [66.185.137.224]
11 24 ms 23 ms 23 ms bb1-chi-P6-0.atdn.net [66.185.152.124]
12 24 ms 25 ms 24 ms bb2-chi-P7-0.atdn.net [66.185.152.131]
13 43 ms 43 ms 43 ms bb2-vie-P10-0.atdn.net [66.185.152.215]
14 43 ms 43 ms 44 ms bb2-ash-P15-2.atdn.net [66.185.152.20]
15 44 ms 44 ms 43 ms pop2-ash-P1-0.atdn.net [66.185.139.211]
16 51 ms 49 ms 50 ms NetAccess.atdn.net [66.185.151.158]
17 50 ms 49 ms 50 ms 0195.at-0-1-0.gbr1.oct.nac.net [209.123.11.138]
18 50 ms 58 ms 87 ms 0095.gi-1-1.msfc1.oct.nac.net [64.21.102.2]
19 51 ms 52 ms 52 ms fa0-0.core1.pwebtech.com [207.99.8.198]
20 52 ms 51 ms 52 ms 207.99.69.2
Trace complete.
Definately not a network issue.
blakerwry
03-28-2003, 02:27 AM
Even going to the site http://swordfish.dnsvelocity.com is rather slow considering the ping and the content of the page...
However, telnetting to port 80 and typing: "get asdfjk" promptly results in a 404 error...
It seems your server is just under too much CPU or disk load... my guess is disk... perhaps the SQL server needs reindexed or whatever it's called to optimize the database.
P5-133XL
03-28-2003, 02:33 AM
Here is a tracert when the forums are very bad. From Salem OR over a cable modem (Comcast network)
Tracing route to storageforum.net [207.99.69.2]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 10 ms 20 ms 10 ms 10.140.192.1
2 10 ms 10 ms 10 ms 12.244.84.129
3 10 ms 10 ms 10 ms 12.244.64.230
4 20 ms 20 ms 10 ms 12.244.72.34
5 10 ms 20 ms 20 ms gbr2-p70.st6wa.ip.att.net [12.123.44.61]
6 10 ms 20 ms 20 ms gbr4-p80.st6wa.ip.att.net [12.122.5.169]
7 60 ms 100 ms 60 ms gbr4-p20.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.2.53]
8 51 ms 60 ms 50 ms tbr1-p012501.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.9.133]
9 90 ms 90 ms 80 ms tbr1-p013601.n54ny.ip.att.net [12.122.10.57]
10 80 ms 80 ms 80 ms gar1-p3100.nwrnj.ip.att.net [12.123.214.181]
11 81 ms 90 ms 80 ms att.ge-0-0-0.gbr1.nwr.nac.net [12.119.140.30]
12 80 ms 80 ms 80 ms 1189.at-0-1-0.gbr1.oct.nac.net [209.123.11.69]
13 80 ms 80 ms 80 ms 0095.gi-1-1.msfc1.oct.nac.net [64.21.102.2]
14 111 ms 80 ms 140 ms fa0-0.core1.pwebtech.com [207.99.8.198]
15 80 ms 80 ms 81 ms 207.99.69.2
Trace complete.
SteveC
03-28-2003, 02:39 AM
Here are my results for when it's slow, from about 15 miles east of where they are located.
Tracing route to storageforum.net [207.99.69.2]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 192.168.0.3
2 8 ms 8 ms 9 ms 10.104.192.1
3 8 ms 8 ms 7 ms dstswr2-vlan2.rh.cftnnj.cv.net [67.83.244.34]
4 7 ms 8 ms 7 ms r4-ge9-1.mhe.prnynj.cv.net [67.83.244.5]
5 9 ms 10 ms 8 ms ool-4353ef32.dyn.optonline.net [67.83.239.50]
6 12 ms 11 ms 13 ms r1-srp5-0.wan.hcvlny.cv.net [167.206.12.145]
7 12 ms 11 ms 11 ms r2-srp13-0.cr.hcvlny.cv.net [167.206.12.100]
8 10 ms 11 ms 13 ms r2-srp5-0.in.hcvlny.cv.net [167.206.12.2]
9 12 ms 11 ms 11 ms gi4-1.msfc1.tlw.nac.net [167.206.16.130]
10 12 ms 13 ms 13 ms gi4-5.msfc1.nyc.nac.net [209.123.11.229]
11 13 ms 13 ms 11 ms 0094.ge-3-0-0.gbr2.nyc.nac.net [64.21.102.13]
12 13 ms 13 ms 13 ms 1194.at-0-0-0.gbr1.oct.nac.net [209.123.11.10]
13 14 ms 15 ms 15 ms 0095.gi-1-1.msfc1.oct.nac.net [64.21.102.2]
14 15 ms 15 ms 15 ms fa0-0.core1.pwebtech.com [207.99.8.197]
15 14 ms 16 ms 15 ms 207.99.69.2
Trace complete.
