|
13 Mar 14 - 03:08 PM (#3609448) Subject: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: gnu Chrome, IE, Firefox, Opera... I have a hard time loading threads and cannot post to most no matter what settings I use. Anyone else? |
|
13 Mar 14 - 03:21 PM (#3609452) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: John J No problem displaying stuff or posting, but it's terribly slow in responding. (Win2000, XP, Win7, Ubuntu, all running Firefox) JJ |
|
13 Mar 14 - 03:22 PM (#3609454) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: gnu Hehehee. Just tried to load this one as it had only one post. Nope, until the third attempt. When longer threads load after MANY attempts (not only different browsers on various settings but on three different PCs), they are truncated and there is no box to post in. |
|
13 Mar 14 - 04:26 PM (#3609467) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: Stilly River Sage Your browser probably stops trying if the loading time takes too long. See if you can adjust the timeout period on your browser of preference. |
|
13 Mar 14 - 04:38 PM (#3609471) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: Mathew Raymond I'm on chrome and its pretty slow. Every once in a while it will say theres an error and to try again later |
|
13 Mar 14 - 04:57 PM (#3609475) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: JohnInKansas Don't try to post while someone is downloading the MOABS thread. (Or sny of the others whose sole purposes is to see how many posts can be made before anyone says anything - but do note that sometimes what appears to be one of those is just the result of nobody having anything to say and not knowing it.) I have noted that a failure to post isn't too uncommon. If I remember to do it, I copy the post just in case, so that I can paste it back and resubmit. It usually works on a retry. Occasionally it looks like it didn't post (the input box stays up and you don't go back to the Index) but a return to the Index and reloading the thread shows it did get there. I also have seen a few cases when the server loads part of the thread and there's a delay before it comes back and loads the rest of it. The wait for the 'cat to finish downloading the whole thing hasn't been too long in cases I've seen, but might be long enough to make you think it isn't going to finish. If even a part of the thread shows in your browser, a "Refresh" of what you have of the thread should try to reload it without the need to go back and start over from the index page, but I won't make any promises on that. John |
|
13 Mar 14 - 06:03 PM (#3609492) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: Stilly River Sage No one downloads the Mother of All BS thread, John. Not anyone in their right mind. They click on the little d next to the post count and it appears with the most recent post on top. MOAB has no impact on the speed and efficiency of Mudcat. Really old servers are the problem. SRS |
|
13 Mar 14 - 06:03 PM (#3609493) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: gnu "Don't try to post while someone is downloading the MOABS thread." Can you let me know where to find that info? >;-) "... adjust the timeout..." I am lucky I am conscious let alone try to figure that out. BTW, SRS, I had a great post for the overlord but I just can't post it. Now, all I have to post is about how I wanna shred Old Man Winter thru my snowblower. |
|
13 Mar 14 - 09:47 PM (#3609523) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: JohnInKansas Stilly - YOU KNOW not to download MOABS, and I KNOW not to download MOABS, but an innocent visitor might not know. And even someone who knows might just click the wrong end of the links. And the comment was obviously facetious, since you can't know what someone else is downloading when you click your clack. Problems with opening a file or posting are much more likely to depend on what someone else is doing here than on what you do. The server has a finite queue limit, and a preset timeout to discard attempts to connect if your request can't make it to the top. Collisions, where the server tries to process more than one hit at a time are less common than in "the good old days," but apparently still occur. And if you're lucky enough to be relayed here through multiple intermediate servers, and of them can lose you, expecially if traffic is high somewhere in your relay link path. (High traffic means several hits within a few seconds, or milliseconds, not just millions per day, and "instantaneous overloads" may not be visible in site statistics.) "The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place." -- George Bernard Shaw, Irish writer IMO, MOABS is a special case for GBS, but a reasonable amount silliness is of course part of the charm of mudcat. John |
|
14 Mar 14 - 04:44 AM (#3609559) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: gnu Indeed. |
|
14 Mar 14 - 10:23 AM (#3609642) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: gnu Worked well in IE this AM. I added Mudcat to the compatability list last night and still had problems. Maybe the reboot did 'something'? Hmmm... better not to ask any questions. I posted early and then mid-morn (here in nb.ca). |
