Forum Index » User Test Forum » BPL server response time is crap


Display Avatars Sort By:
Bob Gross
(--B.G.--) - F

Locale: Silicon Valley
BPL server response time is crap on 12/09/2012 20:55:30 MST Print View

I'm seeing server response times anywhere from 15 seconds up to about 55 seconds. Something is wrong.

Other sites I visit are normal, like 1 or 2 seconds.

--B.G.--

Ken Thompson
(kthompson) - MLife

Locale: Behind the Redwood Curtain
Re: BPL server response time is crap on 12/09/2012 21:16:10 MST Print View

Thought it was just me at first. Been slow most of the day.

David Lutz
(davidlutz)

Locale: Bay Area
"BPL server response time is crap" on 12/09/2012 21:34:21 MST Print View

Me too.

For all the policy hubbub this is the kind of thing that will drive me nuts.

jason quick
(jase)

Locale: A tent in my backyard - Melbourne
Server needs a serving! on 12/09/2012 22:02:13 MST Print View

Agreed with all.

I even got frustrated trying to write this post...it took ages to load.

Listen to us....such a first world problem! ;-)

But yes, in all seriousness, first world issues aside, I find it taking anywhere between 10 - 45 odd seconds to load sometimes too.

Grrr. :-)

Gary Dunckel
(Zia-Grill-Guy) - MLife

Locale: Boulder
Server sucks on 12/09/2012 22:07:25 MST Print View

I agree--I thought it was just my computer or something. Somebody, please fix this. Where's Addie when we really need her? Roger, are you out there?

Ken Thompson
(kthompson) - MLife

Locale: Behind the Redwood Curtain
Like anyone reads this on 12/09/2012 22:37:24 MST Print View

who actually has any control...



Since it is in the test forum, I give it a D.

Mary D
(hikinggranny) - MLife

Locale: Gateway to Columbia River Gorge
BPL server response time is crap on 12/09/2012 23:40:22 MST Print View

It was bad when I tried this morning. Response time is good now, though.

Also this morning, I had problems trying to read an article in the New York Times--it slowed to a crawl and I finally gave up. At least BPL is in good company!

Rod Lawlor
(Rod_Lawlor) - MLife

Locale: Australia
Crap on 12/10/2012 01:26:30 MST Print View

But on the plus side, you can now say crap! That's new. Heh, heh, heh.

Bob Gross
(--B.G.--) - F

Locale: Silicon Valley
Re: Crap on 12/10/2012 01:31:32 MST Print View

"A word used to describe something substandard."

--B.G.--

Bob Bankhead
(wandering_bob) - MLife

Locale: Oregon, USA
BPL server response time on 12/10/2012 09:25:41 MST Print View

This is nothing new.

It's been happening off and on for more than a year.

Changing servers and forum software costs money, and while BPL might like to up-grade both, it does not seem to have the financial resources to do so.

So, fellow users, get used to it or move on.



Maybe if we all included BPL in our letters to Santa................

Roger Caffin
(rcaffin) - BPL Staff - MLife

Locale: Wollemi & Kosciusko NPs, Europe
Re: BPL server response time is crap on 12/10/2012 14:58:06 MST Print View

Hi all

First of all, I am NOT defending any poor service. No way.

However, you can not blame all of this on the server used by BPL. As the internet gets faster and the traffic gets heavier, the internet world (the techie community) is slowly becoming aware of serious network delays which are happening but should not. I will try to explain simply.

When a whole lot of traffic comes into a node anywhere along the line between you and the server, the node may not be able to shove it all through immediately. Usually the data is not lost; it is buffered in a store. The node is supposed to send back a message to your ISP saying 'please slow down a bit'. This is in the TCP/IP protocol. This happens.

However, well-meaning designers have been putting huge buffer stores into the nodes - afetr all, memory is now very cheap. But the returning message saying 'slow down' can get stuck in a buffer in another node along the way and have to wait for a few seconds. This can pile up. So the 'traffic control' part of the TCP/IP design is failing and you are starting to see extended delays. If you want to read more, search on the phrase 'buffer bloat'. It's a serious problem.

Ultimately, the cure is in two parts: faster links between nodes and smaller buffers in the nodes. This may take a while as it means some serious hardware redesign and replacement. =$$$ And it has nothing to do with the BPL server.

