IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

> Hydrogenaudio Forum Rules

- No Warez. This includes warez links, cracks and/or requests for help in getting illegal software or copyrighted music tracks!


- No Spamming or Trolling on the boards, this includes useless posts, trying to only increase post count or trying to deliberately create a flame war.


- No Hateful or Disrespectful posts. This includes: bashing, name-calling or insults directed at a board member.


- Click here for complete Hydrogenaudio Terms of Service

2 Pages V   1 2 >  
Closed TopicStart new topic
How is the speed of this site compared to others you visit?
Dibrom
post Oct 2 2001, 06:36
Post #1


Founder


Group: Admin
Posts: 2958
Joined: 26-August 02
From: Nottingham, UK
Member No.: 1



I want to know what you think about the loading time of this site. Is it fast enough for you? Does it compare favorably with other sites you visit regularly? Is it speedy even on dialup?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
cbuchner1
post Oct 2 2001, 06:45
Post #2





Group: Members
Posts: 46
Joined: 30-September 01
Member No.: 82



whoaah. One vote for "Speedy" resulting in 100%. I guess this is the first time I dominated a poll result like this ;-)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dibrom
post Oct 2 2001, 06:53
Post #3


Founder


Group: Admin
Posts: 2958
Joined: 26-August 02
From: Nottingham, UK
Member No.: 1



Hehe.. that was pretty fast, I believe the poll was only up for like a minute when you submitted your vote. It should be interesting to see how many votes I get on this... smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Jon Ingram
post Oct 2 2001, 07:38
Post #4





Group: Members
Posts: 315
Joined: 29-September 01
Member No.: 53



The site seems very fast at the moment -- and progressively renders well (sections display as they are loading, and the ancient version of Netscape I have at work is very happy).

It'll be interesting to see how the speed scales as this board becomes more popular -- you have an awful lot of features, and I imagine some of them are quite processor intensive.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dibrom
post Oct 2 2001, 07:51
Post #5


Founder


Group: Admin
Posts: 2958
Joined: 26-August 02
From: Nottingham, UK
Member No.: 1



QUOTE
Originally posted by Jon Ingram
The site seems very fast at the moment -- and progressively renders well (sections display as they are loading, and the ancient version of Netscape I have at work is very happy).

It'll be interesting to see how the speed scales as this board becomes more popular -- you have an awful lot of features, and I imagine some of them are quite processor intensive.


Yeah. I think it will do well even under a pretty full load. I've taken steps to try and find a good, reliable, and fast host and cut down bandwidth usage as well as attempt to keep the code running pretty fast. I believe that trying to do this ahead of time will make quite a difference overall.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
JohnMK
post Oct 2 2001, 20:28
Post #6





Group: Members
Posts: 90
Joined: 22-September 01
Member No.: 4



I honestly have never experienced a forum that's this fast. Care to let us in on your secrets?

John
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dibrom
post Oct 3 2001, 00:52
Post #7


Founder


Group: Admin
Posts: 2958
Joined: 26-August 02
From: Nottingham, UK
Member No.: 1



QUOTE
Originally posted by Keynes
I honestly have never experienced a forum that's this fast. Care to let us in on your secrets?


Thanks. The forum software on its own seems to be pretty quick, but as far as loading time goes, mod_gzip for Apache helps with that quite a bit, especially on dialup. Then I'm also using Zend Optimizer which speeds up the php code a bit and lowers cpu usage.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Baddezzed
post Oct 28 2002, 15:12
Post #8





Group: Members
Posts: 7
Joined: 28-October 02
From: Bad Oldesloe
Member No.: 3639



Actually it's pretty fast, but the "Thx, Your Vote has been added" stuff isn't necessary, I think. That's the only thing I don't like.

Hope I could help,

Baddezzed aka doofus2 (dialup user)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Annuka
post Oct 28 2002, 15:27
Post #9





Group: Members
Posts: 333
Joined: 2-February 02
Member No.: 1233



Like most sites HA is sometimes fast and sometimes slow.