Time to get some sleep, now.
blakerwry
03-28-2003, 04:26 AM
forums are fast now... :zzz:
Handruin
03-28-2003, 06:41 PM
I was told they recompiled apache on the server today. I don't know what that means, but the forum seems faster now.
How's it been running today? I checked in around noon EST and it seemed fine. I peaked through my tracert collection from last night and I only see once instance of high pings. It was probably a router somewhere along the line.
Howell
03-28-2003, 07:15 PM
I was told they recompiled apache on the server today. I don't know what that means, but the forum seems faster now.
It means they rebuilt the program (apache) from source code into binaries instead of using prebuilt binaries. Theoretically, you can optimize the binaries for your particular hardware this way. Realisticly, unless they are using some pretty esoteric hardware it may not help much. It's a place to start though.
Can you monitor server load through the NA night? Maybe with a cron job.
Handruin
03-29-2003, 03:04 AM
Well, whatever it is they did, the server is now running around a .90 and 1.2 load average which is much lower than it used to be.
How was the performace tonight? Overall the forums feel snappier to me, then in the past.
blakerwry
03-29-2003, 05:49 AM
yeah, forums feel good... however, as I posted earlier, the server was responding fine(to me anyway) ... it was just when it had to load content that it got bogged down...
recompiling is a start... and hopefully when they recompiled they reinstalled most of the server settings and only included what they needed when they put everything back (this would hopefully clear up any misconfigurations that were slowing the server down)
I'm not sure what all packages apache comes with, but recompiling some of them might give a slight performance boost, and reinstalling them from scratch could easily fix an infinite number of problems.
Whether this is *the* fix for us is yet to be seen. Hopefully it is.
SteveC
03-30-2003, 02:55 AM
The site was just completely down for about 20 minutes.
Handruin
03-30-2003, 03:10 AM
I feel bad for all the dialup members. :( I submitted another ticket for the speed of the site. Seems to be rediculously slow right now and for the most part the site has been pokey tonight.
I don't know what is causing this. Last night the site was screaming on my end, now tonight it's a turtle. The load averages have gone back up into a constant 4 to 4 range. Last I checked it says this:
7:23am up 1 day, 22:58, 1 user, load average: 18.83, 15.77, 12.64
272 processes: 269 sleeping, 1 running, 0 zombie, 2 stopped
CPU0 states: 6.4% user, 3.3% system, 0.2% nice, 90.0% idle
CPU1 states: 5.2% user, 12.1% system, 0.1% nice, 82.0% idle
Mem: 1030556K av, 1019120K used, 11436K free, 0K shrd, 9880K buff
Swap: 522072K av, 398852K used, 123220K free 294536K cached
PID USER PRI NI SIZE RSS SHARE STAT %CPU %MEM TIME COMMAND
29288 named 16 0 110M 107M 1848 S 4.8 10.7 31:26 named
31678 handruin 16 0 1060 1060 716 R 3.2 0.1 0:10 top
31983 nobody 15 0 19380 11M 10308 D 1.7 1.1 0:00 httpd
17359 nobody 15 0 19924 12M 9136 S 0.9 1.2 0:08 httpd
7 root 15 0 0 0 0 SW 0.5 0.0 4:52 kswapd
11610 root 34 19 59576 4604 732 D N 0.5 0.4 7:16 rsync
17387 nobody 15 0 21476 13M 9180 D 0.5 1.3 0:08 httpd
31800 eskam 15 0 14344 10M 3904 D 0.5 1.0 0:00 spamd
31981 nobody 15 0 19644 12M 9548 S 0.5 1.1 0:00 httpd
32565 mysql 15 0 14604 10M 4676 D 0.5 1.0 0:00 mysqld
21329 root 34 19 116M 19M 1944 S N 0.3 1.9 1:28 rsync
29291 named 15 0 110M 107M 1848 S 0.1 10.7 61:43 named
11640 root 34 19 116M 13M 1452 D N 0.1 1.3 1:38 rsync
17366 nobody 15 0 21000 12M 9180 S 0.1 1.2 0:06 httpd
17369 nobody 15 0 19968 11M 9352 S 0.1 1.1 0:05 httpd
17375 nobody 15 0 20876 13M 9656 S 0.1 1.2 0:04 httpd
17416 nobody 15 0 20320 12M 9156 S 0.1 1.2 0:06 httpd
Handruin
03-30-2003, 03:16 AM
There must have been a network issue in their datacenter because all of their servers were down, not just ours.
