Wilders SLOW!!!!!!!!!

[controler]

It took 24.013 seconds to load this page. ON DSL
and that appears to be a false number.
If you look at the loading page time at the bottom of the page, That number is displayed before the page is finished loading. At least it is on my machine.
After the site upgrade things seem to be really slow.
Guessing those on poor old dialup are not getting in at all.

[spy1]

May just be start-up glitches?

When I first came "in" here this morning, I was getting stuff like: "It took 4.222 seconds to load this page." (And some were a lot longer than that - and I'm on cable, too).

However, now I'm getting: "It took 0.317 seconds to load this page." Still a little slow, but at least I can't feel my beard growing while the page loads! :) Pete

[spy1]

Still way slow from the main page to any given post.

What's up? Pete

[Krusty]

Howdy all

Anybody noticed yesterday couldn´t find wilders indexes at all ? So wilders was out of reach to me.
It took 18+ seconds to download this page first time. My own ISP´s proxy was s l o w two days ago, had to use my primary ip to get connected.....
I hope this is temporary only, as usually is ;)

^Ari^

[FanJ]

Hi guys,

Yep, it is slow for me too.
Maybe caused by the server upgrade yesterday. It could well be solved in the coming days. We have to be a little patient, but Paul is in bed with the flu at the moment; I hope he will be OK soon.
Let's all be a little patient, please.

Thanks for your understanding,

Jan.

[UNICRON]

We're lookin into it.

Everyone gets a full year of forum membership for free for the hassle. after that, it is back to the regular rates ;)

[Primrose]

-{ Quote: " quoting: UNICRON link=board=11;threadid=7030;start=0#47020 date=1044509300]
We're lookin into it.

Everyone gets a full year of forum membership for free for the hassle. after that, it is back to the regular rates ;)
" }-

Now you want my second born son ? :o Where do I drop him off ? :D

[LowRider]

Took over three minutes to load homepage

The Wilders logo, TOS icon and the four icons at bottom
of page behaving very oddly. Like re-directors


LowRider

[Nick]

Just adding my input that it's slow for me as well. Page loads fast once it begins to load, but it takes awhile for anything to happen.

Hope Paul gets well soon.

[wink]

Hi,

I am also experiencing long delays on page loading times, it has been like this since the server upgrade.

Wink

[TEL]

Hi All,

Yep, slow as molasses in January (or February! now).

Still Paul has flu. (He got infected with a virus despite NOD32: joke.)

Considering his labor at Wilders, I can be very patient. Is that Paul in his personalized picture, playing tournament Chess? Maybe he ran into an opening novelty? Checkmate? Hahaha

Get well, Paul!

[Krusty]

It took 3.844 seconds to load this page. Now I tried without proxy, it is faster now [ feeling naked :-[ ]

^Ari^


and I use 56 k dialup :P

[Randy_Bell]

4.772 seconds to load this page, and I"m on DSL also. Really I only come here in the new Netscape 7 which has a multi-tab feature that keeps the individual tabs separate. In the old Communicator 4.79 with multiple windows open to different sites, if I dare open a window to Wilders, it loads very slowly and often hangs, causing all the other open windows to hang, which is most annoying. Although I like Wilders, I've been staying away because of this server problem and slow page loading you seem to be having here. LOL I hope it gets fixed soon. ;)

[Pretender]

sssssssllllllllllllllllllllllllooooooooooooowwwwwwwwwwwwwww here also. Taking more than a minute for some pages to load. 56k. connected at 48000bps. I can be very patient as these are one of the best boards I visit. Take care of that flu Paul.........first things first!!!!
bob

[poops]

Gaining speed??? :o ;D 8)

[clown]

seems like it - 33K6 and coming up smoothly 8)

[Tinribs]

It does seem to be speeding up, I'm on a 1meg modem and while its never been 'fast' it is increasing in speed again. :)

