VDr extremely slow

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JPnyc

Thanks poppy. I'm used to the pages loading in a second, sometimes 2, if I'm at home, about twice that at work. They're almost at that speed for me right now, but posting usually takes longer to submit. 6 to 8 seconds. That's about what I got right now as well.

---

WOW....2 seconds :eek: ....it takes my eyes 6 seconds to focus :rolleyes:
poppy

At least yours eventually FOCUS. Mine never would, without artificial assistance. :)

JP...I wear glasses too:)......without them I could forget about 'focus'.....not gonna happen.
btw....fwiw....the times I posted above are for FireFox .....IE takes much longer.
poppy

While the problems could relate to VDR's server, it is also very possible that it is an backbone router problem, which gets overloaded from time to time. Likewise, the traffic to VDR's servers could be greater than the servers are configured to handle.

For my money, I would bet that this is a backbone router issue. This would account for the wide variability of response times from person to person or for different times during the day. Since most people have upgraded to some level of broadband, these users could be impacted more, if there is such a bottleneck or series of bottlenecks.

In this type of situation, there are no fast answers, which is why it may take VDR some time to go through the process of elimination until they find the actual cause.

Cheers,

Linda

;) :rolleyes: :confused:

Very true, Linda. Would also explain why the slowdowns are intermittent and not limited to any one or two of our sites/servers. They appear and disappear periodically from moment to moment across many of our sites. We're engaged in testing as we speak.

I think people forget how things used to be and that is why they get so worked up about it taking 10 seconds for a page to load. Back a few years when people were using a 14.4 kb modem it was normal for a page to take many seconds to load. Nowadays people get so used to the speed that they get cranky when things are slowed down. I take the slowdown as a chance for me to catch my breath. It's kinda relaxing in a way...time for me to rest my eyes. Anyway, I'm just rambling.

Keep up the good work JPnyc and moderators. You are appreciated even though sometimes it doesn't seem like it.

Take care.

Thanks Brily, a breath of fresh air is always nice. ;) BJ

What John said. Thanks man. We are trying...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brily

I think people forget how things used to be and that is why they get so worked up about it taking 10 seconds for a page to load. Back a few years when people were using a 14.4 kb modem it was normal for a page to take many seconds to load. Nowadays people get so used to the speed that they get cranky when things are slowed down.

---

Agree and disagree ... well, now is not a few years back. Good or bad, things, people move along. Hand washing your laundry can be looked at as good upper body excise, but, sorry, I need, not in the sense of live or death but, yes, I need my automatic washer. I live in a big city, have to work 50 - 60 hrs a week, drive a couple of hours a day, so by the time I go home and surf the web, yeah, I don't want to wait 10 seconds for a page to load. I think it is a legitimate concern.

But I am not b**ching at the mods or admins, just the situation, so I will repeat what you said to the staff at VDr, "Keep up the good work JPnyc and moderators. You are appreciated even though sometimes it doesn't seem like it." :)

Hmm a bit like the late 60s early 70s was all free love and the only speed people worried about wasn't dial up.

Now it's all safe sex and say no to drugs.

Hmm bring back the 60s/70s :p:cool:. Just kidding.

This morning I logged onto VDr and at first the pages loaded slow, but now it's like they're flying. I don't know what was done, but it seems as though you're going it the right direction.

Sorry about the earlier rants, but it was getting frustrating........

I agree with your post falcon2000, my post was just a rambling of mine. I understand that people are busier today. Like my life, more stuff to do, but less time to do it in. The world has turned into a blur...everyone is moving at an accelerated pace.

The point I was trying to make is that it isn't the end of the world because this site is currently running slower then normal. They are working on it and hopefully will find a fix soon. I just can't understand why some people get so worked up about it. As a lot of people here should know, some issues can't be fixed in 1 hour. Tracking down a bug/issue/whatever can take some time.

I think we all need a big VirtualDr Group Hug. :D

((((((((((((((((((VDR))))))))))))))))))

aaaaaaah......now that feels goooood....:D:D

Thanks Brily for the suggestion!
poppy

JPnyc, Last night at home I was watching the bottom toolbar (IE6)to see where the first page was stalling at. It was showing connecting "www.virtualdr.com" or something near that. The top three ADV banners loaded nicely and then it said "Done". After about 25 to 30 seconds I guess it decided it really was not done and showed connecting again. As soon as it connected the rest of the first page loaded fine.

The same thing happens every time both at home and here at work. Running XP Pro both boxes currently updated.

So what makes IE think it is done when it is not and on which end is the problem?

Please do not consider this a personal flame or anything like that. If the problem is on my end I want to correct it ASAP. I have not seen this on other sites, which leads me to assume the problem (glich) is not on my end.