I've actually been looking into the cost of a T-1 line, but the cost is way too high. I was considering running this site from my home...I don't know if that is feasible. :)
blakerwry
03-30-2003, 04:31 AM
FWIW the site has been fine (not screaming like it was the othernoght though) all day for me.... I was at a competition earlier today though...
Handruin
03-30-2003, 05:41 AM
I don't understand why the server is so much better now, then it was a few hours ago...
blakerwry
03-30-2003, 08:13 PM
If you want to know my opinion it's not that big an issue. most the times the forums act fine and well tempered... and I'm a patient person.
If the forums are being reeeallly slow then I'll just come back in an hour and it is usually fine.
If the site were down, then that'd be a different issue altogether.
I'm not sure how my opinons differ from that of a new member or the "1st time browser", but I'm thinking they wont be as forgiving as I am... although probably still likely to come back if they enjoy the content.
blakerwry
04-01-2003, 01:15 AM
just wanted to say the forums are sluggish again... i've been seeing 1 minute page loads.. although ~20-30 seconds has been the average for the last 1/2 hour mabye...
It seems to vary enormously. Fats at times, really really sluggish at others. Time of day seems to not matter.
blakerwry
04-01-2003, 02:52 PM
For the past week i've been on the server in both the daytime and the evening to the wee hours of the morning..
I say it tends to get slow in the evening to wee hours in the morning.. during the day it's ranges from fast to fine... at night it ranges from fast to "the pits".
Handruin
04-01-2003, 06:48 PM
I've been trying to update them everytime there is an issue, but by the time I get my support ticket typed, the forum returns to a normal speed.
I noticed this afternoon the forum was really slow around 1:00PM EST. I gave up after it took a minute+ to load each page.
I'm sorry the site has been a bit sparatic, I'm trying to get it resolved. I may request to change servers internally if this keeps up. The thing that boggles me is that no one else has complained in their support forums about the site being slow.
blakerwry
04-01-2003, 08:34 PM
Are you allowed to tell me what other servers they host? (reverse lookup doesn't seem to be setup)
As I said before even visiting the URL http://swordfish.dnsvelocity.com/ was quite slow (considering the content) at the same time the forums were really unresponsive.. so it's not just us.
it's possible that the other virtualhosts don't get the same kind of traffic that we get (small, yet reletively constant throughout the day)
It's also possible that our site relies more on the one area that's being effected than the other sites...
just my thoughts
Handruin
04-02-2003, 12:27 AM
It's no secret to know what servers they host. Here is a list of all of them. Some of them are dedicated servers such as cobra and alpha. (nothing we could use)
The naming is the same for all the server. xxx.dnsvelocity.com
http://info.voxtreme.com/
I'm sure it's possible for other virtual host to get less traffic. It could be that our site relies on a moderate amount of MySQL use, but it isn't overbearing. I can setup a simple page with no sql queries and a timer if you want to hit that page when the site is slow.
The front page normally loads very quick. If you notice at the very bottom of the front page is a page load timer. Normally when the site is running well the front page loads in under a second. I use that as my refference point when complaining.
Handruin
04-02-2003, 01:07 AM
Both queries together:
http://www.storageforum.net/timer.html
Individuals:
http://www.storageforum.net/timer.php
http://www.storageforum.net/timer-sql.php
Dïscfärm
04-02-2003, 01:44 AM
So... so... slugggggggggish...............
I ended up double-posting in the "Broadcom/Serverworks: Paradise Lost?" thread, because after over a minute of waiting, I clicked the Stop button, and then re-clicked the Submit button.
Mistake! Well, at least I now know that my messsage went into the queue and didn't get hung up in transit.
blakerwry
04-02-2003, 03:50 AM
It's no secret to know what servers they host. Here is a list of all of them. Some of them are dedicated servers such as cobra and alpha. (nothing we could use)
The naming is the same for all the server. xxx.dnsvelocity.com
http://info.voxtreme.com/
I'm sure it's possible for other virtual host to get less traffic. It could be that our site relies on a moderate amount of MySQL use, but it isn't overbearing. I can setup a simple page with no sql queries and a timer if you want to hit that page when the site is slow.
The front page normally loads very quick. If you notice at the very bottom of the front page is a page load timer. Normally when the site is running well the front page loads in under a second. I use that as my refference point when complaining.
