Kinda slow during peak hours.....?
- Thread starter oblivion2888
- Start date
It is more than slow, the snails are passing us at an alarming rate. Sometimes in the past couple of days it has taken 2 minutes or longer to load a page.
well im a web developer, and this forum is written in cold fusion (bad web language) and makes too many database calls (kills servers)
both of these put the server thru much more work than it has to, if they were ever to upgrade/change the front end of this forum, i wold recomend an ASP soulution, as it would integrate better into the NT servers.
both of these put the server thru much more work than it has to, if they were ever to upgrade/change the front end of this forum, i wold recomend an ASP soulution, as it would integrate better into the NT servers.
ColdFusion is far from a "bad" web language that "kills servers." ASP, on the other hand, is vulnerable to far more security issues (not that they don't exist in CF or PHP). BTW, CF is *native* to NT servers, not just ASP, and it can certainly handle high volume traffic (many major websites and even some search engines are being built with CF now)...PHP is not native to NT, but on a very high-volume server, you'd be best off with a PHP frontend/SQL backend on a *nix server anyways.
Don't knock what you haven't worked with...CF is one of the best all-around solutions out there for dynamic content.
~Ladi
Don't knock what you haven't worked with...CF is one of the best all-around solutions out there for dynamic content.
~Ladi
Train, thanks for your input. But, you are so wrong its pathetic. ColdFusion is as fast or faster than ASP. Its really not worth arguing with you as your knowledge of web applications is so limited its futile. Below is the execution time to load this thread. Slow? I think not.
Execution Time
94 milliseconds
Who else runs ColdFusion?
Autobytel
Toys 'R us.
Execution Time
94 milliseconds
Who else runs ColdFusion?
Autobytel
Toys 'R us.
Excuse me, I am certified in Allaire Cold Fusion 4.5, and currently code in it 8 hours a day on one of our clients projects.
I am also certified in VB and ASP, and have done large domains in both (my current CF application recieves over one million hits a day)
I feel i am perfectly legitimate in saying what i did based on the fact that I have done extensive work in both. In my humble opinion ASP by far outperforms CF. Cold Fusion just happened to have come out much earlier and at the time was the best web solution, but when ASP arrived i quickly changed my favorite.
BTW 94 milliseconds is horrible, I've had pages with more data than this that load in 12 milliseconds. Where i work, we won't publish a page, in ASP or CF, that doesnt load in under 50 ms on average.
oh and I have benchamarks too, with one of our clients we ran tests, we had two pages, one in ASP the other in CF, they had the exact same html output, the exact same data calls, and the CF page NEVER executed faster than ASP. Dont get me wrong, CF has been put through its paces, and does get the job done, but has never beaten ASP in performance. I admit i may have been i little extreme earlier when i said it was a "Bad" language to develop in, its not, i just think ASP is better.
I am also certified in VB and ASP, and have done large domains in both (my current CF application recieves over one million hits a day)
I feel i am perfectly legitimate in saying what i did based on the fact that I have done extensive work in both. In my humble opinion ASP by far outperforms CF. Cold Fusion just happened to have come out much earlier and at the time was the best web solution, but when ASP arrived i quickly changed my favorite.
BTW 94 milliseconds is horrible, I've had pages with more data than this that load in 12 milliseconds. Where i work, we won't publish a page, in ASP or CF, that doesnt load in under 50 ms on average.
oh and I have benchamarks too, with one of our clients we ran tests, we had two pages, one in ASP the other in CF, they had the exact same html output, the exact same data calls, and the CF page NEVER executed faster than ASP. Dont get me wrong, CF has been put through its paces, and does get the job done, but has never beaten ASP in performance. I admit i may have been i little extreme earlier when i said it was a "Bad" language to develop in, its not, i just think ASP is better.
<< edited due to mature subject matter >>
I think the point was lost when you bashed a language without any real knowledge or proof. Its easy to say ASP sucks.. but why does it suck? Does it have proper server side caching ? Can it run on 4-5 different platforms? Every language has its use, and it all comes down to how good you are at it, what platform you are running on, what is your anticipated load. The point is some of THE LARGEST sites use CF, some of THE LARGEST sites use ASP, some of THE LARGEST sites use PHP. None of the languages suck, and ALL OF THEM can serve a purpose.
