• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Technical Issues - TPU Main Site & Forum (2021)

Status
Not open for further replies.
We will save 2 milliseconds on each request, eliminate a single-point-of-failure, save a few bucks on server costs and reduce administration/monitoring workload (in that order of priority)

Happy New Year!

Does the changeover affect download speeds for anything / Nvidia drivers? I just tried all links for speed. Singapore was slowest at 10MB/sec, Germany was 2nd from last then NL, then US which was 28MB/Sec for Server 4&2 and 28.1MB/sec for 6&5.

US based at 230Mbps. FireFox.
 
I mean, then your next server in line becomes the single-point-of-failure, wouldn't it?
Our main servers are configured as high-availability cluster, and even if. Fewer SPOFs = good

Does the changeover affect download speeds for anything / Nvidia drivers? I just tried all links for speed. Singapore was slowest at 10MB/sec, Germany was 2nd from last then NL, then US which was 28MB/Sec for Server 4&2 and 28.1MB/sec for 6&5.
download speeds are not affected, completely different servers

230 Mbps = around 28 MB/s, so we're maxxing out your line
 
Our main servers are configured as high-availability cluster, and even if. Fewer SPOFs = good


download speeds are not affected, completely different servers

230 Mbps = around 28 MB/s, so we're maxxing out your line
Hope the move simplifies your 2022.
 
Our main servers are configured as high-availability cluster, and even if. Fewer SPOFs = good

[ ... ]
That is true.
I mean, fundamentally you cannot have everything, in this case you'd be trading off some of the flexibility for improved reliability. (Then again, I haven't seen the gateway server fail yet, but I'm also not privy of the details only the sysadmin would be, soxd)
 
We will save 2 milliseconds on each request, eliminate a single-point-of-failure, save a few bucks on server costs and reduce administration/monitoring workload (in that order of priority)
It's surprising how much difference that can make to the overall page load responsiveness, so yeah, go for it. The other reasons are sound too, of course.

Take my case for example. I'm still stuck on crappy old ADSL as they won't install fibre round my area. On Annex A, my speed was 20.5Mbps down and about 0.8Mbps up - these are actual download and upload speeds, not sync speeds and they're excellent for ADSL since I live close to the exchange.

I then needed what little extra boost I could get on the upload, so I'm paying extra for Annex M (minor rip-off). This lowered my download speed to 19.2, but increased my upload to around 1.7-2.0 as it's supposed to. Sure, my uploads are now twice as fast and is a useful difference, but what I didn't expect was to notice how much snappier web browsing now was! This is because my ping had dropped from about 40ms to 10-15ms and was quite the unexpected benefit, but the test result is repeatable time after time. I won't be going back to Annex A...
 
Last edited:
It's surprising how much difference that can make to the overall page load responsiveness, so yeah, go for it. The other reasons are sound too, of course.

Take my case for example. I'm still stuck on crappy old ADSL as they won't install fibre round my area. On Annex A, my speed was 20.5Mbps down and about 0.8Mbps up - these are actual download and upload speeds, not sync speeds and they're excellent for ADSL since I live close to the exchange.

I then needed what little extra boost I could get on the upload, so I'm paying extra for Annex M (minor rip-off). This lowered my download speed to 19.2, but increased my upload to around 1.7-2.0 as it's supposed to. Sure, my uploads are now twice as fast and is a useful difference, but what I didn't expect was to notice how much snappier web browsing now was! This is because my ping had dropped from about 40ms to 10-15ms and was quite the unexpected benefit, but the test result is repeatable time after time. I won't be going back to Annex A...
The ping drop, sounds like "fast path" to me. The "interleaved" mode, will make it more like 40 ms. But even with my BEC 7402TM router coding gain raised to "7", the best I got was 15 Mb download and 0.71 Mb upload. Pretty much the only con with my ADSL setup, was that HD video uploading, took forever. The download and upload speeds, I give here, are the actual ADSL download and upload speeds.
I guess I should have asked for another ADSL router to test. But that was before November 26, 2013, when I got FTTH!

VTel, advertised the maximum possible download speed of 24 Mb, but I never even saw any test hit the 20 Mb mark, even when I was right in downtown of Springfield, Vermont. You would be lucky to get 15 Mb, IMX.

The BEC 7402TM router, (at least the ones I tried) has a habit of playing dumb at default, I usually get only 10.4 Mb down or similar. Before the major tweaking I started in the forth-quarter of 2011, IIRC, when I still had ADSL, I usually would be lucky to get 11.2 Mb down. With the coding gain set to "7", no lick of instability. It never lost sync, TMK. I only lost sync when there was a problem on the ISP-end.

And on VTel ADSL, the annex settings, (at least whether it was annex A or annex M) seemed to make no difference. In fact, the router had what was a possible quirk, where if I don't select the "auto-fallback" mode, it would fail to sync, every time!

So, I was glad to get VTel FTTH for the first time on November 26, 2013.

