|
Author
|
Topic: Long Topics and System Resources
|
b0b
Sysop From: Cloverdale, California, USA
|
posted 25 November 2006 09:43 AM
profile
Someone asked me why I've been discouraging long topics, but allowing the ZB topic to continue. Here's my reply:The ZB thread is long, but it isn't very active. Absorbing that amount of processing a couple times a day isn't a problem. The problem is that when a topic is very long AND very active, it ties up the computer a lot and the whole system slows down. I recently shut down a very long topic in Humor for the same reason when I realized what was happening. You see, when someone replies to a topic, the system generates new web pages for ALL of the pages in the topic. Posting to a 400-reply topic uses 10 times as much processor time as posting to a 38-reply topic. When you have 10 people actively posting to a topic that's 10 pages long... Well, you get the picture. ------------------
 Bobby Lee
-b0b- quasar@b0b.com
System Administrator
My Blog |
Mike Shefrin
Member From: New York
|
posted 25 November 2006 09:53 AM
profile
Hey b0b, what was the very long topic in the Humor section that was shut down?  |
Papa Joe Pollick
Member From: Pontiac, Michigan, USA
|
posted 25 November 2006 01:18 PM
profile
Don't pick on the boss Mike. |
Mike Shefrin
Member From: New York
|
posted 25 November 2006 01:24 PM
profile
That was a friendly joke. I'm not "picking on the boss".Lighten up![This message was edited by Mike Shefrin on 05 December 2006 at 07:12 PM.] |
Papa Joe Pollick
Member From: Pontiac, Michigan, USA
|
posted 25 November 2006 05:44 PM
profile
Don't pick on PJ Mike please .I'm pullin your leg. |
Mike Shefrin
Member From: New York
|
posted 25 November 2006 05:58 PM
profile
Sorry about that; at times it's hard to know when someone's being serious or funny around here.Looks like I'm the one who needs to lighten up. Sorry,PJ, I should've known better.  [This message was edited by Mike Shefrin on 25 November 2006 at 08:35 PM.] |
David L. Donald
Member From: Koh Samui Island, Thailand
|
posted 26 November 2006 09:39 PM
profile
Sounds like time for some distributed computing.So thread one, then thread two after 3-4 pages. |
b0b
Sysop From: Cloverdale, California, USA
|
posted 26 November 2006 10:54 PM
profile
Easy for you to say. |
Jim Cohen
Member From: Philadelphia, PA
|
posted 27 November 2006 04:52 AM
profile
David, don't pick on the boss. |
Howard Tate
Member From: Leesville, Louisiana, USA
|
posted 27 November 2006 06:21 AM
profile
I know b0b is basically an honest man, but I still think it was all those ban** cartoons that made him close it. ------------------
Howard |
Mike Wheeler
Member From: Columbus, Ohio, USA
|
posted 05 December 2006 11:58 AM
profile
All you kids quit pickin' on each other!! Now go to your rooms!! |
Andy Volk
Member From: Boston, MA
|
posted 05 December 2006 12:22 PM
profile
Mom, tell Jimmy to quit biting! |
Ray Minich
Member From: Limestone, New York, USA
|
posted 05 December 2006 01:09 PM
profile
Are we there yet? |
Jimmie Martin
Member From: Ohio, USA
|
posted 05 December 2006 02:41 PM
profile
i think what b0b is saying is that some folks post a lot of long pages on the forum. then they do it again and say the same thing just in a different way. but some people don't have anything else to do with their lives. then the argument begins and that is more posts. maybe that is why he said easy for you to say. i dunno. |
b0b
Sysop From: Cloverdale, California, USA
|
posted 05 December 2006 04:59 PM
profile
No, I meant that it's easy to suggest distributed computing, and hard to implement it. |
Jimmie Martin
Member From: Ohio, USA
|
posted 05 December 2006 06:23 PM
profile
bob does implement have to do with tractors? down close to where i'm from there is a place called farm implement. they sell tractors and farming equipment. also there is a tractor supply. george straight has something to do with that. |
Calvin Walley
Member From: colorado city colorado, USA
|
posted 10 December 2006 07:34 PM
profile
B0B, is there not some way to stop everyone from rambling on and on, they can take an otherwise interesting thread and ruin it with senseless babling , hence the term babling fool.