[Randy_Bell]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Tinribs link=board=11;threadid=7030;start=15#47335 date=1044689799]
It does seem to be speeding up, I'm on a 1meg modem and while its never been 'fast' it is increasing in speed again. :)
" }-
It seems to have sped up once I get here, but getting here still takes a long time for the site to be found and loaded in any of my three browsers: IE 6sp1, Netscape Communicator 4.79, or Netscape 7.01 -- and the past week or so, since you guys made the server change, I can't stay logged on using Communicator 4.79, apparently your server is rejecting my cookie and I've tried everything to fix it with no luck: and this is the only site on the Net where I can't stay logged on using that browser: I have to use the other browsers to come here to Wilders, which is OK but sites should be designed to accommodate the widest range of browsers, and people are still using the old 4.7x Communicator series so I think the webmaster should look into this and get it fixed asap. Thankfully though, the page loading seems improved, this page I'm posting from only took 0.336 seconds to load which is much better for DSL. I really like Wilders and hope all the bugs are out of the new site services soon. Warmly, Ran

[UNICRON]

we're workin on it Randy.

It seems Netscape has always had some quirks with the yabbse software. I can't use nescape here either. Mozilla is flaky for me too. I use IE under windows and Konqueror under linux when I come here.

[Tinribs]

I'm here as always with Phoenix and no problems with cookies at all,or any other problems either, I also tested it with my KMeleon standard, and KMeleon with Mozilla's 1.3a backend hack and still fine.

[Randy Bell]

-{ Quote: " quoting: UNICRON link=board=11;threadid=7030;start=15#47451 date=1044758799]we're workin on it Randy. It seems Netscape has always had some quirks with the yabbse software. I can't use nescape here either. Mozilla is flaky for me too. I use IE under windows and Konqueror under linux when I come here.
" }-

I wrote a long post and the #$$%%^&&**()_+!!{} forum software just nuked it! (Said I was already logged in by the name and email I used; am trying again.

What I basically tried to post was this: I don't have any problems here using IE 6sp1 or the new Netscape 7.01 (latest version); it's only the old Netscape Communicator 4.79 that has problems (can't stay logged on: thus I'm posting here as 'Guest' just to illustrate my point.)

I also mentioned that I think TrojanHunter Forum (http://www.misec.net/forum/?board=TrojanHunter) uses similar YaBB software and I don't have any problems there with this browser. It's only at Wilders, for some strange mysterious reason. Indeed, the software used here is remarkably similar (almost identical) to that used in TH forum.

It does, however, seem to be related to your recent change in servers, as I don't recall ever having this problem before that change. Apparently your server and/or software is rejecting my cookie and there's nothing I can do on my end to fix it: the problem lies on your end. Hope this gets fixed soon, in the meanwhile I'll use my other browsers when visiting this site.

Warmly, Ran

[MickeyTheMan]

It took 49.181 seconds to load this page. (main page) On cable !
It took 15.170 seconds to load this page.

[LowRider]

It took 44.884 seconds to load this page


the wilders logo and TOS is not loading correctly

[LowRider]

It took 7.220 seconds to load this page


better!

[Randy_Bell]