|
14 Mar 14 - 12:53 PM (#3609686) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: Bill D also note... when you click on a thread, there are also background links to FaceBook, Amazon, Google ad links and 'other stuff' being loaded. Lag time 'may' be associated with some of these. How do I know? Because when I hover or hold the mouse button over the 'back' button, I often see the links.... it sometimes take 3-4 clicks to actually GO back. This happens in many, many other sites also. The actual details of how it works is beyond me, but I like to control, as much as possible, how MY browser works and what I see and who knows about it. Paranoid? Nawwwww... just picky. |
|
14 Mar 14 - 01:47 PM (#3609701) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: Q (Frank Staplin) Response times long. I have clicked submit, gone to the kitchen to get coffee, and hope it has entered the post by the time I get back- occasionally only, but I often have time to glance at another website before the creaking wheels turn. |
|
14 Mar 14 - 01:52 PM (#3609703) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: Q (Frank Staplin) From what John posted, are the long garbage threads below the line responsible for delays? They should be removed! I don't have delays with any other website, and some are complex. |
|
14 Mar 14 - 01:53 PM (#3609705) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: Elektra I've been trying to catch up on things here lately (Howdy y'all! XOXOX) and my searches (among other things) seem to keep giving the server a bad hair day - it has thrown me several errors over the last few days. Frankly though, Mudcat server lag is just something I got used to from the get, so it doesn't shock me now - still WAY better than it used to be. Maybe it's unusual _these_ days, but I haven't been checking in regularly enough to know. *sniffle* Sorry 'bout that. As a concept, it frequently has to do with how many people are active on the site and what they are doing. There definitely tend to be "peak" usage hours here, where page/query load times may suffer significantly. The partial pageload problem, particularly sans posting-pane (say THAT fast ten times!) is generally indicative of a heavy load on the Mudcat Server itself. It is likely more related to searches than thread-reading, though if a lot of people are busy posting too, the lag is as likely to be from the actual hard drive being unable to keep up with all the read/write requests. I am unfamiliar with the current traffic patterns, but try keeping track of the time of day and you may find it makes a useful difference. *E* |
|
14 Mar 14 - 02:20 PM (#3609713) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: Mathew Raymond Seems like a dated server problem |
|
14 Mar 14 - 02:28 PM (#3609718) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: gnu Well, if it was traffic, why didn't I have these problems 'before'. BTW... me and my BIG mouth! Same problems just in the past 30 minutes. |
|
14 Mar 14 - 02:38 PM (#3609722) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: gnu Hahahahahaa! I just booted up my Vista PC which has been offline for a while to download some pics from my camera. Figure this out. http://www.flickr.com/photos/15565423@N05/13151740255/ |
|
14 Mar 14 - 02:55 PM (#3609727) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: GUEST,Eliza I thought it was our feeble Broadband speed. Often, it says it's been put offline by the moderator, but if you try again two seconds later, it loads. Have often had my posts disappear before they get there. (Probably not a bad thing, as I do ramble on a bit.) I'm on Chrome. (Well, that's what is says on the lid of this thing.) |
|
14 Mar 14 - 04:31 PM (#3609746) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: gnu Always copy and paste before posting (been that way for years and years). Try the back button and then reloading too, of course. Many use a word processor to formulate posts and then copy and paste in a thread... good idea. |
|
14 Mar 14 - 04:41 PM (#3609748) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: JohnInKansas Each thread is identified in the mudcat database somewhat like a "folder" on your computer. This thread is: http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=153958&messages=19 Each time a new post is added, the "message count" is updated, hence the "&messages=19" on the end of the identification. Each post is more like a "file" (in a folder) on your computer, identified by the thread id and also by the individual post number. The post in which Q asks if the "big threads" affect operation is: http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=153958&messages=19#3609703 Site identity: http://www.mudcat.org/ Thread identity: thread.cfm?threadid=15395 Number of posts currently in the thread: &messages=19 Identity of the individual post: #3609703 Individual threads are assigned their "thread number" sequentially, and the posts are also are assigned