in other words its like they can't write 2-3 sentence's to convey the point they are trying to make, so they need to ramble on and on,
or they simply think that they are impressing everyone with 1000 words about nothing------------------
Mullen SD-10 3&5 / nashville 400
Hilton volume pedal
|
Dave Mudgett
Member From: Central Pennsylvania, USA
|
posted 11 December 2006 01:47 PM
profile
Calvin - not all ideas can be reduced to 2-3 simple sentences, just like not all problems can be reduced to a 30-second superficial soundbite to be blithely spouted off by a smarmy politician.I think the issue is whether or not somebody has something to say in those 1000 words, not the length of the post. Of course, all this is a different topic than this thread is about, which is the fact that long threads - threads which take up a lot of separate thread pages - force the forum server to do a lot of extra work to recreate all the thread's pages every time a new post is made to the most recent page. I think that is b0b's point, and it's important because these long threads can potentially slow the entire server down. |
Calvin Walley
Member From: colorado city colorado, USA
|
posted 11 December 2006 03:23 PM
profile
Dave i must disagree with you
i am a simple man and i CAN get my point across with just a few WELL CHOSEN words
i don't feel the need to impress anyone or to babble endlessly------------------
Mullen SD-10 3&5 / nashville 400
Hilton volume pedal
|
b0b
Sysop From: Cloverdale, California, USA
|
posted 11 December 2006 06:17 PM
profile
I usually don't read long posts. I think that the best posts on the forum are Earnest Bovine's one-liners.------------------
Bobby Lee
-b0b- quasar@b0b.com
System Administrator
My Blog |
Calvin Walley
Member From: colorado city colorado, USA
|
posted 11 December 2006 06:25 PM
profile
B0B, am i right or wrong that it costs you more when these posts get long ? i really don't know how the cost is computed for things like the forum
------------------
Mullen SD-10 3&5 / nashville 400
Hilton volume pedal
[This message was edited by Calvin Walley on 11 December 2006 at 06:26 PM.]
|
HowardR
Member From: N.Y.C.,N.Y.
|
posted 11 December 2006 07:16 PM
profile
not sure about the cost of long posts....but I know for a fact that Joey Ace works on commission.....he gets a percentage for every thread that he locks......  [This message was edited by HowardR on 11 December 2006 at 07:17 PM.] |
b0b
Sysop From: Cloverdale, California, USA
|
posted 12 December 2006 09:35 AM
profile
Minus the cost of the lock itself, of course. |
b0b
Sysop From: Cloverdale, California, USA
|
posted 12 December 2006 09:43 AM
profile
Calvin,
No, I own the server, and the bandwidth is set by the limit of our leased T1 line. The "cost" of using more processor time is measured in how long people have to wait for a page from the server.
If the computer is busy regenerating a lot of pages, it doesn't have time to serve pages to other users. The page requests stack up, and people feel that the web site has "slowed down".
I hope that explains it better. Some sites rent server space and bandwidth from an internet service provider. They get billed by how much space and bandwidth they use. We don't do that here. We own the hardware and lease a broadband line from the phone company. There's no metering going on at all.------------------
Bobby Lee
-b0b- quasar@b0b.com
System Administrator
My Blog |
Calvin Walley
Member From: colorado city colorado, USA
|
posted 12 December 2006 11:41 AM
profile
thanks for the information B0B , at least the windbags don't cost you anything extracalvin |
Jimmie Martin
Member From: Ohio, USA
|
posted 12 December 2006 03:19 PM
profile
b0b you really opened yourself up now. i can see the post now. its just cold in dec. thats why it snows. |
Scott Shipley
Member From: Nashville, Tennessee USA
|
posted 18 December 2006 02:21 PM
profile
I agree with Jim, b0b, Calvin, David, and Pete (different post, thought I´d save b0b a few bucks worth of bandwidth ). I disagree with Andy, Ray, Howard (I own a ban**), and Buck Nelson. Not only is he guilty of marketing sensationalism, but he´s responsible for one of the best 60´s-rock-bands-turned-vegas-acts having to dye their hair green just to get on TV.  [This message was edited by Scott Shipley on 18 December 2006 at 03:23 PM.] |
The Steel Guitar Forum