This page just took 2.571 seconds to load, which I suppose is neither bad nor good. And I'm currently using Netscape Communicator 4.79 on my son's computer, and you may notice I'm posting not as a guest this time but as my usual logon name. I owe an apology in part to UNICRON and the systems admin people here, because I now believe my problem was/is mainly with the privacy filtering in my firewall, which is that damnable resource-hogging ZoneAlarm Pro 3.5 (latest version, hehe); yet it remains a mystery because I don't seem to be able to stay logged on here (on my computer running ZAP 3.5) even when I disable ZAP's privacy controls entirely: soooooo, I'm thinking it's a conflict with that version 3.5 of the TrueVector firewall engine; I say "that version 3.5", because on my son's computer that I'm typing this post, ZA 2.6 (the older free version) is running without causing the same problem. Also running on this my son's puter is AdSubtract Pro 2.55 (latest version) and as you see there are no probs with ASP and Wilders: your server is accepting my cookie, I'm staying logged on, the display and page loading seems normal, and I'm a happy camper now. I guess I really have an issue with ZoneLabs rather than Wilders, sorry for the false alarm but this has been awfully confusing. Funny though, I thought for sure I could access Wilders normally with this browser before the change in servers, from my computer running ZAP 3.5 -- but before ZAP, I was running NIS 2003 as firewall, so it's entirely possible my memory is from when I was running NIS and not ZAP. Sorry to confuse you folks, I've obviously been confused myself: strange that of all the security sites I visit, Wilders is the only one where I encountered this problem. It must be some odd combination of browser, firewall/privacy filtering, and YaBB software along with your website distinctives that was/is causing the problem, but as I said I can just use a different browser. I'm one of those types who hates glitches and sometimes unrealistically expects perfection and full compatibility across different platforms and browsers, but unfortunately that doesn't always happen. Anyways, sorry UNICRON and others for the "semi-false alarm", LOL. :o 8)

[spy1]

Nothing to be sorry for, really - the board is still way slower than it was before the server-change.

I'm noticing, though, that it's a lot slower at some points than others - to wit:

Any click on "Wilders Security Forum" (at the upper left of this window - the "tree" ) or clicking the browsers "Back" button always take longer than a move from within a forum that you're already in (IOW, once a particular forum loads, you can move around within it pretty quickly.

I sincerely hope this "new server" stuff either gets corrected or we go back to the old one, because honestly, this stinks. Pete

[controler]

It took 44.196 seconds to load this page.

I am now starting to wonder if Wilders is doing some special
IP scans as members come to the start page?

[spy1]

If that was supposed to be humor - it wasn't funny. ::)

The server change-over (to this point, anyway) has been a complete disaster. Pete

[Paul Wilders]

-{ Quote: "The server change-over (to this point, anyway) has been a complete disaster. Pete" }-

As stated by UNICRON: we are working on it. Fixing the problem - which isn't purely related to the server upgrade btw - will take some time.

Be assured we will do our upmost to deal with this.

regards.

paul

[Primrose]

Hang in there Paul you will get it sorted out. ;) I do not mind the wait and I always copy my posts before I post them..you never know when they will end up in the wrong box or lost in transmission. ;)

[Paul Wilders]

Thanks John ;)

regards.

paul

[Jooske]

Noticed before in daytime the site is rather normal speed,
so i tried several days to be sure.
It took 16.303 seconds to load this page.
This was the main index, which normally takes around 22.000 or more certainly in the evening.
Soooooooooooooo who is taking all that bandwidth?
Is the hosting service giving preference somewhere else? Wrong configured programs like "wintasks" and the like for the server?

[Jooske]

See the difference:
It took 71.917 seconds to load this page. (main index page)
It took 28.650 seconds to load this page. (this message page)
It took 27.975 seconds to load this page. (to get the reply page for this)

and the page is building up really ugly........

[controler]

I aggree with Jookse

During the day 2:42 PM central USA today took DSL


It took 69.374 seconds to load this page. ( main page )

This page :It took 1.231 seconds to load this page.

[MickeyTheMan]

It took 75.998 seconds to load this page. (main page)
Sunday morning 11:24 EST

[discogail]

Just now.....
It took 39.132 seconds to load this page.

[javacool]

-{ Quote: " quoting: discogail link=board=11;threadid=7030;start=30#48496 date=1045419424]
Just now.....
It took 39.132 seconds to load this page.
" }-

Which I also got a minute ago - but now page loading time has dropped again.

It took 2.098 seconds to load this page.

