[closed] bug/error: Server Overload?

[SYNACK]

It seems that when there are more than about 500 people online at any one time that the server overloads, at least for me and I am left with timeing out replies, 5 minute page load times and incomplete page loads.

 

It may just be me but other sites that I access during this time all appear to work fine and it has happened three or four times now which can be quite irritating when you go to the effort of answering a question and then have to spend 10 minutes attempting to get the server to accept it.

 

I know that ZH is rightfully very occupied at the moment but it would be good if this could get looked at at some point.

Edited April 6, 2010 by ZeroHour

[john]

We do seem to be suffering from a spate of spam at present which I am very sure won't be helping this, but we are on to it I assure you

[contink]

You do realise that this is all being caused by one thread created by one young lady...

 

[SYNACK]

For this instance I do beleive that you are right, that thread was well trafficed enough to put a heavier than usual load on the server

 

This has happened at least a couple of times before as well though so I'm thinking that the extra load plus the large latency between here and there is causing the issues again. A while back when ZH did the reoptimization of the site content to make it smaller and easier for the server to serve up the load times went right down so I am wondering if it is a function of more active users or whether there is a bit more stuff going on behind the scenes because it has definatly slowed down noticibly during my absence and is back to loading the title block then several seconds later the content at the best of times unless there are less that 200 people on.

[Michael]

Although it creates a little more work for moderators, it is of my opinion that moderating/authorising posts from new users can prevent attacks of this nature. There was a thread a month back discussing the specs of Edugeek's new server. This should be more than capable of 500+ users at any one time.

[EduTech]

With all of the interest in the thread earlier, and the fact we have spam on the profiles that we are just working through to clear up edugeek is very busy at the moment

 

James.

[Danielle]

I dont understand what I did wrong

[contink]

I dont understand what I did wrong

 

I'm doubtless out of turn here but I doubt anyone thinks you did... It's probably more the way the troll activity was taking things that had the thread pulled for review.... assuming that's what happened of course.

[cookie_monster]

Although it creates a little more work for moderators, it is of my opinion that moderating/authorising posts from new users can prevent attacks of this nature. There was a thread a month back discussing the specs of Edugeek's new server. This should be more than capable of 500+ users at any one time.

 

 

 

What are the specs of the new server?

[SYNACK]

I dont understand what I did wrong

 

Like contink I think that it was more a result of some of the heated comments and the posting of pictures by others that lead to its investigation and suspention. Some of the banter was also possibly a bit close to the expected line as well given that NSFW material has been banned because most of the audience of the site look at it while in a school setting. Personally I had no problem with it but you can understand the issues a thread like that could cause if read over a sholder in a primary school or something simmilar.

Edited January 22, 2010 by SYNACK

[Michael]

I believe these are the specs

[Danielle]

but that wasnt my fault that someone decided to do that to me and they were removed upon my request straight away. I am not advertising my company, I am not using any abusive language and there were no pornographic terms in there - so I dont see what was near the line of NSFW?

[SYNACK]

but that wasnt my fault that someone decided to do that to me and they were removed upon my request straight away. I am not advertising my company, I am not using any abusive language and there were no pornographic terms in there - so I dont see what was near the line of NSFW?

 

I was not blameing you and even participated in the now locked thread myself, but the NSFW bar is vastly lower in a primary school or even high school than in a normal business. We have had schools complain about the cartoon weight loss ads as to risque. There is a thread about hiding a wireless network name with swear words in it and when compared to that, possibly over cautious measuring stick even with the carefull wording of many of the posts it may have been too close to the line. I could be wrong and do not make the rules so this is by no means a definative reason (that is up to the mods to release, or not at their descression) just speculation based on past experience on the forum.

[EduTech]

what you have said is correct Synack, and if i am honest i was also participating in the said thread but as you say some of the content was not suitable for schools especially primary where as in a business environment it would of been fine.

 

Danielle, we are not saying you have done anything wrong.. other than the fact you had an (X) in every post similar to how CPLTD puts (Fella) in every post expect the x is not really proffesional.

 

Just dont use them words in future and it will be fine, i'm just as much to blaim as i took part and i am not going to hide that fact. I've given myself a smack i'll promise to not let the little brain inside me go off on one again.

 

Now moving on so this thread dont go off topic.

 

James.

[Edu-IT]

Danielle, we are not saying you have done anything wrong.. other than the fact you had an (X) in every post similar to how CPLTD puts (Fella) in every post expect the x is not really proffesional.

 

Just dont use them words in future and it will be fine,

What!? So you can't put x's in posts now? Ridiculous. I know dozens of people who end their text messages, emails, tweets etc with X. It doesn't mean anything.

[Danielle]

What!? So you can't put x's in posts now? Ridiculous. I know dozens of people who end their text messages, emails, tweets etc with X. It doesn't mean anything.

 

thank you

xx

[webby74]

What!? So you can't put x's in posts now? Ridiculous. I know dozens of people who end their text messages, emails, tweets etc with X. It doesn't mean anything.

 

Totally agree... nothing wrong with that at all!

[contink]

Erm... ok... just a thought but that whole thread was a bit of fun so talk of professionalism, etc... does seem just a teensy bit moot really.

 

Can I just note that as per the other discussion re: "the line"... If I'd been in any of my primaries it'd have been a bit embarrassing if something we know to be a bit of fun was on screen when a loud voiced child asked "Why is he writing about getting wet and car bodies Miss?! " because you didn't notice them looking over your shoulder.

 

BUT, before anyone jumps on my back and starts stabbing frantically away... It is also our responsibility not to be reading anything in the Red door forum out in the open anyway... Really the professionalism thing could be pointed more in our direction (the reader/user) at this point...

 

 

Anyway, just a thought or three and perhaps let James rethink and retract a little. Besides that, let's not take things toooo personally.. Now big hug... that's it... Oi! stop groping, that's my a*se!

 

Besides I missed the ruddy picture so why should you lot have all the fun... *grumble* *fart* *mutter*...

 

[EduTech]

lol... i say i have not denied i overstepped the mark myself so i appoligise for that. i was whipped back into shape by the other mod's lol who made me re-think about what i was agreeing with lol!

[ZeroHour]

Right server load, can you post next time you notice it Synack as there is nothing in the logs so far but if I get an idea when I will manually monitor the server.

I have tweaked it again as I was meaning to increase the limits anyway as the server is under taxed right now.

[SYNACK]

Cool thanks, will do. It is usually for quite short periods comparitivly - 30minutes to an hour. I'll record when it happens again and try to get in contact.

[SYNACK]

Server appeared to drop out completely for about 5 minutes at 0405 GMT+12 27/01/2010.