As far as the response of the rest of the pages I have not noticed any thing a miss there, much faster than my 6 WPM typing. :D

Here are some traceroutes I've done. this first is from a T1 test site..
http://www.t1shopper.com/cgi-bin/nph-trace.cgi

1 161.58.14.161 (161.58.14.161) 0.383 ms 0.277 ms 0.235 ms
2 ge-1-2-0.378.r01.stngva01.us.wh.verio.net (204.2.127.185) 5.424 ms 14.511 ms 11.981 ms
3 xe-1-2-0-5.r20.asbnva01.us.bb.verio.net (129.250.27.190) 0.461 ms 0.414 ms 0.385 ms
4 p16-7-0-0.r02.asbnva01.us.bb.verio.net (129.250.2.83) 0.472 ms 0.469 ms 0.452 ms
5 dcp-brdr-02.inet.qwest.net (205.171.1.145) 0.389 ms 0.399 ms 0.340 ms
6 205.171.251.37 (205.171.251.37) 0.548 ms 0.533 ms 0.511 ms
7 dca-core-03.inet.qwest.net (205.171.209.113) 2.259 ms 1.769 ms 1.929 ms
8 ewr-core-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.8.245) 7.248 ms 7.351 ms 7.251 ms
9 ewr-cntr-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.146) 7.223 ms 7.127 ms 7.504 ms
10 msfc-22.ewr.qwest.net (63.146.100.34) 7.355 ms 7.208 ms 7.243 ms
11 63.236.93.180 (63.236.93.180) 8.196 ms !X * *
12 * * *
13 * * *
14 * * *
15 * * *
16 * * *
17 * * *
18 * * 63.236.93.180 (63.236.93.180) 8.959 ms !X
19 * * *
20 * * *
21 * * *
22 * * *
23 * * *
24 * * 63.236.93.180 (63.236.93.180) 9.068 ms !X
25 * * *
26 * * *
27 * * *
28 * * *
29 * * *
30 * * *


Note the serious problem at 63.236.93.180

But from another test site at the same time...

http://networking.ringofsaturn.com/Tools/traceroute.php

1 dsl081-112-001.dfw1.dsl.speakeasy.net (64.81.112.1) 20.910 ms 26.530 ms 19.402 ms
2 110.ge-0-0-0.cr1.dfw1.speakeasy.net (69.17.82.225) 19.593 ms 19.244 ms 17.673 ms
3 444.ge-6-3-0.cr1.dfw2.us.above.net (209.249.11.194) 17.873 ms 18.968 ms 17.393 ms
4 dap-brdr-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.1.109) 17.950 ms 19.110 ms 17.196 ms
5 dal-core-02.inet.qwest.net (205.171.225.54) 17.426 ms 18.906 ms 128.751 ms
6 ewr-core-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.8.186) 59.863 ms 59.719 ms 60.244 ms
7 ewr-cntr-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.146) 58.968 ms 59.650 ms 60.494 ms
8 msfc-22.ewr.qwest.net (63.146.100.34) 59.066 ms 203.809 ms 59.280 ms
9 63.236.93.180 (63.236.93.180) 59.792 ms 58.379 ms 59.791 ms
10 63.236.73.204 (63.236.73.204) [open] 61.519 ms 62.252 ms 65.681 ms


Normal looking result.

Now here's a traceroute from http://www.washington.edu/networking/tools/traceroute

1 zinc-FE-4-7.cac.washington.edu (140.142.3.1) 0 ms 0 ms 0 ms
2 uwbr1-ge2-2.cac.washington.edu (140.142.155.23) 1 ms 1 ms 0 ms
3 cnsp1-wes-ge-0-0-0-0.pnw-gigapop.net (209.124.176.8) 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms
4 129.250.10.194 (129.250.10.194) 0 ms 1 ms 1 ms
5 p16-0-0-0.r00.chcgil06.us.bb.verio.net (129.250.2.7) 42 ms 42 ms 42 ms
6 p16-1-0-0.r01.chcgil06.us.bb.verio.net (129.250.5.77) 45 ms 56 ms 41 ms
7 p4-0.qwest.chcgil06.us.bb.verio.net (129.250.9.190) 48 ms 42 ms 42 ms
8 cer-core-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.139.145) 42 ms 42 ms 42 ms
9 ewr-core-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.1) 67 ms 71 ms 65 ms
10 ewr-cntr-01.inet.qwest.net (205.171.17.146) 68 ms 70 ms 66 ms
11 msfc-22.ewr.qwest.net (63.146.100.34) 66 ms 65 ms 81 ms
12 * * 63.236.93.180 (63.236.93.180) 65 ms
13 * * *
14 * 63.236.93.180 (63.236.93.180) 66 ms *
15 * 63.236.93.180 (63.236.93.180) 66 ms *
16 63.236.93.180 (63.236.93.180) 80 ms * *
17 * * *
18 * 63.236.93.180 (63.236.93.180) 66 ms *

Notice the same problem as the first traceroute at 63.236.93.180 (Qwest Communications)

Make what you will of that but there's definately a problem before it reaches VRDR from some of these results.