Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 2/26/2002 10:35:22 AM EDT
Thanks a [b]LOT[/b] Goatboy! It seems as fast as it was before.....
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 10:40:39 AM EDT
I dont have to beat on my computer today to speed it up, im back to normal, well as normal as I get........... Bluemax
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 10:45:22 AM EDT
Its still not fast for me, but its usable. Bill3508
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 10:49:26 AM EDT
Still running slow here, getting lots of 'gateway timeouts' and false 404 file not found errors too.
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 10:52:49 AM EDT
That's wierd....I wonder why it isn't as fast for the rest of yall? Maybe Goatboy decided to get the speed up in Texas first [:)] Whatever it is, I hope it stays the same here and picks up for the rest of you guys......
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 11:22:24 AM EDT
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 11:28:53 AM EDT
Speed is a whole lot better than in the past few days. A great improvement. But it is still not quite as fast as before the "big crash." Almost, but not quite. Thanks for the effort GB.
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 11:52:22 AM EDT
Originally Posted By EdAvilaSr: It is smoking fast here! It picked up a lot in the last hour.[^]
View Quote
Ditto. Compared to the speed in the past week, I feel like my hair should be on fire [:D]
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 11:59:12 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/26/2002 11:59:43 AM EDT by EdAvilaSr]
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 11:59:28 AM EDT
It took over 1 full minute to load this web page. And I have a T1 line! [>Q][>Q][>Q][>Q][>Q][>Q]
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 12:18:46 PM EDT
Yep, I can kiss my work productivity goodbye again. Damn, and the boss was just getting used to me actually getting some work done [;)] [:P] LL [:P]
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 12:19:16 PM EDT
Refresh of this page took 25 seconds for me. Getting better, but I ain't scalded.
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 12:23:36 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/26/2002 12:24:22 PM EDT by EdwardAvila]
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 12:42:56 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 12:47:51 PM EDT
Much faster for me. [beer] Tyler
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 1:03:40 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 1:14:00 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 1:24:20 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 1:31:13 PM EDT
YEAH! Much faster than it was 24 hours ago. Atta Boy, GB!
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 2:01:09 PM EDT
Woo-who! I no long have to open another browser and hit my other sites while I wait for the pages to load!
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 2:03:30 PM EDT
Good job Goatboy, the sites running much better than in the past !!! It' nice to surf with speed.
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 2:11:59 PM EDT
Yeah well done Goatboy. Glad to see the site getting back up to snuff!
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 2:16:17 PM EDT
GB & Ed, Much better here, too. Thanks
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 2:16:23 PM EDT
Whoo hoooo [:)]
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 2:42:03 PM EDT
Originally Posted By akira: Whoo hoooo [:)]
View Quote
Double Whoo hoooo here! The site's back up to speed and I got my first thread tacked almost simultaneously! [:)]
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 3:25:48 PM EDT
nice, this site is as fast as the car in my sig pic now!
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 3:41:04 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Waverunner: nice, this site is as fast as the car in my sig pic now!
View Quote
I always like the t-shirt with the picture of the Texas Highway Patrol Mustang. Underneath the picture it said, "It takes one to catch one". [:)]
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 4:03:53 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/26/2002 4:04:08 PM EDT by EdwardAvila]
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 4:13:36 PM EDT
Compared to the last few days Boss, we're in hyper-drive. Thanks to you and GB (I can understand how hard it must be to have to carry GB)!! [;)]
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 4:14:19 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 6:30:59 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 6:35:17 PM EDT
Slower... but better than it's been recently. Still heavy periods of latency and packet loss: C:\>ping -t www.ar15.com Pinging www.ar15.com [24.97.83.141] with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 24.97.83.141: bytes=32 time=150ms TTL=41 Reply from 24.97.83.141: bytes=32 time=801ms TTL=41 Request timed out. Reply from 24.97.83.141: bytes=32 time=501ms TTL=41 Reply from 24.97.83.141: bytes=32 time=140ms TTL=41 Request timed out. Request timed out. Request timed out. Request timed out. Reply from 24.97.83.141: bytes=32 time=841ms TTL=41 Request timed out. Request timed out. Reply from 24.97.83.141: bytes=32 time=401ms TTL=41 But when it's good, it's good. Looks like a cable modem!
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 6:39:36 PM EDT
GoatBoy stopped chewing on the line finally.
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 6:49:11 PM EDT
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 6:56:51 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 2/26/2002 6:58:52 PM EDT by Pthfndr]
Even way out here in the boondocks on 30 year old phone lines and a dialup modem it's running as fast for me as it ever did in the past. Good job guys! Once everyone east of the rockies go to bed it ought to really fly.