I meant other websites hosted on swordfish... so we could verify that they are slow when SF is slow...
heh.. that sql page loads faster every time i refresh the page(cahcing maybe)... statred off @ 2.1 secs...went to 1.7...etc...etc... till it got to a base of ~0.07 seconds...
And I'd have to say that the front page does not always load fast... It normally loads fast.. but when the forums are sluggish the front page is often sluggish as well.
P5-133XL
04-14-2003, 02:49 AM
The forums are dog-tired today. It won't budge regardless of the threats used against it.
DrunkenBastard
04-14-2003, 03:42 AM
Very slow right now.
Handruin
04-14-2003, 08:36 AM
I keep complaining and they keep telling me it's caused by their nightly backup. I've been trying to figure out how to make a case to have them move us or fix the issue. I argue the point that while a backup will cause slower performance, my sites on this server should not become completely unusable.
Pradeep
04-14-2003, 08:45 AM
I was thinking that it's prob backups, given the time of night that the slowdowns happen.
Pair.com are using shadow drives on all their servers now, and besides giving a near identical copy of the primary drives contents, also reduces the disk load at backup time, because the backup is taken from the shadow drive. Of course loads are very low at any time. Unfortunately they do have limitations on the size of SQL DBs, at least with their entry level packages.
Pradeep
04-14-2003, 09:10 AM
Hmm I should really have read the full thread before saying anything :)
A load of 17 is very high, it could be due to some other users on the server overtaxing available resources. Also when you have virtual hosts, this takes up more resources.
A T1 to your apartment is going to be very expensive, unless you can resell it to your neighbours or something :)
Hmm I just perused one of the Voxtreme forums, I see they have banned Formmail? And they way they have done it. Looks like patching a sinking ship.
Pradeep
04-14-2003, 09:20 AM
I'm confused how people are attacking via formmail. Why doesn't Vox require that any email recipients outside the local domain be specified in a .formmail file, or specify them directly in the script?
The site was just woefully sluggish for me. Other sites like hlmcompany.com, redhill.net.au, overclockers.com.au, and SR were just fine. The problem last for about 4 minutes.
The time of my post is off by one hour. The problem occured at:
20:14 Pacific Time
Handruin
04-14-2003, 11:25 PM
I noticed it too. I didn't see any notification about it though. I did find that today the NAC datacenter was hit by a DoS which effected every host. THis most recent issue was probably a crash of apache because I could ping the host while it was unavialable through the web.
Pradeep
04-14-2003, 11:27 PM
SR was giving me error messages about half an hour ago, and wierd crap like three ads up top in the forums. Seems to have been fixed now tho.
Now Pradeep has infected this thread. Every thread he posts in gets that awfully wide Author column! Don't make me go back to IE! :o
Handruin
04-14-2003, 11:32 PM
Hmm I should really have read the full thread before saying anything :)
A load of 17 is very high, it could be due to some other users on the server overtaxing available resources. Also when you have virtual hosts, this takes up more resources.
A T1 to your apartment is going to be very expensive, unless you can resell it to your neighbours or something :)
Hmm I just perused one of the Voxtreme forums, I see they have banned Formmail? And they way they have done it. Looks like patching a sinking ship.
When the server runs at 17, I can't do anything at all on the site. That's what I keep complaining to them about but they don't seem to care.
The T1 idea was out of frustration. :) I looked at the price and it would be much cheaper to rent a dedicated server with a better connection.
I think they removed formmail. I don't know what the problem is, something with security. I don't use it so I didn't pay much attention to the topics.
Bartender
04-14-2003, 11:37 PM
Quit complaining Buck! Have another drink.
Handruin
04-14-2003, 11:40 PM
I'm confused how people are attacking via formmail. Why doesn't Vox require that any email recipients outside the local domain be specified in a .formmail file, or specify them directly in the script?
I thought the script could be limited to a specified range if you edit the config section. My guess is that another security issue was exploited, that or they don't want to deal with the complexities of that script.
:dunno:
Pradeep
04-14-2003, 11:42 PM
Awfully wide? Jeeze you should prob come back to IE :D
I'm jsut sipping on a lubbly Bombay Sapphire and Indian tonic water. Purely for medical reasons of course... can't be too careful with that SARS about.
Awfully wide? Jeeze you should prob come back to IE :D
I'm jsut sipping on a lubbly Bombay Sapphire and Indian tonic water. Purely for medical reasons of course... can't be too careful with that SARS about.
:bigeek: Indeed!
Bartender
04-14-2003, 11:49 PM
Bunch of drunks. Can't you see this is a serious thread?
Between Merc's crack and the drinkz otherz keep having, I seem to be the only zober one.
