Server up, but for how long? May 24, 2001 11:40 PM Subscribe
We're finally back up. What a relief. I was getting really jittery. But are we back up for good?
On a side note, my heart goes out to Matt. I've been laid off three times in the last two years, so I feel your pain. (I'm starting another new job on Tuesday.)
Well, I hope the downtime gave you a well-deserved moment of zen. (Though, if you're anything like me, you absorb the collective impatience of the masses. When my projects go down, it always makes my butt twitch.)
posted by waxpancake at 11:52 PM on May 24, 2001
Well, I hope the downtime gave you a well-deserved moment of zen. (Though, if you're anything like me, you absorb the collective impatience of the masses. When my projects go down, it always makes my butt twitch.)
posted by waxpancake at 11:52 PM on May 24, 2001
oh yeah, let me know if the DSL line is noticeably slower. It should be, it's only a 128kbps line. I'd suggest everyone limits their front page to <3 days view as well.
posted by mathowie (staff) at 11:54 PM on May 24, 2001
posted by mathowie (staff) at 11:54 PM on May 24, 2001
I'm loading pretty slowly.
(please note, this beggar is not being a chooser)
posted by modofo at 12:22 AM on May 25, 2001
(please note, this beggar is not being a chooser)
posted by modofo at 12:22 AM on May 25, 2001
I didn't notice any added load time for Metafilter, in Metatalk the images in the menu above took a little time, but again it's not that noticeable.
P.S: Good luck with your job search Matt.
posted by riffola at 12:23 AM on May 25, 2001
P.S: Good luck with your job search Matt.
posted by riffola at 12:23 AM on May 25, 2001
you're hosting this on your DSL line? it's slower, but not that much slower, but it's also early morning.
good luck finding an engaging job and a dependable host.
posted by register at 12:39 AM on May 25, 2001
good luck finding an engaging job and a dependable host.
posted by register at 12:39 AM on May 25, 2001
Matt, you could probably save just the tiniest bit of speed by off-loading the Spellchecker.net javascript to another server. That 11k file, several thousand times a day, adds up, I'm sure. As an alternative, you could make it just load on the comment pages, and not the home page, since there's no reason to have it load on page one (I did that by using two different headers). Hell, for that matter, you could off-load all of your graphics, as small as they are, to another server. Every little bit...
As has been discussed on these pages before, I recommend using Apple's iTools/iDisk (not whatever's at idisk.com): reliable company, decently fast servers, no fees, no advertising and no it's perfectly alright to just pull graphics from the free 20MB of hard drive space. (I'm not sure if it's Mac-only, or not). I've just this week finally put all my images for World New York over there, leaving them, however, in their original local directories in case I should need to quickly change back (and also for the Google cache, which still pulls from the old directories, at least until yesterday googlebot ransacking of my site shows up in the new index).
posted by Mo Nickels at 4:25 AM on May 25, 2001
As has been discussed on these pages before, I recommend using Apple's iTools/iDisk (not whatever's at idisk.com): reliable company, decently fast servers, no fees, no advertising and no it's perfectly alright to just pull graphics from the free 20MB of hard drive space. (I'm not sure if it's Mac-only, or not). I've just this week finally put all my images for World New York over there, leaving them, however, in their original local directories in case I should need to quickly change back (and also for the Google cache, which still pulls from the old directories, at least until yesterday googlebot ransacking of my site shows up in the new index).
posted by Mo Nickels at 4:25 AM on May 25, 2001
no it's perfectly alright to just pull graphics from the free 20MB of hard drive space
I dunno what that spurious "no" is doing in there, but it shouldn't be.
posted by Mo Nickels at 4:27 AM on May 25, 2001
I dunno what that spurious "no" is doing in there, but it shouldn't be.
posted by Mo Nickels at 4:27 AM on May 25, 2001
Another potential bandwidth saver: On the comment preview page don't load the entire thread, just preview the comment.
