D
I got the big news that slowest is no longer here. Why does it take over 45 seconds to load a post? The old slowest was much faster!
high-speed what?
- Thread starter diggerdown
- Start date
B
Boy those pricey servers are really paying off with speed aren't they
Might want to load more useless crap into the system to increase performance Crissy
Might want to load more useless crap into the system to increase performance Crissy
Not sure what you guys are talking about......it's faster than ever for me.
D
The speed picked up for me shortly after I made this post. It still does'nt seem any fasterthan before the new "high speed" but at least it will load now!
Sure seems fast to me
Mabye its time for you to sell the dialup modem and invest in broadband?Boy those pricey servers are really paying off with speed aren't they
Might want to load more useless crap into the system to increase performance Crissy
S
No problems here.
B
D
Any tips on how to make someone else pay for my upgrades???
Gotta love that one!
M
There's a notable lag between when DNS resolves, when the top of page draws and then again when the middle/forum portion of the page builds. Application Architecture?
If that's sarcasm - so be it.
It is NOT.
I say we're up to $1.99/year memberships at best.
MD.
If that's sarcasm - so be it.
It is NOT.
I say we're up to $1.99/year memberships at best.
MD.
Last edited:
S
very noticeable diffrence. It does not hang up and stuter anymore. great improvement.
R
S
No change for me, but then again, I didn't think it was slow before.
Right now seeing 2 seconds per page load from the time I press SUBMIT.
And this on my home pc with a 128K DSL line.
P
It seems that a lot of frustration has come from peeps that have a slower connection. I for one have to use a broadband card at home from Verizon due to a lack of available land line. Verizon has told me multiple times that I can get out of my contract due to poor signal strength, hence on their records showing I shouldn't even have signal.
At work I have DSL and runs lightning speed loading pages at Snowest(I haven't forgot 56k). I have noticed a difference at home the last couple weeks loading pages being faster, and whether or not that is because of lack of traffic or new servers, who am I to say.
Maybe we all need to consider our connection speed before bashing change. Surely my Verizon can get this out there before tomorrow morning!!
At work I have DSL and runs lightning speed loading pages at Snowest(I haven't forgot 56k). I have noticed a difference at home the last couple weeks loading pages being faster, and whether or not that is because of lack of traffic or new servers, who am I to say.
Maybe we all need to consider our connection speed before bashing change. Surely my Verizon can get this out there before tomorrow morning!!
S
There is a plugin for firefox that I started using a couple weeks ago that lets you "throttle" your bandwidth to simulate a 56k connection. It's pretty decent except your latency is still going to rock compared to a modem. For those who don't understand these intarweb and fancy compooter language things: latency = throttle response, bandwidth = horsepower. This "bandwidth throttle" = a rpm limiter. And remember, RPM is an important part of the horsepower equation.
Obviously, every connection is going to be different, and I'm willing to bet that the average "56k connection" ain't coming close to what it should be getting in terms of bandwidth anyway. Same way for folks like pullhardr who are on the "edge" of a wireless network. (For the cellular/wireless type nerds out there I just made a pun. Ha! The rest of you may carry on.)
From what I can tell with this plugin, for a 56k connection, it seems to work pretty decent. The banner ads and threads with lots of uploaded pictures were definitely slower, but that's to be expected. Still, threads were readable in a couple of seconds.
So again, I don't see a speed problem. Maybe as Chris was fiddling with adding and removing stuff, the subsequent restarts or database updates were causing little up/down glitches, but from what I see right now it's running great, even at 56k.
Obviously, every connection is going to be different, and I'm willing to bet that the average "56k connection" ain't coming close to what it should be getting in terms of bandwidth anyway. Same way for folks like pullhardr who are on the "edge" of a wireless network. (For the cellular/wireless type nerds out there I just made a pun. Ha! The rest of you may carry on.)
From what I can tell with this plugin, for a 56k connection, it seems to work pretty decent. The banner ads and threads with lots of uploaded pictures were definitely slower, but that's to be expected. Still, threads were readable in a couple of seconds.
So again, I don't see a speed problem. Maybe as Chris was fiddling with adding and removing stuff, the subsequent restarts or database updates were causing little up/down glitches, but from what I see right now it's running great, even at 56k.
well it doesn;t seem faster then old snowest..but faster then past few months...some lag...it sure will be tested when and if the site ever sees traffic again..seems ok for the small numbers so far
Thanks Steve.
Similar threads
- 144