230 Mbps = around 28 MB/s, so we're maxxing out your line
Looks right for the usual Comcast plan, since 2016. That was like my Comcast plan in Bellows Falls, Vermont, because I couldn't get VTel FTTH in BF. :( I was there from June 12, 2016 to February 24, 2018. But by sometime in January, 2018, it got downgraded to 120 Mb without anyone in my family telling me. That was before the closure of the current house, which was on January 29, 2018, IIHC.

So, when I had Comcast in BF, it was 230-300 Mb (maybe 400 Mb?) down and 11 Mb up then it suddenly was downgraded by sometime in January, 2018 to 120 Mb down and 6 Mb up.
 
Last edited:
The ping drop, sounds like "fast path" to me. The "interleaved" mode, will make it more like 40 ms. But even with my BEC 7402TM router coding gain raised to "7", the best I got was 15 Mb download and 0.71 Mb upload. Pretty much the only con with my ADSL setup, was that HD video uploading, took forever. The download and upload speeds, I give here, are the actual ADSL download and upload speeds.
I guess I should have asked for another ADSL router to test. But that was before November 26, 2013, when I got FTTH!

VTel, advertised the maximum possible download speed of 24 Mb, but I never even saw any test hit the 20 Mb mark, even when I was right in downtown of Springfield, Vermont. You would be lucky to get 15 Mb, IMX.

The BEC 7402TM router, (at least the ones I tried) has a habit of playing dumb at default, I usually get only 10.4 Mb down or similar. Before the major tweaking I started in the forth-quarter of 2011, IIRC, when I still had ADSL, I usually would be lucky to get 11.2 Mb down. With the coding gain set to "7", no lick of instability. It never lost sync, TMK. I only lost sync when there was a problem on the ISP-end.

And on VTel ADSL, the annex settings, (at least whether it was annex A or annex M) seemed to make no difference. In fact, the router had what was a possible quirk, where if I don't select the "auto-fallback" mode, it would fail to sync, every time!

So, I was glad to get VTel FTTH for the first time on November 26, 2013.
Thing is, interleaving was already off before Annex M was enabled. I don't remember the exact ping beforehand, but it did at least halve what it was before.

Looks like you're doing ok with that fibre connection.
 
Noticing some 502 Bad Gateway errors today.
Edit: looks like they cleared up as quickly as they appeared.
 
Last edited:
yup and back up, overloaded the cpu on one of our servers
Can we start TPU bingo, on the topic of "Why is the server down today?"
 
Can we start TPU bingo, on the topic of "Why is the server down today?"
Let's not.

I stayed away from this Q&A forum for a couple of weeks during the course of multiple site hiccups.

I'm sure W1zzard would like to put this sorry chapter behind. I'm not convinced that the site is running correctly based on his comment earlier today.

If I personally encounter another error, I will probably check out for another few weeks. It's really up to W1zzard to sort this all out in a expedient manner.

Trust is earned. It is easily squandered. TPU has a mountain to reclimb.
 
Let's not.

I stayed away from this Q&A forum for a couple of weeks during the course of multiple site hiccups.
Mussels was joking... No worries man.

I'm sure W1zzard would like to put this sorry chapter behind. I'm not convinced that the site is running correctly based on his comment earlier today.

If I personally encounter another error, I will probably check out for another few weeks. It's really up to W1zzard to sort this all out in a expedient manner.

Trust is earned. It is easily squandered. TPU has a mountain to reclimb.
For the record, this was the fault of the hosting company. W1zzard was not at fault here. Let's not talk down our nose at undeserving persons..
 
This site did not have one problem in the past few weeks. Yes, the original one was the fault of the hosting company however there were myriad issues that were the fault of the people who operated this site including poor programming, poor configuration, etc.

The comment by W1zzard earlier today referrred to one of these. And this wasn't the first admittance in the past two weeks.

Much as I like the content on this site, I'm not giving any site any confidence if it will wipe away user data -- which this site did.

TRUST IS EARNED.

And it's not your opinion. It comes down to site operators instilling confidence in each and every one of its visitors. You do not get to dictate how each visitor accepts this site operations.

Never ever forget that.

Even if you say "____ runs this site the best he/she can but the problem lies with someone else" that really doesn't fix the issue. Ultimately the customer-facing entity has some responsibility for the actions of its vendors-partners.

The burden on any website operator is to build and maintain that trust, whether it be some little 'blog, a well-financed startup like Path.com, or megacorps like Myspace, Yahoo, Facebook, whatever.
 
Last edited:
Ultimately the customer-facing entity has some responsibility for the actions of its vendors-partners.

The burden on any website operator is to build and maintain that trust
No doubt, I failed you, but there isn't much I could have done. Not sure if you've ever operated any complex machinery, just dreaming up changes and making them isn't easy.

btw
We would like to extend our apologies for the inconvenience caused, with this we have received approval for a refund in a form of credit totaling $37.49 based on the total number of days the services were down.
I had to lol
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top