Cheers

Bob Gross
(--B.G.--) - F

Locale: Silicon Valley
Re: Re: BPL server response time is crap on 12/10/2012 15:27:39 MST Print View

So, Roger, what the rest of us do is to move out of a slow node and into a faster node so that traffic congestion is no longer a factor. Bandwidth can be infinitely cheap if you select the right providers.

--B.G.--

Mary D
(hikinggranny) - MLife

Locale: Gateway to Columbia River Gorge
BPL server response time on 12/10/2012 16:47:09 MST Print View

I've always noticed a big slowdown on weekdays about 3 pm. when the high schools let out. I swear the kids get on the computer before they hit the refrigerator! Early evening is often slow, too (probably when their parents get on). However, that's all sites, not just one or two (probably traffic connections related to my ISP's servers?). Yesterday, though, I saw this slowdown only on two sites, as mentioned--BPL and the New York Times. Weird.

Bob Bankhead
(wandering_bob) - MLife

Locale: Oregon, USA
Re: BPL server response time on 12/10/2012 17:21:42 MST Print View

+1 Mary D:


Every time BPL response gets slow, I always check the response times for all my other Favorites sites. It's always the same result - only BPL is lagging excessively.

I'm getting tired of seing IE9 report "waiting for response from Backpackinglight.com".

I expect slowdowns if someone is working with either the software or server hardware behind the scenes, but there's too many occurences of this for that to always be the case.

Still, what do I know? I'm not an IT guy.

Bob Gross
(--B.G.--) - F

Locale: Silicon Valley
Re: BPL server response time on 12/10/2012 17:23:57 MST Print View

Mary D, you probably have a 10 Gigabit/sec fiber optic drop in your sewing room.

--B.G.--

a b
(Ice-axe)
Re: Re: BPL server response time on 12/10/2012 17:32:09 MST Print View

I am pirating my neibors wi-fi connection right now and i am not seeing any slow down at all on BPL or any other site.
Of course.. my standards are pretty low. I consider any internet service fine even if it takes a minute to load sometimes.
Anyhow, right now it's about 3 seconds between pages on BPL and thats from a wi-fi connection 100 feet away. (Don't worry.. it's all noble, i have permission)
Yea, the engineers say wi-fi doesn't go that far.. they are wrong.
.Pirate wifi dish
.
Perhaps you need a pirate wi-fi booster dish like i made from tin foil and card board.

I also have a matching hat i wear to keep the govt from reading my thoughts.

Edited by Ice-axe on 12/10/2012 17:36:04 MST.

Roger Caffin
(rcaffin) - BPL Staff - MLife

Locale: Wollemi & Kosciusko NPs, Europe
Re: Re: BPL server response time on 12/10/2012 18:08:05 MST Print View

> Every time BPL response gets slow, I always check the response times for all my other
> Favorites sites. It's always the same result - only BPL is lagging excessively.
Sorry, but that tells you nothing, except that the problem does not come from your ISP. If your other Favorites are in a different State to BPL, or just off in a different compass direction, they probably won't be hitting the nodes which are congested.

Sure, it might be the InfoGears servers (which host BPL), but it might equally be congestion at a node a couple of hops away from them. You could do a nettrace ...

Cheers

Doug I.
(idester) - MLife

Locale: MidAtlantic
Re: Re: Re: BPL server response time on 12/10/2012 18:51:09 MST Print View

"Perhaps you need a pirate wi-fi booster dish like i made from tin foil and card board."

Dude, you're not fooling me. That's your bidet....

Ken Thompson
(kthompson) - MLife

Locale: Behind the Redwood Curtain
Re: BPL server response time on 12/10/2012 19:20:32 MST Print View

Stop splashing!! It's not for playing in.


But he is a plumber...

Jeffs Eleven
(WoodenWizard) - F

Locale: Greater Mt Tabor
Re: Re: Re: Re: BPL server response time on 12/10/2012 19:23:38 MST Print View

I thought the same thing, Doug.

A Magic Eraser bidet.

a b
(Ice-axe)
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: BPL server response time on 12/10/2012 19:30:46 MST Print View

The really scary part is how close Doug is to the truth..

Ever since i met Sage on the CDT and she taught me the NOLS way of "cleaning up" after potty time.. I have not used a single square of toilet paper on the trail or in my place.