Best regards,

-Javacool

[Krusty]

I got wilders fast. With 56 k dialup It took 5.581 seconds to load this page. How I did it?
I used "System Mechanic" feature to tweak bandwidth speed:

Edit settings manually

MTU size: 1500
RWIN; Tcp receive window size: 6432
Time to Live; TTL: 256
Enable blackhole detection: yes
Enable Automatic MTU detection: yes

Other settings you have to experience how they should be. I used " relative speed test " feature for experiencing the speed, and I was amazed again ! and here is the log :

Start Test: 16.2.2003 21:55:11
Test Type: Download 1 megabyte
Operating System: Windows 98
-------------Settings Used------------
Maximum Transfer Unit: 1500
Tcp Receive Window: 6432
Time To Live: 256
Black Hole Detection: True
Auto-Detect Maximum Transfer Unit: True
Maximum number of simultaneous HTTP 1.0 Connections: 10
Maximum number of simultaneous HTTP 1.1 Connections: 10
Tcp Options: 1 - Window Scaling but no Timestamp Options
Fast Retransmission and Recovery support value: 2
Support for Selective Acknowledgements: True
---------------------------------------------
Data Transfer Start: 16.2.2003 21:55:17
Data Transfer Complete: 16.2.2003 21:55:29
--->Total Data Received: 1024,51 kilobytes
--->Time to Complete Transfer: 00:00:11:551
--->Average Speed: 87,86 kilobytes per second
--->Peak Speed: 140,74 kilobytes per second

^Ari^

SystemMechanic 30 day trial at : www.iolo.com

[Paul Wilders]

Ladies and Gents,

We are perfectly aware of the board speed issue. Starting say approx. a week from now, we are going to tackle this problem - once and for all (and hopefully with great succes).

Apologies for this issue for the moment ;)

regards.

paul

[meneer]

Well, today you seem very fast to me:

It took 0.355 seconds to load this page

Perhaps an incident, but I'm happy now ;D

edit:
fast: the input screen
forum page a;so quick:
It took 2.347 seconds to load this page.

[Mike_Healan]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Forum Admin link=board=11;threadid=7030;start=30#48621 date=1045473915]
Ladies and Gents,

We are perfectly aware of the board speed issue. Starting say approx. a week from now, we are going to tackle this problem - once and for all (and hopefully with great succes).

Apologies for this issue for the moment ;)

regards.

paul
" }-

You wouldn't be planning on hiring someone to walk behind the server and give it a nudge every so often are you? ;)

[Pieter_Arntz]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Mike Healan link=board=11;threadid=7030;start=30#48765 date=1045564344]
You wouldn't be planning on hiring someone to walk behind the server and give it a nudge every so often are you? ;)
" }-

We're already doing that, but some relief of duty would be nice. I doze off sometimes. ;D
Hey Mike, is that yours? The one next to it?
* Evil plan comes to mind

[eyespy]

Getting better ! :D
Average page load this evening was about 10 seconds.

regards,
bill :)

[Randy_Bell]

At the bottom it says: It took 2.242 seconds to load this page. Also, I'm using Netscape 7.02 (latest version), and I changed my video display from 16-bit to 32-bit color, and everything appears really nice: I'm a happy camper now! :o ;D :D

[controler]

Yep things seem back to , if I could say , normal ;D
See me dancing around my computer?
I think someone finialy paid the bill he he

Good job ;)

[Randy_Bell]

It took 2.345 seconds to load this page.

That's what was just displayed: I'm back posting this experiment: IE 5.5 sp2, 33.6K modem -- soooo, Wilders does appear to be getting back to normal, which is great: no offense guys, but for awhile, I was avoiding this site because it was loading pages so slowly.

(previous post above was Netscape 7.02, DSL modem: different browser, connection speed). ;D ;D

[trparky]

Why is Wilders Security Forum slow? Answer! The YaBBSE code is trash.

Basically, the code is very very inefficient.

There is a new forum software soon to be released called ttForum (http://www.ttforum.com) based on YaBBSE's code but has been secured and optimized to the max.

Want more proof?