It happens so frequently when individuals do this, and well to some of us its offensive. Some of us make a damn decent living off any one of these languages. So why not sit back and think before typing away about something you really don't have a grasp of what so ever. i.e 94ms is slow on a site that does 10-15 million hits a day ;p Geesh that has to be the most ridiculous thing anyone has ever said.
I think the point was lost when you bashed a language without any real knowledge or proof. Its easy to say ASP sucks.. but why does it suck? Does it have proper server side caching ? Can it run on 4-5 different platforms? Every language has its use, and it all comes down to how good you are at it, what platform you are running on, what is your anticipated load. The point is some of THE LARGEST sites use CF, some of THE LARGEST sites use ASP, some of THE LARGEST sites use PHP. None of the languages suck, and ALL OF THEM can serve a purpose.
It happens so frequently when individuals do this, and well to some of us its offensive. Some of us make a damn decent living off any one of these languages. So why not sit back and think before typing away about something you really don't have a grasp of what so ever. i.e 94ms is slow on a site that does 10-15 million hits a day ;p Geesh that has to be the most ridiculous thing anyone has ever said.
Not going to start an argument, but I'm a web developer for a Major hospital in the City I work in. My collegue and I had worked with some CF before and we both agreed that we prefered ASP over it as it seemed to be slightly faster. Interestingly, our rival hospital just released their new site in CF. It's not bad. I think it is a tad slower though, and I do prefer ASP with a good server set up.
Edit: But it gets the job done here, and Zuni, you must be pretty good with it so can't argue with a good programmer. Knowledge and experience go a long way. And I think this is the best CF site I've ever seen. I've never had very many "slow" problems with AnandTech.
Edit: But it gets the job done here, and Zuni, you must be pretty good with it so can't argue with a good programmer. Knowledge and experience go a long way. And I think this is the best CF site I've ever seen. I've never had very many "slow" problems with AnandTech.
Thanks Scorpion, we have had issues but 98% of them were all isp related. I think out of any of my clients anand has had the worst luck with ISP's and its not his fault at all. We use some pretty advanced caching routines 99% of anandtech is in memory and gets updated when databases get updated. Having fun writing code is what its all about
<Big Gulp>
Zuni,
I feel very unproffesional about calling CF "bad" I guess i chose the wrong words, really i was venting about some problems i had recently had with it, that i could have solved in ASP, but then of course there are also been problems in ASP that could have been solved much easier in CF.
Zuni,
I feel very unproffesional about calling CF "bad" I guess i chose the wrong words, really i was venting about some problems i had recently had with it, that i could have solved in ASP, but then of course there are also been problems in ASP that could have been solved much easier in CF.
Yep we all have those moments. I.e trying to load active x objects using cfobject in CF, its a sob . It's getting better but its not where asp is for active x.
Its all cool no worries.
we all have those moments. I.e trying to load active x objects using cfobject in CF, its a sob . It's getting better but its not where asp is for active x. Its all cool
no worries.maybe someday we will all be able to "speak" the same language, then we will have only ourselves to blame if something doesn't meet our expectations
I would like nothing more than there to be one language that does EVERYTHING right but hey we are living in reality Where MS and Allaire make mistakes
Where MS and Allaire make mistakes It's been fun watching you two duke it out. But the fact is, FuseTalk is the only database-driven board that's worth its salt (that I've found), so CF seems to me to be the only way to go...
yea, slow at peak times again. Damn. I thot probs were over.
We all know its isp hops, not server.
I'm getting 15 hops, last 4 over 1040ms
This time its AlterNet 157.130.33.22 where it starts
hope it heals itself
the best forum ive ever seen is Ultimate bullitin board, even though im an NT guy, and UBB runs in Perl.
The reason UBB is better than any CF or ASP forum i have found is simple, it writes each topic into static HTML, and only rewrites the topic when someone edits or posts to that topic. (if your on a modem youll notice when a topic loads in a fusetalk forum that each post comes up seperate, indicating the script loads that post, dumps it, loads another, dumps, etc., static HTML just dumps the whole page)
This is good for several reasons, first, static HTML will destroy any CF, ASP, JSP or whatever scripting language you use, no contest, servers can spit out static html like nobodys business. second, search engines prefer static pages, easier to index, thus more exposure there, if you want it anyways.