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 6:56:54 PM EDT
I did a ping to see what the avg. reply time would be. It is 110ms from my house in IL. Not bad round trip time considering how many hops I have to across to get to the server. I counted 25 hops from my house to the server via traceroute. C:\>ping 24.97.83.181 -t Pinging 24.97.83.181 with 32 bytes of data: Reply from 24.97.83.181: bytes=32 time=80ms TTL=40 Reply from 24.97.83.181: bytes=32 time=70ms TTL=40 Reply from 24.97.83.181: bytes=32 time=131ms TTL=40 Reply from 24.97.83.181: bytes=32 time=110ms TTL=40 Reply from 24.97.83.181: bytes=32 time=181ms TTL=40 Reply from 24.97.83.181: bytes=32 time=100ms TTL=40 Reply from 24.97.83.181: bytes=32 time=90ms TTL=40 Reply from 24.97.83.181: bytes=32 time=80ms TTL=40 Reply from 24.97.83.181: bytes=32 time=150ms TTL=40 Reply from 24.97.83.181: bytes=32 time=111ms TTL=40 Ping statistics for 24.97.83.181: Packets: Sent = 10, Received = 10, Lost = 0 (0% loss), Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds: Minimum = 70ms, Maximum = 181ms, Average = 110ms Control-C ^C C:\>tracert 24.97.83.181 Tracing route to rrcs-nys-24-97-83-181.biz.rr.com [24.97.83.181] over a maximum of 30 hops: 1 10 ms 10 ms 10 ms 10.104.51.1 2 10 ms 10 ms 10 ms 12.244.106.129 3 10 ms 10 ms 10 ms 12.244.68.26 4 10 ms 10 ms 10 ms 12.244.68.30 5 10 ms 20 ms 30 ms 12.244.72.242 6 10 ms 50 ms 31 ms gbr2-p100.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.123.5.78] 7 60 ms 20 ms 20 ms tbr1-p013502.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.11.33] 8 10 ms 10 ms 10 ms ggr1-p340.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.11.206] 9 10 ms 10 ms 10 ms att-gw.cgi.qwest.net [192.205.32.82] 10 10 ms 50 ms 10 ms chi-core-03.inet.qwest.net [205.171.20.141] 11 30 ms 40 ms 40 ms dca-core-03.inet.qwest.net [205.171.8.161] 12 30 ms 50 ms 70 ms dca-core-02.inet.qwest.net [205.171.9.49] 13 30 ms 40 ms 70 ms ewr-core-03.inet.qwest.net [205.171.8.182] 14 70 ms 40 ms 41 ms ewr-edge-06.inet.qwest.net [205.171.17.90] 15 40 ms 40 ms 30 ms 65.115.225.166 16 30 ms 60 ms 40 ms bb2-new-P0-0.atdn.net [66.185.137.5] 17 40 ms 70 ms 40 ms bb2-alb-P6-0.atdn.net [64.236.7.29] 18 40 ms 40 ms 40 ms pop1-alb-P1-0.atdn.net [64.236.4.6] 19 40 ms 50 ms 50 ms rr-syracuse.atdn.net [198.81.2.130] 20 50 ms 50 ms 50 ms roc-mth-gsr-spp-gsr.nyroc.rr.com [24.92.224.6] 21 50 ms 61 ms 50 ms syr-24-92-224-36.nyroc.rr.com [24.92.224.36] 22 51 ms 50 ms 50 ms roc-24-93-2-197.rochester.rr.com [24.93.2.197] 23 40 ms 60 ms 50 ms roc-24-93-2-26.rochester.rr.com [24.93.2.26] 24 60 ms 70 ms 60 ms 10.108.192.51 25 80 ms 121 ms 110 ms rrcs-nys-24-97-83-181.biz.rr.com [24.97.83.181] Trace complete. Now that the 2 DSL links are up, how are you planning on load balancing across the two links? Whos routers are you using? Have you thought about using a cache server to cache the ads and other static content? Mike
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 7:07:37 PM EDT
Hell yeah!!! She is rockin and rollin again!! DK [:D]
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 7:12:07 PM EDT
Rock and Roll baby!!!!!! Site rips now!!![smoke] T
Link Posted: 2/26/2002 7:12:14 PM EDT
GB, Running much faster tonight that the past week or so. Congratulations! A visual trace route still shows the bottleneck is at the server itself, which returns a ping in 130 to 250ms. This is a 3x improvement for a few days back at about this time of night, so there is a difference. You know, 500MB/hour is quite impressive. That's 8MB/Min, or 1.1Megabits/second. Say, that's pretty close to T1 speed! For what its worth, I see little difference between the two IP addresses. Maybe things leveled out quicker than anyone thought.
Top Top