My web host decided to put a proxy server into auto-mode and told it to hit a YaBBSE board with 75 requests at the same time, server loads on the server hosting the YaBBSE board shot up to 4.00 and above. They did the same on a ttForum board and the server load didn't even rise above .25.

If that isn't enough info to convince you that YaBBSE has bad code, I don't know what else I can tell you.

[Jooske]

Ya ya ya, how much do they pay you as a reseller and to spam around?
I don't need to know, leaving this to the Admins, as well as the technical parts. Could be the host, server, connection, anywhere along the line and all that is in study.
At times it's really fast, even with many people online, so there are more matters and causes, but as said, all under deep investigation.
In the meantime see if you can find anything suitable in the TOS. Thanks.

[trparky]

Yea yea yea, but you probably haven't looked at the code of YaBBSE either. All I can say, it is trash.

<Edited out a bit> There is no need for personal insults. Pieter

And no, I don't get paid. I am serious here. I don't get one red cent for these posts I have made. Swear to God I don't. Swear on my great-grandparent's graves I don't.

[Paul Wilders]

Tom,

-{ Quote: "Yea yea yea, but you probably haven't looked at the code of YaBBSE either." }-

Wrong.

-{ Quote: "All I can say, it is trash." }-

A matter of opinion. I do agree YaBB isn't coded for big and heavy loading boards. For that reason, we are rather busy at the moment.

That said: play by the rules over on this board. In case you feel the need to discuss the matter any further, don't hesitate to drop me an email.

regards.

paul

[The Snowman]

***It took 1.963 seconds to load this page***

[trparky]

2.115 seconds.....thats slow.

[Krusty]

TrParky, It took 4.918 seconds to load this page and read your funny slow message. I agree that is slow because it is not milliseconds.........56k modem should work much faster aye ? and considering the way to go, Texas can´t be too far away because earth is still round ?

^Ari^

[ladyjeweler]

I use 56K dialup, connected at 49.3 Kbps. It took 5.137 seconds to load this page.

That's OK! :)



Jeannie

[trparky]

Well, with broadband (1.5 Mbps of it), I have been spoiled. If a page don't come in a click of a finger, I complain.

[Paul Wilders]

Tom,

-{ Quote: "If a page don't come in a click of a finger, I complain." }-

Complaint noticed. Therefore, no need to post one and the same message over and over again.

regards.

paul

[Jooske]

Loaded the main index page at 9.336 seconds, which is for this time of night and my slower system really quick, compared with normal around 20/27 seconds for the index page; this same page here was just 2 seconds, often it's even faster. But when the whole of the Americas wakes up and join .. hmm will try again and post results.

[LowWaterMark]

-{ Quote: " quoting: Jooske link=board=11;threadid=7030;start=45#49879 date=1046284932]But when the whole of the Americas wakes up and join .. hmm will try again and post results. " }-

Hey, I'd be happy to sleep later if you think that will help! ;D

[Jooske]

Take your own time! It's a known fact for us surfing on internet as a whole slows down when America wakes up or China and so it seems to be the most occupied here around 4 in the morning for either best results or most people in chats if that's what they come for.
With the faster ADSL it is noticable still, but the waiting time is less. In the old days it might have taken a minute to load a page and we were used to it and did wait patiently, while now we get nervous if it takes 3 seconds or more and click on to a next page :)
So now the index took 11 seconds and something, which is still half of worse times.

[Randy_Bell]

It took 2.316 seconds to load this page.

Yet another experiment:
Netscape Communicator 4.79
indirect PPPoE DSL connection (ICS client)

GREAT! This is on my son's puter running AdSubtract Pro and ZoneAlarm Free, specifically ASP 2.55 and ZAF 2.6 -- I'm now convinced the previous probs I had with this version of Netscape were due to the privacy filtering in ZoneAlarm Pro, specifically ZAP 3.5 (I've since upgraded my main box to ZAP 3.7, no difference though).

Attached is a screen shot showing the privacy filters I have set in ASP for this domain. Anyone running ASP can use these same settings successfully for wilderssecurity.com ;).