Yep, the yellow sponge is for dishes.. the blue sponge is for..

So, who want to come over for dinner?

I'm making brownies for desert (yes, had to go there!)

Seriously, if you got "it" on your hand would you rather wipe it off or wash it off?

I know, i know, don't get it on you hand... Yada Yada Yada.

John S.
(jshann) - F
Re: BPL server response time is crap on 12/10/2012 19:54:28 MST Print View

I'm gonna have to get back on my medicine...glug, glug

Bob Gross
(--B.G.--) - F

Locale: Silicon Valley
Re: BPL server response time is crap on 12/18/2012 23:21:09 MST Print View

It certainly seems like the server response time has slowed to a crawl, again.

--B.G.--

Bob Gross
(--B.G.--) - F

Locale: Silicon Valley
Re: BPL server response time is crap on 12/21/2012 16:39:48 MST Print View

Now at 20-25 seconds.

--B.G.--

Mary D
(hikinggranny) - MLife

Locale: Gateway to Columbia River Gorge
Snails or slugs? on 12/21/2012 17:30:09 MST Print View

Just reread the thread after my last response. I want to make it clear that I do not have a sewing room. I always was horrible at sewing and since my detached retina episode I don't have binocular vision close than 3 feet. Forget sewing! It's a combined computer and backpacking gear storage room!

Anyway, BPL is currently approaching the speed of our native western Oregon fauna. I haven't tried the New York Times lately (I ran out of my free article allowance for the month).

Bob Gross
(--B.G.--) - F

Locale: Silicon Valley
Re: Re: BPL server response time is crap on 12/21/2012 20:47:37 MST Print View

"First of all, I am NOT defending any poor service. No way."

Roger, if it were network congestion leading to the InfoGears node, then the InfoGears index page itself would show that congestion. But it doesn't. It is responding normally. That suggests that the BPL server there may be overtaxed. So, somebody needs to spend some money to upgrade something. Of course, the long term solution may not involve InfoGears itself. When I see errors all over the InfoGears site, that suggests that it may be overtaxed, itself.

Tick Tock.

--B.G.--

John Abela
(JohnAbela) - MLife

Locale: www.hikelighter.com
Re: Re: Re: BPL server response time is crap on 12/25/2012 17:34:25 MST Print View

I respect you and all that Roger, you know that, but this issue has got nothing at all to do with anything other then the server that BPL is being served from has reached its limit of load balancing. Obviously we out here have no idea if BPL is being hosted on a dedicated server or a co-hosted server or a virtual server or whatever. But in the end, its reached its limits.

I have faced this issue dozens of times over the years with my own websites. At some point the concurrent connections to get to be too much and you start having longer query times, and bottlenecks lead to more bottlenecks. You can pay a developer a whole lot of money to try to optimize the code. You can spend even less money and get a newer server and resolve the problems without touching the code. Obviously both is the idea solution.
A dedicated *managed* server these days is under three hundred bucks a month. (managed server being one where a companies deals with keeping the server updated and so forth).

Middle of this year I had to upgrade servers running my largest blog service provider website. It was facing the same exact issues that BPL is now suffering - and BPL is suffering it very hard... try opening up a half dozen or dozen tabs all loading BPL pages and see just how bad the load balancing on the server is suffering right now.

What kind of caching is taking place?

What kind of IO usage is there on the server?

What kind of long queries are there?

What are your max connections set at?

There are folks out here that really do know how to help you guys solve these issues, with experience with facing and resolving these issues. It would be stupid of BPL to not take advantage of these resources and resolve the problems that plague all of us that use this website.

Nick Gatel
(ngatel) - MLife

Locale: Southern California
Re: Re: Re: Re: BPL server response time is crap on 12/25/2012 22:39:34 MST Print View

I know nothing about servers, caches (other than water), I/O, etc.

I do know that I just did an eBay search that returned 2.5 million results in about 1/2 the time it took to get this thread to open up.

Now, to me, that would indicate that something is broken on BPL.

Come on guys, feed your squirrels some more peanuts so they can crank up their speed in the cage.

Nick Gatel
(ngatel) - MLife

Locale: Southern California
Okay, I found the problem on 12/25/2012 23:06:05 MST Print View

IT Support

BPL Server and Support Services

Bob Gross
(--B.G.--) - F

Locale: Silicon Valley
Re: Okay, I found the problem on 12/25/2012 23:10:59 MST Print View

Don't let Roger Caffin see that.