their "post number" sequentially without regard to what thread they're in, so it doesn't really matter if they're in a short thread or a long one. Using the "Filter" you can select "All" for how far to go back, but mudcat limits the number of "hits" (threads) reported to approximately 100, so you can't actually go "back to the beginning" that way. You can search for a thread "too far back" using the form (in your browser address box): http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=1 Unfortunately, thread #1 was numbered during setup of the site, and doesn't survive. The first thread that existed here the last time I looked was ?threadid=4. Oldest Surviving Thread at Mudcat There are now at least 15,395 threads, and only the highest numbered 100 (15,295 and later) will be returned if you just use the filter without modifiers, so if you want to "find" a thread with a lower number you have to enter the indvidual thread number. For the next thread, increment the number by 1, etc. The total size of the database (mainly the number of posts) probably does affect server response. The total size of the "index" (number of threads) probably does affect server response. The main factor affecting response probably is the "front end load" on the queue due to the number of requests lined up for the 'cat to reply to at any given time. In the distant past, requests in the queue could time out if traffic was more than could be handled, and the "timed out" hits never got a reply. Additionally, the server didn't do a perfect job of deleting the dropped requests and the queue got "stuffed" and stopped responding, or responded very slowly, to new requests. The solution then was to "reboot" the server, which cleared the "trash" and restored prompt response. The ability of the mudcat server to handle higher traffic densities has greatly improved, but it still seems that it's possible to "outrun" the front end if a lot of requests arrive in a very short time. It "looks like" Max has improved things so that fewer "dead requests" clutter up the server and most overloads are automatically resolved and are temporary. It is still possible that the server isn't quite big/fast enough to handle all of the worst-case traffic. The answer to Q's question is that the size of a thread has no significant effect unless someone tries to load it all at once. I don't check MOABS very often, since there's nothing to tell me whether someone has added something of interest or if it's just the usual babble, and when the subject changes it's very difficult to identify prior posts on the newest subject (how far back do you look) so really believing your latest comment is meaningful is sort of a hallucination. I don't like making "out of context" comments, when I don't at least think I know what I'm commenting on,but others are welcome to use it as they wish. John |
|
14 Mar 14 - 08:42 PM (#3609775) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: gnu "just the usual babble" I assure you, sir, that the quality of bullshit on Mom's thread is of penultimate quality, ranging from "babble" to prose that would make you tremble and weep. Just depends on the time of day. Ya pays yer money, ya takes yer chances. Bugger the bunny eh? |
|
14 Mar 14 - 09:30 PM (#3609784) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: Stilly River Sage Mathew, Mudcat is privately owned and runs (literally) on a server in a cabin in the woods of Pennsylvania. Every so often the server gets replaced and works fast for a while. There are software developments underway, I hear tell, and one of these days a new server and Mudcat 2.0 will run faster for all of us. Just don't hold your breath. These things come in their own time. SRS |
|
15 Mar 14 - 06:35 PM (#3609925) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: gnu New server is functioning with blazing speed! I am one happy camper! Thanks again, Max! Best site on the net... anyone who has read my and others' posts over the last decade plus knows why I said that. |
|
15 Mar 14 - 06:45 PM (#3609928) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: Max Although I love taking credit for pretty much everything around here, Joe Offer... and all the joeclones for that matter... deserve AT LEAST as much credit as I. They work their asses off every day. |
|
15 Mar 14 - 07:07 PM (#3609932) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: Stilly River Sage But Max made Mudcat load faster! Thanks! Maggie |
|
15 Mar 14 - 07:14 PM (#3609933) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: Max Well, Joe had a hand in that as well. |
|
16 Mar 14 - 05:30 AM (#3609984) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: gnu Thanks Joe and joeclones. |
|
16 Mar 14 - 05:21 PM (#3610107) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: Stilly River Sage 👍 |
|
23 Mar 14 - 11:34 AM (#3612112) Subject: RE: Tech: Mudcat will not display properly From: maeve I just noticed that the "Mudcat Cafe new" logo at the top left of each page has morphed into "Mudcat Cafe awe" along with the updates in other parts. Nice, Max and all. |