JuiceInDogtown wrote:I don't think anybody is making a wage running this forum 40 hours a week.
based on your vague understanding of this, its no wonder the problems cannot be fixed. blaming the users?? comon.. the non-answers the admins keep giving make it seem like they're more interested in keeping the status quo, like they're afraid they'll lose their admin rights, even though no ones suggesting that. innov8ion offered knowledgeable help, and was rebuffed.. personally, i stopped posting here months ago, large photo posts are tedious enough without having to deal with the slowdowns and timeouts, not to mention i would actually like people to be able to see them..I am working on doing something, but the problem from the host is that the server can't handle it, and it would take a lot of money and load balancing between two servers. I've seen several forums have this problem. Most of the problem actually comes from guest users, not registered members.
shinpickle wrote:the non-answers the admins keep giving make it seem like they're more interested in keeping the status quo, like they're afraid they'll lose their admin rights, even though no ones suggesting that.
He didn't blame the users direct actions. He's saying that the current server cannot handle the amount of unregistered user traffic. I too have seen that happen on other boards, and they usually block unregistered users or cap it at a fixed number until they can get moved to a new server.shinpickle wrote:based on your vague understanding of this, its no wonder the problems cannot be fixed. blaming the users?? comon..
In the most facetious (as opposed to self-entitled or preachy) manner possible, I ask if the board is running on a 486.MattnSTL wrote:Yes, I am working on doing something, but the problem from the host is that the server can't handle it, and it would take a lot of money and load balancing between two servers. I've seen several forums have this problem. Most of the problem actually comes from guest users, not registered members.
you mean this:Urban Elitist wrote:Maybe you missed the string of posts about how the true owner of this site is MIA
is there more I'm missing? so is this guy willing to change the DNS to point to a new host and provide someone FTP access, there isn't much more he has to do. or is he lost the rainforests of Bolivia or something.. i missed the string of posts..It's no longer his primary business. I'll post more later.
The forum domain is urbanstl.com and not urbanstlouis.com. Perhaps he would let us keep the urbanstl.com domain for the forum's use. If not, maybe he would be gracious enough to setup a temporary redirect to a new domain.jlblues wrote:Are we talking copyright issues here? The owner of this site is going to come back and sue for copying the database to a new host and server and using the name urbanstlouis?
Which, I take it, is the problem...innov8ion wrote:Something to think about, which requires communication with urbanstlouis.
Fast CGI wrote:
Instead of creating a new process for every request, FastCGI can use a single persistent process which handles many requests over its lifetime. Processing of multiple requests simultaneously is achieved either by using a single connection with internal multiplexing (ie. multiple requests over a single connection) and/or by using multiple connections. Many such processes can exist, something that can increase stability and scalability. FastCGI also allows programs to get the web server to do certain simple operations, like reading in a file, before the request is handed over. Environment information and page requests are sent from the web server to the process over a TCP connection (for remote processes) or Unix domain sockets (for local processes). Responses are returned from the process to the web server over the same connection. The connection may be closed at the end of a response, but the web server and the process are left standing.
Many web site administrators and programmers are finding that the separation of web applications from the web server in FastCGI (and the simpler SCGI) has many desirable advantages over embedded interpreters (mod_perl, mod_php, etc.). This separation allows server and application processes to be restarted independently — an important consideration for busy web sites. It also facilitates per-application security policies — important for ISPs and web hosting companies.
MattnSTL wrote:Communication is not the problem. I was in contact with him yesterday. A lot of it has to do with me having no time at the moment. I'm basically the contact point with him. He has a family and job and not a lot of time to get on here. But I'll try and get urbanstlouis to log on here and post. That would be a lot more helpful than me going back and forth with him and then this conversation separately. He is open to moving the forum to a different server which we had talked about with him a couple months back. Although he did recommend doing the upgrade to 3.0 after the move. Although he doesn't think a move would make a difference without a much more powerful server. Personally, I don't have a lot of technical knowledge when it comes to servers and traffic. He could provide info about the monthly bandwidth and all the other details. I would assume he has a decent server, but the only thing I know specifically about it is it runs Linux. The only other thought I have at the moment is that maybe something is wrong in the software and is causing the problem.
JuiceInDogtown wrote:But according to another poster, SYSTEM ADMINISTRATION IS YOUR DAY JOB!
Any update on this, Matt?MattnSTL wrote:To keep everyone in the know, we are in fact discussing a server move or any other fix that is suggested. I have been discussing this with inno, and we will figure out what should be done once urbanstlouis chimes in.
Unfortunately, this issue is apparently more critical to some than others.phpBB : Critical Error
Could not connect to the database