But I am getting tired of clicking the redundant links: Click here if you don't want to wait... why would I EVER want to wait?
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Volcano
post Oct 28 2002, 17:40
Post #10





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 916
Joined: 30-September 01
From: Berlin, Germany
Member No.: 112



"Thanks for bumping this thread" wink.gif

I hadn't voted on this yet, hehe. I don't really notice any difference after the server change, HA for me (56K dial-up) is still "quite speedy" most of the time. smile.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
chicoselfs
post Oct 28 2002, 18:34
Post #11





Group: Members
Posts: 145
Joined: 27-August 02
From: Portugal
Member No.: 3208



It's very speedy for me, it's good like that for me smile.gif


--------------------
Made in Portugal
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
smok3
post Oct 28 2002, 18:41
Post #12


A/V Moderator


Group: Moderator
Posts: 1709
Joined: 30-April 02
From: Slovenia
Member No.: 1922



very fast, faster than the old ha (tested on dialup and with fast connection), where is this new server located?


--------------------
PANIC: CPU 1: Cache Error (unrecoverable - dcache data) Eframe = 0x90000000208cf3b8
NOTICE - cpu 0 didn't dump TLB, may be hung
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Andavari
post Oct 31 2002, 11:38
Post #13





Group: Members
Posts: 935
Joined: 3-June 02
From: USA
Member No.: 2204



It's pretty fast on my 56k dial-up even with images enabled in Opera.


--------------------
Complexity of incoherent design.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
guruboolez
post Oct 31 2002, 12:00
Post #14





Group: Members (Donating)
Posts: 3474
Joined: 7-November 01
From: Strasbourg (France)
Member No.: 420



Better than the previous HA board. Thank you Dibrom !
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dibrom
post Nov 1 2002, 22:56
Post #15


Founder


Group: Admin
Posts: 2958
Joined: 26-August 02
From: Nottingham, UK
Member No.: 1



QUOTE (smok3 @ Oct 28 2002 - 10:41 AM)
very fast, faster than the old ha (tested on dialup and with fast connection), where is this new server located?

Yeah... not only is the forum software substantially faster than vb (and it just got faster with the latest update! (w00t) ), but the server is way faster than the old one wink.gif About the fastest transfer rates I've gotten out of it were 6.2MB/sec (yes, Megabytes) from apache.org when I was downloading an update biggrin.gif

The server is located somewhere on the US west coast I believe, probably in or near the CA Bay Area or something.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Infrared Archer
post Nov 1 2002, 23:11
Post #16





Group: Members
Posts: 36
Joined: 23-July 02
From: Washington
Member No.: 2757



This is the fastest board that I visit. Thanks for keeping the site fast and professional smile.gif Also aren't these so called "redundant links" necessary to keep the forum in synch with the user's browser?


--------------------
"I have learned a lesson from the lessons I have learned"
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
fewtch
post Nov 1 2002, 23:38
Post #17





Group: Members
Posts: 1460
Joined: 5-February 02
From: Seattle WA. USA
Member No.: 1261



QUOTE (Infrared Archer @ Nov 1 2002 - 03:11 PM)
This is the fastest board that I visit. Thanks for keeping the site fast and professional  smile.gif Also aren't these so called "redundant links" necessary to keep the forum in synch with the user's browser?

I second that -- this is the fastest web-based board I'm currently using, especially in the time it takes between posting and the post actually appearing (nearly instantaneous).


--------------------
Bring back dynamic range... www.loudnessrace.net
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Dibrom
post Nov 2 2002, 01:13
Post #18


Founder


Group: Admin
Posts: 2958
Joined: 26-August 02
From: Nottingham, UK
Member No.: 1



QUOTE
This is the fastest board that I visit. Thanks for keeping the site fast and professional  :)


Thanks smile.gif

QUOTE
Also aren't these so called "redundant links" necessary to keep the forum in synch with the user's browser?