We'll miss out on comments posted while we're writing, but it would probably help out a smidge.
posted by cCranium at 5:47 AM on May 25, 2001
We'll miss out on comments posted while we're writing, but it would probably help out a smidge.
posted by cCranium at 5:47 AM on May 25, 2001
Mo: you have to have a Mac with the iTools plugin installed to sign up for the service, but after that it's pretty platform-independent.
posted by darukaru at 6:38 AM on May 25, 2001
posted by darukaru at 6:38 AM on May 25, 2001
MeFi doesn't have many images on it, admittedly, but you might be able speed up the system a bit by moving those to another server, as well. You could also make the stylesheet an external file instead of embedding it in each page and host that elsewhere. I have some Web space where I'd be glad to host any static files that would help offload the bandwidth a bit. I'm sure I'm not alone -- I bet many other MeFi members could host some files, and all you need do is ask...
Of course if MeFi is moving to a faster home soon, this all becomes moot...
posted by kindall at 9:15 AM on May 25, 2001
Of course if MeFi is moving to a faster home soon, this all becomes moot...
posted by kindall at 9:15 AM on May 25, 2001
Great idea Kindall, Mo... I have a Mac and haven't used any of my iDisk space. I'd be happy to house some graphics.
posted by silusGROK at 12:59 PM on May 25, 2001
posted by silusGROK at 12:59 PM on May 25, 2001
It seems to me that most of the images and the style sheet should be cached, so you're only hitting them once per user per session. Still potentially a lot, but not as much as it would be without caching.
posted by fooljay at 2:00 PM on May 25, 2001
posted by fooljay at 2:00 PM on May 25, 2001
How about using the Akamaitech cache servers? CNN.com, etc use 'em, perhaps there is a way the static files here can be served from an Akamai server.
Example: the Metatalk logo.
posted by riffola at 3:12 PM on May 25, 2001
Example: the Metatalk logo.
posted by riffola at 3:12 PM on May 25, 2001
It seems to me that most of the images and the style sheet should be cached
This is theoretically true, but most people have their browsers set to at least check to see if there's a new version each time a file is needed. My copy of MacIE gets hung up a couple seconds asking for spch.js each time I go to a MeFi thread, even though I'm sure it's in the cache and hasn't changed.
posted by kindall at 3:46 PM on May 25, 2001
This is theoretically true, but most people have their browsers set to at least check to see if there's a new version each time a file is needed. My copy of MacIE gets hung up a couple seconds asking for spch.js each time I go to a MeFi thread, even though I'm sure it's in the cache and hasn't changed.
posted by kindall at 3:46 PM on May 25, 2001
Mine too. That spch.js drives me nuts sometimes. I never use spellcheck either, so it's just wasted bits for me.
The style sheet won't be cached anyway because it's in-page. If it were a separate linked .css file, at least some people would benefit from caching.
posted by rodii at 9:04 PM on May 25, 2001
The style sheet won't be cached anyway because it's in-page. If it were a separate linked .css file, at least some people would benefit from caching.
posted by rodii at 9:04 PM on May 25, 2001
What's really whacked is that IE asks for spch.js even if I have JavaScript turned off. I added MeFi temporarily to my Restricted Sites zone, where I keep Geocities and the other sites that use JavaScript pop-up add windows (that zone has JS turned off), in the hopes of saving Matt some bandwidth and me some frustration. No dice...
posted by kindall at 11:30 PM on May 25, 2001
posted by kindall at 11:30 PM on May 25, 2001
If it were a separate linked .css file, at least some people would benefit from caching.
I think the problem is that the style-sheet is, to a degree, user configurable. To make it a seperate file Matt would have to create a new .css file for every user.
posted by cCranium at 8:11 AM on May 26, 2001
I think the problem is that the style-sheet is, to a degree, user configurable. To make it a seperate file Matt would have to create a new .css file for every user.
posted by cCranium at 8:11 AM on May 26, 2001
Of course. I never put that together, but you're right. I've always wondered why the CSS was in the page--never considered that it was being generated on the fly. Neat.
posted by rodii at 9:23 AM on May 26, 2001
posted by rodii at 9:23 AM on May 26, 2001
Matt, I'd be more than happy to host some images on my servers. Lord knows some traffic might make them happier. :-)
posted by fooljay at 8:48 PM on May 26, 2001
posted by fooljay at 8:48 PM on May 26, 2001
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
posted by mathowie (staff) at 11:50 PM on May 24, 2001