I have been getting complaints from people that my site is running slow. With some testing, it appears that some in southern Cal (Los angeles area) cannot even access the site in under a minute.

The site is not heavily loaded, and I am accessing it at a reasonable speed.

My traceroutes to them from the server appear fine 30ms-50ms range, but they tracert to me and get times 250ms-700ms.

The server is at RackShack. I am not an expert but can some people tracert me and post their findings? Can someone else help me analyze the problem?

Thanks for the help!

Site: www.addictsports.com

loads fine for me :D

Loads fast for me

5 seconds from Canada running a Cable Modem.

1 12 ms 12 ms 14 ms 172.21.16.1
2 15 ms 13 ms 10 ms rt-rogers-stjh-01-01.cbl.nf.net [205.251.130.1]

3 18 ms 17 ms 21 ms FE1-0.WANA-STJHNF.IP.GROUPTELECOM.net [198.165.4
0.17]
4 26 ms 17 ms 19 ms FE8-1-0.MANA-STJHNF.IP.GROUPTELECOM.net [198.165
.40.33]
5 79 ms 32 ms 34 ms ATM5-0-0-1.WANB-HLFXNS.IP.GROUPTELECOM.net [198.
165.40.9]
6 74 ms 85 ms 104 ms POS9-2.WANB-TOROON.IP.GROUPTELECOM.NET [66.59.19
1.37]
7 85 ms 74 ms 72 ms GE4-0.PEERA-TOROON.IP.GROUPTELECOM.NET [66.59.19
1.18]
8 87 ms 81 ms 93 ms 206.220.243.190
9 76 ms 77 ms 78 ms core-02-ge-1-1-0.chcg.twtelecom.net [168.215.53.
193]
10 98 ms 128 ms 96 ms core-01-so-2-3-0.dlfw.twtelecom.net [168.215.53.

0.chcg.twtelecom.net [168.215.53.
193]
10 106 ms 107 ms 102 ms core-01-so-2-3-0.dlfw.twtelecom.net [168.215.53.
46]
11 98 ms 105 ms 95 ms hagg-01-ge-0-3-0.dlfw.twtelecom.net [207.67.26.2
46]
12 101 ms 94 ms 142 ms core-02-ge-0-3-1.dlfw.twtelecom.net [207.67.26.2
49]
13 103 ms 109 ms 104 ms dist-01-so-0-0-0.hsto.twtelecom.net [168.215.53.
62]
14 119 ms 117 ms 116 ms 66.162.210.250
15 156 ms 116 ms 142 ms 66.162.210.2
16 134 ms 139 ms 154 ms tayhou-223-36.ev1.net [207.218.223.36]
17 * * * Request timed out.

started loading in about a second.
entire page was loaded in around 10 seconds .
UK 512K cable

I didn't do a speed test but general observation is it loads relatively quick.

One thing you may want to look into:
I'm using a 17" monitor set for 800 x 600 and still had to scroll a half screen to the right in order to see the entire page width.

It takes about 22 seconds on dial-up Prodigy from Beaumont, Tx.

-Lamar

It took a while longer than normal for your DNS server to respond, but after that, the page loaded fast. Might check out your DNS server for problems.

Thanks for helping me out everyone. I will check into the DNS issue, but I am at rackshack using their DNS server - therefore I doubt that anything will be done.

ccreighton - Actually the site should collapse to 800x600 resolution without a problem, though it is a message board, so if the was a long 'unspaced' string in the thread you were viewing, it will make you scroll to the right.

If you haven't already, you should enable GZip compression for your vBulletin forum (it's in the Admin options). This will compress each page, which makes it load faster (less data to send).

OOOOhhhh....

Zutroy - I see this option, but I am unsure of EXACTLY what it does... I guess GZipping doesn't make sense to me.

Is it automatically unzipped by the clients browser? Does it 'zip' every page? It says there will be a performace overhead, doesn't that contradict what I am trying to accomplish (I don't need space, I need performance...)

I appreciate any help you can give me on this option, and how it works.

Thanks for your reply :D

Yeah,
like you said,
the web pages are compressed by the server, then sent compressed to your browser and then your browser decompresses the webpage.

It won't take as long for the client browser to download the information, but your server will be working harder to compress the pages.

I've never worked with gzipped pages before, so I don't know what the tradeoffs are specificially.

Ciao :D

Originally posted by jizz
Yeah,
like you said,
the web pages are compressed by the server, then sent compressed to your browser and then your browser decompresses the webpage.

It won't take as long for the client browser to download the information, but your server will be working harder to compress the pages.

I've never worked with gzipped pages before, so I don't know what the tradeoffs are specificially.

Ciao :D Gzip ROCKS!! Period.. end of story.. it's great!!

Shortz

Gzip takes up some processor compressing, so it adds to load there.

It decreases load, though, because it can finish sending information faster and terminate web server processes faster. Sometimes 500% faster. So it's like doing a little extra work now, so you can do far less later.

Other than the above (which is benefit in balance), it's pure lopsided benefit (lopsided on YOUR side).

People get your pages faster. You get a reduced bandwidth bill. You smile more. Others notice that, and like you more. You get more dates. More business connections that actually 'pan out'. Air begins to smell better. Fresher, somehow. You find that your body doesn't need as much rest, as being awake becomes so much more exciting and fulfilling. You might catch yourself singin' and whistlin' -- just for fun. And as your mind begins to wander now, you begin to find uses... yes, actual uses... and intricate meanings... deep ones... behind 'single' and "double" quotations.

Suddenly, life makes sense. Perhaps for the first time in a LONG, LONG time.

How do you feel about using gzip now?

load fast to me in an ADSL from Argentina

Ok, I am looking into this GZip thing and I have a question:

The setting allows 10 levels of compression.

0 = none
9 = max

What level would be smart to increase speed?

Currently I have bandwidth to burn, I want my pages to load faster in vBulletin.

Well, you definitely don't want to use level 0, as that means no compression at all ;) In my experience the default tends to be fine.

Sorry - default is 1. I thought this might be too low...

But I don't know...

According to gzip.org, the "recommended default" is 6, so you could try that...

Ultimately the optimum setting depends on the tradeoff between the amount of processing time the data you don't have to send would have taken to transmit, and how much time the extra processing takes.

Since you said that you're not too worried about bandwidth, 6 might be a reasonable setting as with higher settings the return on the time spent compressing gets worse.