Between Merc's crack and the drinkz otherz keep having, I seem to be the only zober one.
iv ben soaber al day . . . untillll now
Mercutio
04-15-2003, 12:21 AM
Hittin' tha rock in no way impacts my sobriety!
Handruin
04-19-2003, 02:40 AM
Has the site been running better at nights? It seems to be a bit better later in the night. However, earlier tonight there was a separate issue where someone was running a SQL realted task that slowed down the entire server. :x
Howell
04-19-2003, 09:51 AM
It is a bit sluggish right now.
Howell
04-19-2003, 09:52 AM
And now it's OK. Before it would take 20-30 sec to after click to get a new page.
Howell
04-19-2003, 09:53 AM
Scratch that. 5-10s. Normally It's less than 1s.
Handruin
04-19-2003, 11:14 AM
Yeah, it's not any better today. I've been watching for the last hour and the site has been unresponsive. I opened ticket for this last night and I added to it today. They seemed to login to the server and did something, but it's not completely fixed.
I'm getting tired of the reliability....
Handruin
04-19-2003, 11:18 AM
test
timwhit
04-19-2003, 03:29 PM
Doug,
Have you considered moving the site to Pair or another more reliable provider? What kind of contract do you have with the current provider? I will be in the market for a provider in the next couple weeks like we had talked about before.
Tim
Handruin
04-20-2003, 12:54 AM
Pair.net seems to have a good reputation, but they also have a very restricted policy for database usage and other areas.
"Each individual database is allotted up to 20MB (megabytes) of disk space. Extra disk usage within reason is allowed, and pair Networks reserves the right to charge for over-usage. "
We wouldn't be able to host with them because our database is 59MB.
Even if I could get over their database usage limit, I'd still have a problem because they limit the amount of time any script can run. Because of this, it wouldn't be easy to backup the database.
timwhit, I can still host your site if you want, but I would want to wait until I can get this performance issue dealt with. Last thing I want to do is provide you with a slow hosting. :-?
Handruin
04-24-2003, 08:10 AM
Swordfish - Mon, 21 Apr 2003 22:02:07 GMT - High loads resolved
The high loads were caused by a ressource intensive account, which got suspended in order to fix this issue.
I guess we'll see if this fixes the issue. The site has seemed a little better to me so far.
blakerwry
04-24-2003, 01:50 PM
yeah, i havent noticed a slowdown for a while
CityK
04-25-2003, 12:47 AM
Yep...its quite responsive again. Now we just have to drum up some interesting topics on the computer board.
Handruin
04-30-2003, 11:39 PM
Just looking for more feedback. Has the forum been ok for the past week since they fixed the issue? I've noticed a large improvement, but I want to hear from others since I can't visit every hour. ;)
Just a quick side note about our current environment. I discovered something the other day that actually cleared up an issue I was having. From time to time you may notice the site is working fine, then all the sudden you can't get to anything for about 30 seconds. This happens randomly and not set time.
The reason is that since we are part of a reseller environment, that every time someone on this sever creates a new account for a customer, apache has to be restarted quickly. This causes a brief interruption that lasts for about 30-40 seconds. I notice this the other day when I created an acount...while I was waiting for the script, I couldn't access SF...
I hope everything is running ok so far. I've been watching the CPU loads and they are now in the 1 - 2 range in TOP.
Howell
04-30-2003, 11:55 PM
The reason is that ...
That addresses the only thing left I had noticed.
SteveC
04-30-2003, 11:59 PM
It's been running fine for me.
Singificantly faster/better. It is slow once in a while, but only for a few seconds. A very measurable change, thanks Doug.
blakerwry
05-01-2003, 04:09 AM
the site's been running great for me... 30 seconds to restart apache? wow.. glad my computer isn't that slow or my server just doesn't have that much work to do while loading...
that was one thing that bugged me about apache, whenever you make a change to the basic config you are requred to restart apache. (although on my system that takes under 2 seconds using a script)
I wonder if setting up dynamic vhosts would solve their problem.
Blake, didn't you know? MS was the original designer of Apache :mrgrn:
blakerwry
05-01-2003, 03:21 PM
Blake, didn't you know? MS was the original designer of Apache :mrgrn:
Apache has been the most popular web server on the Internet since April of 1996
would that mean MS designed it for NT 3?
Howell
05-01-2003, 10:03 PM
I don't know what is going on right now (or more likely what is now happening on the server), but it is wicked fast.
Handruin
05-01-2003, 10:04 PM
I'm not complaining. :) I hope it remains this way.
http://www.storageforum.net/timer.html
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.11 Copyright © 2012 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.