--B.G.--

Roger Caffin
(rcaffin) - BPL Staff - MLife

Locale: Wollemi & Kosciusko NPs, Europe
The Problem??? on 12/26/2012 03:11:50 MST Print View

> A dedicated *managed* server these days is under three hundred bucks a month.
Indeed. But does BPL have that sort of money available?

I am sure everything could be solved with LOTs more money. If only.

Cheers

Ken Thompson
(kthompson) - MLife

Locale: Behind the Redwood Curtain
Re: The Problem??? on 12/26/2012 06:18:26 MST Print View

" But does BPL have that sort of money available?"

Well if the MLifers were receiving the annual reports we thought we paid for we would know.


Customers have been complaining about the software, service forever. You guys are wasting your time.

Piss poor state of affairs.

Tom Kirchner
(ouzel) - MLife

Locale: Pacific Northwest/Sierra
Re: The Problem??? on 12/26/2012 17:55:05 MST Print View

"Indeed. But does BPL have that sort of money available?"

Check my math, but I calculate that 180 annual membership renewals should cover $3600/year for a dedicated, managed server. There are a lot more renewals than that, if I'm not mistaken. To be perfectly honest, what is more important to a website than a server and bandwidth adequate to handle the activity the website generates? What actually has more priority in the current scheme of things.

"I am sure everything could be solved with LOTs more money. If only."

$3600 is chump change these days, and a small percentage of the revenue this website generates. This is a bold statement, one I invite BPL management to disprove.

John Abela
(JohnAbela) - MLife

Locale: www.hikelighter.com
Re: The Problem??? on 12/26/2012 18:03:38 MST Print View

But does BPL have that sort of money available?


If BPL is not bringing in at least $3600 a year to cover a dedicated server than RJ should just sell the Services to somebody that can properly run this service.

If the largest backpacking website in the world is not even making that little amount of money - given the activity of this website - then really, he should pass it along to somebody like myself or others here at BPL that have decades of our lives invested into running operations such at this.

Lets just pad that 3600 up to 5000 to cover other issues, we are only talking about 200 annual members per year to cover the very basic of expenses for day to day operations of this website. Does BPL not have that many annual members? Yes, there are other expenses (moderators??, part time developer ??, domain fees - all of about 8 bucks a year, ssl cert = 30 bucks a year, business license, no idea what this is in montana, a couple hundred bucks a year??) so really, what kind of overhead does this website have that cannot generate 5k a year.

I run a website that has tens of millions of verified page views a month and has members from almost every nation on the planet, and minus my own time it costs less then 5000 bucks a year to keep it operational. It generates me 10 times that much, and I do so without a single bit of advertisement on the website.

My point here is that there is just no reason that BPL should not be in a position to be able to keep their hardware and software up to date based on the amount of members that I see here.

I am by no means intending to be critical of RJ or Rodger or anybody else. It is just that the math does not seem to make any sense - as I have said in the past.

RJ - if you ever see this and are interested in yapping about how to potentially resolve some of these issues, by all means, lets talk... you have my email address (well, the bpl database does).

Gary Dunckel
(Zia-Grill-Guy) - MLife

Locale: Boulder
Money? on 12/26/2012 19:00:10 MST Print View

It seems to me that we have had a goodly number of new subscribers (M and MLIFE) join in the past few months. I assume this means that BPL is bringing in some money, where it should (could) do just as you say, John.

John Donewar
(Newton) - MLife

Locale: Southeastern Louisiana
Re: Server needs a serving! on 01/07/2013 06:34:13 MST Print View

Slllllllooooooooowwwwwwwwwed to a crawl early this morning and resulted in dual and triple posts.

Canceling the post does nothing because the post finally goes through and we have to delete the multiple posts after the fact. :-(

Seems a little better now.

Party On,

Newton

Edited by Newton on 01/07/2013 06:38:06 MST.

Ken Thompson
(kthompson) - MLife

Locale: Behind the Redwood Curtain
BPL response time is crap on 01/07/2013 11:28:20 MST Print View

ryan@ryanjordan.com

ryan@backpackinglight.com


Anyone try e mailing Ryan?

How about we all do it at one time?

You have 1734 unread messages...