Yes, pretty much. All web forums have this really. It might be possible to remove it, but I suspect that would cause problems with some browsers and/or other aspects of the forum software. In other words, that's just the way it goes wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
layer3maniac
post Nov 2 2002, 06:04
Post #19





Group: Banned
Posts: 529
Joined: 29-September 01
Member No.: 37



Seems pretty fast to me!
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Sphinx no. 4
post Dec 30 2002, 20:10
Post #20





Group: Members
Posts: 4
Joined: 5-November 02
From: Stockholm, Sweden
Member No.: 3696



Unfortunately I am not here as often as I would like, but I think the site runs pretty smooth.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
edekba
post Dec 30 2002, 20:20
Post #21





Group: Members
Posts: 191
Joined: 6-February 02
From: 310
Member No.: 1273



Quite Fast ... even for my slow ass dialup when I am home for the holidays w/da Parents.

I guess It has to deal w/my other boards ppl have sigs that are jpeg & take up bw. O well.

Nice Work though
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
Jens Rex
post Dec 31 2002, 00:12
Post #22





Group: Super Moderator
Posts: 605
Joined: 18-December 01
Member No.: 680



No complaints here.

Of course, being the PNG zealot that I am, I'd love to see all the GIF graphics here converted into nice, tiny, cute (yes cute) PNG files, for even faster loading smile.gif.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
LIF
post Dec 31 2002, 00:29
Post #23





Group: Members
Posts: 232
Joined: 23-April 02
Member No.: 1853



Portal, Foruns and Active Topics, all have good speed.
No complaints. Nice job guys.(Opera 6.05)

LIF

This post has been edited by LIF: Dec 31 2002, 00:30


--------------------
"Jazz washes away the dust of everyday life" (Art Blakey)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
LordofStars
post Dec 31 2002, 01:25
Post #24





Group: Members
Posts: 353
Joined: 28-April 02
Member No.: 1894



Quite a fast board... Comparable to some of the boards I visit that use vbulletin. I use 56k and avoid many boards because of their speed.


--------------------
r3mix zealot.
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post
SometimesWarrior
post Dec 31 2002, 10:24
Post #25





Group: Members
Posts: 671
Joined: 21-November 01
From: California, US
Member No.: 514



This site is responsive on my cable connection, but maybe this has something to do with the fast hosting service.

I have been optimizing a dynamic website for my company because modem users have been complaining about long load times. I altered the sourcecode and dropped the generated-HTML filesize (on the page that was the most troublesome) from 100k to 65k just by eliminating the extra whitespace.

I downloaded the sourcecode for this thread, and it was a 106k textfile. Simply stripping out excess tabs and spaces dropped that to 93k. My guess is that the server is told to output text to the browser exactly as it is typed into the sourcecode, whitespace formatting and all. So, for a 10% increase in speed, I recommend that an administrator go to the site's tag generating code and remove any whitespace characters where the code tells the forum software to directly output HTML tags.

Example (I don't know phpBB syntax):
CODE
<!-- print directly to browser -->
<table>
    <tr>
           <td>
           <td>
    </tr>
</table>
<!-- now go back to the script -->

Should be:
CODE
<table><tr><td><td></tr></table>


Another thing: what about putting all the stylesheets data into a separate .css file (the same goes for the javascript)? Then the browser can cache that data and not reload it with every page.

And finally, I'm not sure if this is my browser's (IE6) fault or what, but many of the links seem to have an "absolute" address, rather than a "relative" address. Example:
CODE
Flag: <img src='http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/html/flags/blank.gif' align='top' border='0'>
could be
CODE
Flag: <img src='/html/flags/blank.gif' align='top' border='0'>


All other optimizations would require a lot more work. For example, any properties that's applied to all <td>'s could just be applied once to a <tr>. And then there's the option of throwing out all the table tags and switching to pure CSS layout... (I've toyed with that on my site... waaaay too much work! Going from tables to CSS for layout is like learning how to walk again! smile.gif)
Go to the top of the page
+Quote Post

2 Pages V   1 2 >
Closed TopicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 19th April 2014 - 10:32