RE:Reply to post - feature switched off

[Lela]

Well, really, when features that a whole lot of people really enjoy disapear without warning (for many) and no back up, such as a Sticky Thread, goes up a lot of people are going to be annoyed. But then completely different features pop up that are usable only by the paying minority. Yeah, I'm betting a lot of people are gonna be angry, regardless of the argument.

I'm also betting people are a little afraid that this is heading towards being, essentially, a pay site. That tends to be the trend after features start vanishing. Especially when new incentives suddenly pop up for getting membership/account/supporter/donator status. No one really cares about the reasoning behind it. They've seen and heard it all before and it usually ends the same way: Pay Site. Which, as often as not, goes under anyway.

They don't want to lose the boards. Can you really blame them?

 

[Morrus]

You need to make your mind up about what you feel the issue is. On the one hand, I have someone saying "it's using resources!" and on the other hand I have someone saying "its use shouldn't be limited to a small group!". These are contradictory.

I added Petz for one simple reason: it seemed like fun, and I thought some people might enjoy it. If you personally aren't interested, that's fine; it's probably not for everyone, but it didn't take much effort to install.

As for sticky threads: nobody reads them.

 

[WayneLigon]

Anything that speeds the boards/server up gets my vote. You can take down thread emails, eliminate whatever; as long as I can read and reply and post I'm fine

 

[Lela]

You need to make your mind up about what you feel the issue is. On the one hand, I have someone saying "it's using resources!" and on the other hand I have someone saying "its use shouldn't be limited to a small group!". These are contradictory.

Sorry if it came off that way. I did not mean to say that you should give it to everyone. I merely said that pulling something from everyone and then giving to a select few can seriously piss people off.

I added Petz for one simple reason: it seemed like fun, and I thought some people might enjoy it. If you personally aren't interested, that's fine; it's probably not for everyone, but it didn't take much effort to install.

It probably doesn't take any real resources. In fact, I figured that you wouldn't have put it up if it were going to cause a problem. Though I was interested in Drego the Spider, it's not a big deal for me who gets to play and who doesn't. I haven't ever been to NeoPets and I'd likely lose interest in Drego after a while even if I did play.

As for sticky threads: nobody reads them.

I do. In fact, I read the titles of the sticky threads before I came over to meta to check why no e-mails were forthcoming.

Besides, who does it hurt to put one up? Make P-Kitty do it. We all know he has nothing to do ).

 

[Lela]

Morrus,

As to ways to cut down on bandwidth, I assume you've seen these threads on vBulliten's support boards:
http://www.vbulletin.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17943

http://www.vbulletin.com/forum/showthread.php?t=29446

There are several more that I noticed a few hours back. Just do a search for "Bandwidth" or something similar and they should pop right up.

It doesn't allow me to start new threads due to me not actually owning vBulletin myself. As such, I was unable to ask (or suggest changes in new versions) regarding different ways to do e-mail notifications.

[Edit There also seems to be a number of hacks into vBulletin linked to from those boards. Perhaps there's something in those or you could request something.

 

[Morrus]

Thanks, Lela.

Bandwidth isn't so much of a problem, though - the real crunch is database queries. Anything which reduces those will make a difference.

 

[Lela]

Thanks, Lela.

Bandwidth isn't so much of a problem, though - the real crunch is database queries. Anything which reduces those will make a difference.

Hmmmm,

Well, this thread looks like it might go somewhere eventually:
http://www.vbulletin.com/forum/showthread.php?t=57611&highlight=Reduc%2A+queries

It looks like you're already doing just about everything on this page but I'll drop it in anyway:
http://www.vbulletin.com/forum/showthread.php?t=78701&highlight=Reduc%2A+queries

Ah, this looks promising. Note that I know very little php (i.e. none at all) so I could be wrong:
http://www.vbulletin.com/forum/showthread.php?t=57611&highlight=Reduc%2A+queries

 

[BSF]

Morrus,
Are you using a basic install of MySQL and/or the underlying OS? There might be some performance optimizations that can be achieved by compiling MySQL and statically linking libraries on the server. There might also be some server parameters that can be tweaked to utilize memory, etc.

On the OS side, especially if you are using a linux flavor, there might be some kernel tuning that you can implement. Modules that are unnecessary, services that can be shutdown, tweaks geared toward server performance as opposed to desktop performance, etc.

Hmm, what about any tweaks with the web server software, or with PHP?

You indicate that bandwidth isn't really the problem, which isn't a surprise since you have done a lot the past year or so to reduce bandwidth consumption. Have you been able to ascertain that the problem is with database performance as opposed to server performance?

And Morrus is correct, all the changes I have suggested are non-trivial. Many of the suggested changes are not, necessarily, straightforward to implement. Any changes should be carefully evaluated because they do bring forward an element of risk. With some of these ideas, it might be better to analyse the condition on the current server and look for optimizations that can be implemented when the server is upgraded or replaced. Yes, I know that sounds a little harsh, especially when there are features right now that people are missing. But, I am just thinking from the standpoint of how difficult some of these are to implement on a production system where you do not have a regular maintenance window to test things. I'm sure none of us wants Morrus to schedule regular downtime.

As for Petz, I trust that Morrus has looked at it and is reasonably sure there won't be a huge impact on the site. I would check it out myself, except I spend enough time on EN World goofing off. (In other words, maybe later)

Morrus, server tuning for databases is not my strongest point. But, I have done server tuning on a couple of OS's. If there is anything that you think I can help you with, please feel free to email me.

 

[DaveStebbins]

For the record, I didn't get the e-mail either. If I didn't check Meta as part of my daily wanderings around the boards, I'd never have known. I also at least read sticky thread titles, if not always the messages.

 

[Morrus]

You indicate that bandwidth isn't really the problem, which isn't a surprise since you have done a lot the past year or so to reduce bandwidth consumption. Have you been able to ascertain that the problem is with database performance as opposed to server performance?

Yup, this time last year, bandwidth was a major problem. Not any more, though.

The database queries have been reduced drastically since the site redesign, too. Removing those PostNuke sites was a godsend. However, the result, of course, is that forum usage increases again, using up the nice "buffer" created by removing the extraneous software.