| Performance degrading? [message #153555] |
Tue, 03 January 2006 02:40  |
Frank
Messages: 7901
Registered: March 2000
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi,
It looks to me that the response-times when replying or adding new topics increased.
This results in people reposting the same form over and over, causing duplicate posts.
Frank
|
|
|
|
| Re: Performance degrading? [message #153757 is a reply to message #153555] |
Wed, 04 January 2006 00:05  |
Frank Naude
Messages: 4581
Registered: April 1998
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi Frank,
We are busy investigating the problem. Would you mind posting the following to help diagnose the problem:
1) "Total time taken to generate the page:" (see bottom of page):
2) Actual time taken:
3) Time of day:
Best regards.
Frank
|
|
|
|
| Re: Performance degrading? [message #153766 is a reply to message #153757] |
Wed, 04 January 2006 00:18 |
Frank
Messages: 7901
Registered: March 2000
|
Senior Member |
|
|
New topic in Test-forum:
Actual time: 46.88 seconds
Reported time: 0.02048 seconds
At 07.18 (GMT+1)
Reply was within a second.
[Edit:
This reply:
Actual time: 22.25 seconds
Reported: 0.02043 seconds]
[Edit edit:
The edit took less than a second]
hth
[Updated on: Wed, 04 January 2006 00:21] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Performance degrading? [message #155032 is a reply to message #153766] |
Wed, 11 January 2006 16:38 |
 |
djmartin
Messages: 10181
Registered: March 2005
Location: Surges Bay TAS Australia
|
Senior Member
Account Moderator |
|
|
Really bad again - right now. Pressed 'Submit Reply', 1 minute later pressed 'preview Message' which returned in 10 seconds, but now had two copies of the reply in the thread.
How do you want us to record and post the various details of this problem.
David
Upd: This posted in just a few seconds but the 'timer' said 0.26nnn seconds. Can we put a timer further 'out' so that it starts earlier in the process?
Upd 2: The first update took "Total time taken to generate the page: 0.25771 seconds" but subjectively was way, way quicker that the original post which 'took' nearly exactly the same time to generate'.
[Updated on: Wed, 11 January 2006 16:42] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Performance degrading? [message #156014 is a reply to message #155973] |
Fri, 20 January 2006 04:26 |
Frank Naude
Messages: 4581
Registered: April 1998
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Definitely a good idea!
The site will remain available most of the time. However, downtime can be expected from Saturday morning, possibly even on Sunday.
New server's details:
CPU: AMD Athlon64 3000+, 384K Cache
RAM: 2 GB DDR-RAM
Hard Drive: 2 x 160 GB / 7200 RPM in a RAID 1 configuration (mirrored)
OS: CentOS Enterprise Linux
Best regards.
Frank
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Performance degrading? [message #161932 is a reply to message #161900] |
Tue, 07 March 2006 23:24 |
Frank Naude
Messages: 4581
Registered: April 1998
|
Senior Member |
|
|
Everything looks OK. The server is busy at times, but on average it is coping quite well:
-bash-3.00$ uptime
23:20:40 up 43 days, 8:49, 1 user, load average: 0.32, 0.88, 1.70 |
|
|
|
| Re: Performance degrading? [message #161933 is a reply to message #161932] |
Tue, 07 March 2006 23:27 |
|
djmartin
Messages: 10181
Registered: March 2005
Location: Surges Bay TAS Australia
|
Senior Member
Account Moderator |
|
|
"Total time taken to generate the page: 1.97488 seconds" I think it is a bit slower ... normally the generate time is in milliseconds.
David
But added this post was "Total time taken to generate the page: 0.02167 seconds" and doing the edit page was "Total time taken to generate the page: 0.09008 seconds"
And the update was "Total time taken to generate the page: 0.63859 seconds"
[Updated on: Tue, 07 March 2006 23:29] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
] 
Blog
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