[eyespy]

Their seems to be improvement here. Best this forum has worked in a long time !! Kudos to ALL involved !!

Regards,
bill

[Zhen-Xjell]

Its called "dedication". ;)

[spy1]

And it's very much appreciated.

Welcome back. Pete

[Jooske]

As all seems so well now (note: i say SEEMS!) one asks if there is much hurry to go for the next step? It will be necessary i understand, in technical sense, but maybe we can hope our admins can take a breathe before those next steps?

[Randy_Bell]

;D ;D ;D I dunno what y'all did, but you seemed to have fixed any incompatibilities with Netscape browsers. I'm posting here now in NS Communicator 4.79 with ZA Pro 3.7 and privacy filtering turned on, with no problems staying logged on and no "slow surfing": nice job guys. Now I can access this site with any of my three browsers: IE6sp1, NS Communicator 4.79, and Netscape 7.02 -- am very pleased, and I hope the new site proves to be as good as or better than the old! ;)

[eyespy]

Paul and Paul , LWM and the BC man
you gents' must be doing some Server upgrades.
Today, using this forum, has to be the best and fastest it has worked in a very long time, for me anyway !! :)
Hope it stays that way !! ;D

regards all,
bill ;)

(edit:)
added Unicron to the list. Almost forgot ! ;)

[LowWaterMark]

Ah, Bill, it's a good thing you added Unicron - since he's the one who did all the work! ;)

However, we're all helping him beta test the newest YaBB-SE mod-pack... It's a special accelerator to produce even faster page loads. I have to say that I don't fully understand it myself. But, Unicron says it works on the sub-atomic level - something about quarks and neutrinos. :-\

All I know is it seems to work. See image below for speed results seen, so far.

There is just one problem we have to work out, if the acceleration is too fast, the new page appears before you've finished reading the previous one. But, we'll keep working on it!

[meneer]

Wow, that quick indeed, -0.153 seconds, the pages is served before you ask for it ;D 8)

[Pilli]

Wilders Warp drive initiated ..... ;D Well done Allan!

[eyespy]

This forum is running beautifully now. Great work and Kudos to all involved !!

regards,
bill :)

[Paul Wilders]

-{ Quote: " quoting: eyespy link=board=11;threadid=7030;start=60#msg69896 date=1056724066]
This forum is running beautifully now. Great work and Kudos to all involved !!

regards,
bill :)
" }-

Imagine: we didn't enable the turbo as of yet ;D

regards.

paul

[bigc73542]

My average page load time at wilders is 0.423 seconds with dsl. :)

[Paul Wilders]

-{ Quote: " quoting: bigc73542 link=board=11;threadid=7030;start=60#msg92085 date=1065485855]
My average page load time at wilders is 0.423 seconds with dsl. :)
" }-

Same here ;)

regards.

paul

[beetlejuice]

-{ Quote: "Wow, that quick indeed, -0.153 seconds, the pages is served before you ask for it ;D 8)
" }-

Since todays pages are loading yesterday, (going back in time so to speak) have you also solved the problem of aging? ??? Man O Man I hope so!!! ;D

[LowWaterMark]

-{ Quote: " quoting: beetlejuice link=board=11;threadid=7030;start=60#msg92233 date=1065564038]
-{ Quote: "Wow, that quick indeed, -0.153 seconds, the pages is served before you ask for it ;D 8)
" }-

Since todays pages are loading yesterday, (going back in time so to speak) have you also solved the problem of aging? ??? Man O Man I hope so!!! ;D
" }-

Unfortunately, we had to deinstall the neutrino-based accelerator. :( It wasn't that it didn't work, or that we couldn't handle getting webpages before we even asked for them, it was just Paul didn't want to pay for the 1.21 gigawatt power source it used. :-\

;D

[beetlejuice]

>:( The price of energy! ARRGGHHH!!! >:(