slow loading

works great for me. what type of internet connection do you have?

 

there are times when PC loads kinda slow. Not really dead dog slow but not like normal DSL stuff.

 

I'd say thats in line with what I call normal PC loading.

 

Tadashi,

I'm also running 3Mbit DSL also and the site is very slow for me at times and never snappy. I have noticed that when I first access the site (as I do every morning) if the number of "posts since last visit" is below 300 the server either was very slow yesterday or it will be very slow today. Yesterday it seemed VERY slow to me; this morning there were 224 new posts. At times I simple go on to other forums...

Not complaining, just the facts as I find them to be...

 

I've got DSL and read through a couple of different forums. This is by far the slowest loading site of the bunch.

It probably also see's the most traffic though.

 

This is by far the slowest loading board I frequent. It is right on the edge of being tolerable on Broadband. It's orders of magnitude worse than any other site that I visit regularly. If I didn't enjoy the content, the slow speed would take it off my list immediately.

It's intolerable on Dialup.

I travel on business, and often only have dialup available. I don't even bother to try to come here those times.

 

I have a 10 Mbps fiberoptic line, and YES, PriusChat is slower than just about any other site out there . . . BUT the info is worth waiting two or three seconds for, on a normal day, and for almost an eternity just prior to PriusChat crashing.

I wonder if those with dial-up don’t really notice the slow response as much . . . because everything is, well, slow.

On the days when PriusChat is acting slower than normal I will use Firefox’s tabbed browsing to its fullest extent (I use it to a certain degree all the time anyway.) On slow days I will read one thread while another is loading. If I reverted back to a 56k dial-up, I would have to use tabbed browsing to maintain sanity!

We with high speed connections (3+ Mbps) have turned into spoiled children.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tempus\";p=\"91703)</div>

I have 3Mbps cable internet at home and frequently dial up through AOL elsewhere, as I am doing today.

I have no issues with the speed of PriusChat.com in either mode.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(AnOldHouse\";p=\"91712)</div>

Just look at the loading times at the bottom of the page. A general rule for the web page "show" has been anything over 8 seconds is unacceptable, 5 is tolerable, 3 is not bad.

PriusChat happens to be the only site I'm aware of that puts up these times (to its own detriment , and they're generally over 10 seconds for myself and average closer to 12 seconds during peak times. This is far slower than PriusOnline, and most other websites out there.

This is either because PriusChat's hardware is underspec, there's a lot of traffic, the pages aren't set to cache, the HTML is fat and lazy, or there's too much "fluff" running.

Just the source for this "posting" page totals over 247K (HTML 92K); the thread page is ~269K total which makes them about as fat as CNN's main news page.

Looking at the HTML, I see a lot of duplicate carriage returns, unnecessary tab spaces, inefficient HTML (such as duplicate td attributes which could collapse into the parent tr; empty tables; not using enough external .js files to consolidate common javascript sections; not much CSS usage), uncompliant HTML 4.01, etc...

At least most of the graphics is cacheable, everything works, and is tolerable most of the time.

Many people here might not have been on the 'net long enough to remember < 1 second webpages that were as fast as you could think because it was the text info, not the graphics/fonts/pictures that's the real importance. Websites are spoiled by broadband these days, otherwise, there would be a lot more outrage going on.

Of course this means if you want to read PriusChat on less than broadband such as over your mobile phone/laptop WAP, it's basically impossible. Maybe, websites will get back their lean roots someday.

At least there's plenty of room for improvement.

 

sure glad im retired and have the extra few seconds to load pages.dont know if i could spare the few seconds if i was working. set back,relax,enjoy life .

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(NuShrike\";p=\"91728)</div>

Just look at the loading times at the bottom of the page. A general rule for the web page "show" has been anything over 8 seconds is unacceptable, 5 is tolerable, 3 is not bad.


Many people here might not have been on the 'net long enough to remember < 1 second webpages that were as fast as you could think because it was the text info, not the graphics/fonts/pictures that's the real importance.

Of course this means if you want to read PriusChat on less than broadband such as over your mobile phone/laptop WAP, it's basically impossible.[/b][/quote]
I'm currently on a laptop dialed up on AOL.

Calling up this thread to view your post (I was notified of it by email) resulted in this at the bottom of the page:

Server Load (5 mins): 130 | Page generation time: 2.2092s (PHP: 54% - SQL: 46%) | SQL queries: 56 | GZIP enabled | Debug on

The only time I notice anything of a lag is when hitting the "Submit" button when posting.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(AnOldHouse\";p=\"91731)</div>

Doesn't matter if you're dialed in to AOL. The times are from the server end.

[ Server Load (5 mins): 138 | Page generation time: 6.9499s (PHP: 46% - SQL: 54%) | SQL queries: 64 | GZIP enabled | Debug on ] to read your post.

[ Server Load (5 mins): 135 | Page generation time: 4.6084s (PHP: 48% - SQL: 52%) | SQL queries: 41 | GZIP enabled | Debug on ] to make this post.

Lots of SQL queries too btw. Maybe lack of subqueries so there's a lot of going back and forth between php and mysql.

The server load is awfully high too (100+), although don't really know what it's measuring. A 5-minute "uptime" value would be nice. It's usually below ~100s.

Still usable though, but only if broadband.

after I posted:
[ Server Load (5 mins): 99 | Page generation time: 5.2434s (PHP: 61% - SQL: 39%) | SQL queries: 58 | GZIP enabled | Debug on ]

 

does everyone here who uses firefox turn on pipelining? go to the address about:config
type pip in the search tool presented
set pipelining to true and maxrequests to about 10 or 12.

this can give firefox a speed boost on broadband connections

 

Yup, it's mostly the SQL requests slowing things down, which is completely server-server delays. I wonder if turning debug off would help?

Also, we have to remember that theres tons of data on this site. Consider the number of registered users, the number of total posts (other than what's archived), and the files we have uploaded to the site.

 

With few exceptions, primarily only sites that won't work with FF, I use the browser exclusively. But I'm sort of surprised that I haven't seen a substantial improvement given the amount of tweaking I've done. I mean, I've tried almost every possible combination and permutation without a whole lot of success. In fact, some sites appear to work better with the default settings for some reason.

That's just an observation, not a complaint. FF takes a bit longer to load than IE but I'm hooked on tabbed browsing which makes it, at least seem, much faster than IE.

 

i dont see FF as being slower. i dont like that fact that buttons are not available as quickly as in IE but for a complete load i havent noticed a difference and i am on a dialup connection where every slowdown is noticable.

 

I re-read my post and the part about FF 'taking a bit longer to load' wasn't at all clear. What I meant to say was that FF takes longer to start than IE. IOW, when I hit the IE icon, it takes less than a second for IE to pop up on my screen while FF takes several seconds, initially at least.