Legacy Account
Active member
Shame it got so compressed somewhere along the line....
Animated ads slowing this place down?
- Thread starter Frustrated Father
- Start date
Frustrated Father
New member
Personally I\'ve never seen a .sig slow the site down, but I have reduced it. As for the ad, it was, and did, slow the site down and Borg was nice enough to deal with it.
As for my .sig, sorry if it offends, I\'ll happily link it to my webpage so that it doesn\'t set off your \'dipstick\' alarm.
As for my .sig, sorry if it offends, I\'ll happily link it to my webpage so that it doesn\'t set off your \'dipstick\' alarm.
Sorry...
I was in \'grumpy old man\' mode last night and I was a little bit gobsmacked by the pot-kettle-blackness motif that appeared to be going on, but I didn\'t intend that comment to be as \'direct\' as it sounds this morning
Generally, sigs aren\'t a problem, but when there are a whole page of them on a forum, and you are on a dial-up connection, it can significantly slow down the speed with which a page loads.
You should have been here when Tuubje, the signature king, was a regular visitor to the forums. He had a different avatar and sig for every day of the week. :flip:
I was in \'grumpy old man\' mode last night and I was a little bit gobsmacked by the pot-kettle-blackness motif that appeared to be going on, but I didn\'t intend that comment to be as \'direct\' as it sounds this morning
Generally, sigs aren\'t a problem, but when there are a whole page of them on a forum, and you are on a dial-up connection, it can significantly slow down the speed with which a page loads.
You should have been here when Tuubje, the signature king, was a regular visitor to the forums. He had a different avatar and sig for every day of the week. :flip:
G
Ghey Boy
Guest
I would have to agree that this site seriously needs speeding up somehow.
I rarely visit the forums, I usually just visit the picture part of the site and click on \"top last 7 days\", and ocasionally do a search.
Now on the pages that I use, there just seems to be FAR too much stuff. I understand that some things, such as ads and eBay links, are totally neccessary.
I just wish we could lose some of the incidental stuff (that \"shout\" box is especially annoying to me-totally redundant as far as I am concerned).
I rarely visit the forums, I usually just visit the picture part of the site and click on \"top last 7 days\", and ocasionally do a search.
Now on the pages that I use, there just seems to be FAR too much stuff. I understand that some things, such as ads and eBay links, are totally neccessary.
I just wish we could lose some of the incidental stuff (that \"shout\" box is especially annoying to me-totally redundant as far as I am concerned).
D
douglasgreen
Guest
Hi Ghey Boy...
....not often you can say that without reprocussionsI went for a low key pseudenym(spelling???)in hindsight maybe I should have gone with Patsy KensitlolWelcome to the forums,great to see new faces!You should use the shoutbox if you have pics up here,I\'ll always go vote if you callTake it easy man
....not often you can say that without reprocussions
I went for a low key pseudenym(spelling???)in hindsight maybe I should have gone with Patsy KensitlolWelcome to the forums,great to see new faces!You should use the shoutbox if you have pics up here,I\'ll always go vote if you callTake it easy man
G
Ghey Boy
Guest
Heh, I\'m glad you appreciate brand of humour
Yes, I have pics on this site, under my old name though (I lost all of my details when I moved house, and have just gotten round to creating a new account).
I will be taking new pics of my minis in the next few days, so I will get them posted (along with my new minis) next week.
Yes, I have pics on this site, under my old name though (I lost all of my details when I moved house, and have just gotten round to creating a new account).
I will be taking new pics of my minis in the next few days, so I will get them posted (along with my new minis) next week.
E
E-Arkham
Guest
Incidently, the \"Processing took XX.XXXX seconds\" note at the bottom of a CMON page is not the time it takes the page to load, but the time it takes the server to process and execute the PHP code before displaying the results. More specifically, it only shows the time it takes that section of code which is placed between the start of the timing session and the point where \"processing took...\" is printed. Thus depending on where it\'s placed on the page, it could be skipping some sections of the code, such as the headers, etc.
Actual page load time is always longer, depending on connection speed.
When my site was on Host Department (spits!), my processing time was typically 0.2 to 0.5 seconds (sometimes higher, sometimes MUCH higher, heh, and that was when the site was up -- just don\'t use Host Department EVER). The same site on a dedicated server (my site and one other site, actually) with the same code now means a processing time of less than 0.03 seconds.
Anyway, that was a long way of saying that the quality of the server can definitely have an impact on processing times. For most sites, a difference between 0.02 and 0.5 is meaningless, but in CMON\'s case, sorting through 50k worth of images is certainly going to be a resource drain no matter what -- those small differences will add up VERY quickly. What I\'m curious about is if they\'re being stored in some massive folder or if they\'re actually being saved in an mySQL table.
Honestly, I think for performance reasons archiving of some sort is going to be a necessity sooner or later. That, or splitting things up across multiple servers -- backbone of the site on one, images on another, forums on another, etc.
Kep
Actual page load time is always longer, depending on connection speed.
When my site was on Host Department (spits!), my processing time was typically 0.2 to 0.5 seconds (sometimes higher, sometimes MUCH higher, heh, and that was when the site was up -- just don\'t use Host Department EVER). The same site on a dedicated server (my site and one other site, actually) with the same code now means a processing time of less than 0.03 seconds.
Anyway, that was a long way of saying that the quality of the server can definitely have an impact on processing times. For most sites, a difference between 0.02 and 0.5 is meaningless, but in CMON\'s case, sorting through 50k worth of images is certainly going to be a resource drain no matter what -- those small differences will add up VERY quickly. What I\'m curious about is if they\'re being stored in some massive folder or if they\'re actually being saved in an mySQL table.
Honestly, I think for performance reasons archiving of some sort is going to be a necessity sooner or later. That, or splitting things up across multiple servers -- backbone of the site on one, images on another, forums on another, etc.
Kep