If fusetalk makes a forum which outputs static HTML, that would be awesome, but until then, UBB is tops in performance. I only wish they made it in ASP or CF
The reason UBB is better than any CF or ASP forum i have found is simple, it writes each topic into static HTML, and only rewrites the topic when someone edits or posts to that topic. (if your on a modem youll notice when a topic loads in a fusetalk forum that each post comes up seperate, indicating the script loads that post, dumps it, loads another, dumps, etc., static HTML just dumps the whole page)
This is good for several reasons, first, static HTML will destroy any CF, ASP, JSP or whatever scripting language you use, no contest, servers can spit out static html like nobodys business. second, search engines prefer static pages, easier to index, thus more exposure there, if you want it anyways.
If fusetalk makes a forum which outputs static HTML, that would be awesome, but until then, UBB is tops in performance. I only wish they made it in ASP or CF
heheheh UBB fast? sure for 1000 users.. it would NEVER handle 26,000 users. Fusetalk was built just because of that.. anand was running ubb and every time it hit 5000 users or so BOOOOOOM, MANY other sites have had that problem, UBB was not built to handle an enterprise class forum ;p Geesh.
UBB fast? sure for 1000 users.. it would NEVER handle 26,000 users. Fusetalk was built just because of that.. anand was running ubb and every time it hit 5000 users or so BOOOOOOM, MANY other sites have had that problem, UBB was not built to handle an enterprise class forum ;p Geesh.i don't even know how to program
i find myself saying that i am more interested in the hardware than the software, but from what i know of programming (stupid course of pascal as a prereq for intro to CS (ap equiv) at NYU) it's "fun." as in you see results...
i am having problems now, i don't know if it's "you," my ISP, or the fact that i just installed the final release of ie 5.5.
i find myself saying that i am more interested in the hardware than the software, but from what i know of programming (stupid course of pascal as a prereq for intro to CS (ap equiv) at NYU) it's "fun." as in you see results...
i am having problems now, i don't know if it's "you," my ISP, or the fact that i just installed the final release of ie 5.5.
hmmm CF beat static HTML? id like an explanation for this,
it seems your obviously biased torward fusetalk as you are a "FuseTalk Developer" but Oracle, Mp3.com, and Warner Bros all use UBB, ultimatebb.com has 14,000 users.
looks pretty huge to me: http://bboard.mp3.com/cgi-bin/mp3/ubb/Ultimate.cgi?action=intro
mp3.com doesnt display how man users, but they have about 75 forums, each with over 10,000 posts
if they can handle that many and you can only do 1,000... whats the problem? are you ever going to admit its a server problem? or are you just going to keep blaming it on ISP's? im on a dual T3 where i am right now and the only site i have trouble reaching right now is forums.anandtech.com sites in the UK and Australia are loading faster than this
there were a total of 15 sites listed on fusetalk.com using fusetalk, ultimatebb.com had nearly a thousand.
it seems your obviously biased torward fusetalk as you are a "FuseTalk Developer" but Oracle, Mp3.com, and Warner Bros all use UBB, ultimatebb.com has 14,000 users.
looks pretty huge to me: http://bboard.mp3.com/cgi-bin/mp3/ubb/Ultimate.cgi?action=intro
mp3.com doesnt display how man users, but they have about 75 forums, each with over 10,000 posts
if they can handle that many and you can only do 1,000... whats the problem? are you ever going to admit its a server problem? or are you just going to keep blaming it on ISP's? im on a dual T3 where i am right now and the only site i have trouble reaching right now is forums.anandtech.com sites in the UK and Australia are loading faster than this
there were a total of 15 sites listed on fusetalk.com using fusetalk, ultimatebb.com had nearly a thousand.
Its obvious you have been offended, by whom I don't know. The problems you are having are not coldfusion or fusetalk related. That is all I have to say regarding this matter.
sure is nice to be able to edit your post without the little edit message apearing when your the webmaster isnt it?
hoping no one would notice?
hoping no one would notice?
Hate to ask a stupid question, but how do I check my traceroutes and figure out where the holdup is? Is it a simple DOS deal like sending a ping? I have no problem taking your word that it isn't your server, just curious where the slowdown is taking place, because it seems to be getting worse. The page I am writing this on still hasn't finished loading (on cable modem) and I type slower than Forrest Gump talks.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter