Sorry for the bad timing. The changes you made will increase the speed of your site. I think that there is something going on with the site in general right now. I just got back from the gym so I have not checked everything but I think that is what is going on. Please give it a little bit and check again. It should be much faster once the site is running smooth.
This has been up and working for over a month and now, all of a sudden, when I try to access my website I get an "Access Denied" error in IE. "I don't have permission to use the server"
I've made no significant changes. My custom homepage in smugmug hasn't changes (www.karenpavlovicphotography.com), I have my domain with Active Domains and the CNAME record (domains.smugmug.com) and A record (208.79.45.23) haven't changed either.
Karen, I think you tried to access this during our scheduled maintenance last night. It should be working now. Please give it a try and let me know if you are still seeing the error. I tested and did not see anything wrong. So I thing the maintenance was to blame.
Akamai should be live for people who have their custom hostnames properly configured now. We're hearing reports of major speed boosts.
Cool - is there any way for us to confirm if we've been Akamaised? Apart from the speed of course!
The reason I ask is that I am pretty sure I have been configured correctly, and I haven't noticed an increased in speed... It might be to do with me being on the other side of the world though... So I hoped there was another way to confirm if my site is being cached by Akamai for everyone else...
EDIT - Figured it out...
This is a trace to smugmug.com... It gets the usual 200 odd ms and hops all the way to San Jose...
tracert smugmug.com
Tracing route to smugmug.com [208.79.45.23]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 1 ms 1 ms <1 ms twentya.home [192.168.199.244]
2 31 ms 30 ms 29 ms 60.234.8.200
3 59 ms 58 ms 50 ms ge-0-0-3-201.cre2.nct.orcon.net.nz [121.98.9.69]
4 48 ms 50 ms 45 ms ge-1-3-0-0.bdr2.nct.orcon.net.nz [121.98.9.38]
5 77 ms 77 ms 77 ms g2-0-1-118.tkbr10.global-gateway.net.nz [203.96.66.97]
6 84 ms 76 ms 73 ms xe7-0-0-2.tkbr9.global-gateway.net.nz [203.96.120.221]
7 208 ms 219 ms 221 ms so7-0-1.labr5.global-gateway.net.nz [122.56.127.38]
8 197 ms 198 ms 202 ms so7-0-3.sjbr2.global-gateway.net.nz [122.56.127.54]
9 205 ms 206 ms 208 ms so-0-0-0.pabr4.global-gateway.net.nz [203.96.120.218]
10 162 ms 163 ms 169 ms ge-6-24.car2.SanJose2.Level3.net [4.59.4.25]
11 165 ms 162 ms 165 ms ae-23-79.car3.SanJose1.Level3.net [4.68.18.69]
12 227 ms 208 ms 223 ms SMUGMUG-INC.car3.SanJose1.Level3.net [4.71.112.10]
13 185 ms 194 ms 192 ms smugmug.com [208.79.45.23]
This is a tracert to my site through the custom hostname (nzsnaps.com). It resolves to an Akamai box and the latency is suitably shorter - indicating it's being served only from Sydney, in Australia, not the other side of the world...
tracert nzsnaps.com
Tracing route to e1021.c.akamaiedge.net [122.252.44.77]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms twentya.home [192.168.199.244]
2 31 ms 30 ms 33 ms 60.234.8.200
3 49 ms 52 ms 90 ms ge-0-0-3-201.cre2.nct.orcon.net.nz [121.98.9.69]
4 53 ms 47 ms 45 ms ae1-0.cre1.nct.orcon.net.nz [121.98.9.13]
5 * 44 ms 43 ms ge-1-3-0-0.bdr1.nct.orcon.net.nz [121.98.9.34]
6 58 ms 60 ms 57 ms ge-2-2-0.gw4.akl1.asianetcom.net [203.192.166.69]
7 79 ms 81 ms 85 ms po4-0.cr2.syd1.asianetcom.net [202.147.55.254]
8 61 ms 58 ms 54 ms gi1-3.gw2.syd1.asianetcom.net [202.147.40.190]
9 86 ms 81 ms 85 ms gi1-0-1.gw1.syd2.asianetcom.net [202.147.40.194]
10 57 ms 55 ms 55 ms 202.167.228.102
11 71 ms 65 ms 63 ms www.nzsnaps.com [122.252.44.77]
I get similar times and the same route if I add www in front of nzsnaps.com, but it doesn't resolve to Akamai.. odd.
Tracing route to www.nzsnaps.com [122.252.44.77]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 2 ms 1 ms 1 ms twentya.home [192.168.199.244]
2 31 ms 30 ms 31 ms 60.234.8.200
[snip]
9 84 ms 82 ms 74 ms gi1-0-1.gw1.syd2.asianetcom.net [202.147.40.194]
10 54 ms 54 ms 54 ms 202.167.228.102
11 69 ms 68 ms 67 ms www.nzsnaps.com [122.252.44.77]
And finally, I go to my smugmug site with the smugmug based URL...
tracert talkiet.smugmug.com
Tracing route to a539.b.akamai.net [60.234.9.243]
over a maximum of 30 hops:
1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms twentya.home [192.168.199.244]
2 31 ms 30 ms 30 ms 60.234.8.200
3 53 ms 51 ms 50 ms ge-0-0-3-201.cre2.nct.orcon.net.nz [121.98.9.69]
4 59 ms 59 ms 53 ms edge.quantserve.com [60.234.9.243]
My custom domain works, mostly. I got a mild error on a DNS test elsewhere which made me double check it was set up right.
Either I'm blind or there is an inconsistency in the instructions. I have the CNAME correct I think (www.captivephotons.com to domains.smugmug.com), but the A record is the question.
I am using 208.79.45.23.
However, the test recommended at the beginning of this thread:
FAIL: Custom hostname captivephotons.com is pointing to 208.79.45.23 (www.smugmug.com) instead of 96.6.244.77 (domains.smugmug.com).
What's the right address for the "A" record? It appears the documentation says one thing and the test program another? Or maybe I'm just not reading it correctly?
What's the right address for the "A" record? It appears the documentation says one thing and the test program another? Or maybe I'm just not reading it correctly?
Stick with what the docs say. I think the tool needs to be updated. The opperative goal is that your non-cnamed address (i.e. the non-www version) goes to our server and gets redirected to the correct url, which is then akamaized.
SmugMug Sorcerer - Engineering Team Champion for Commerce, Finance, Security, and Data Support http://wall-art.smugmug.com/
My custom domain works, mostly. I got a mild error on a DNS test elsewhere which made me double check it was set up right.
Either I'm blind or there is an inconsistency in the instructions. I have the CNAME correct I think (www.captivephotons.com to domains.smugmug.com), but the A record is the question.
I am using 208.79.45.23.
However, the test recommended at the beginning of this thread:
FAIL: Custom hostname captivephotons.com is pointing to 208.79.45.23 (www.smugmug.com) instead of 96.6.244.77 (domains.smugmug.com).
What's the right address for the "A" record? It appears the documentation says one thing and the test program another? Or maybe I'm just not reading it correctly?
Sorry for the bad timing. The changes you made will increase the speed of your site. I think that there is something going on with the site in general right now. I just got back from the gym so I have not checked everything but I think that is what is going on. Please give it a little bit and check again. It should be much faster once the site is running smooth.
Hi Doc-
I wanted to let you know that the speed did finally improve significantly. However, I noticed today that my four other domains that are fowarded to my primary domain with the updated ARecord pointed to 208.79.45.23 and the CNAME upated to www (host) and @ (points to) are going to the the main SmugMug home page instead of my primary domain. For example, one of my other four domains is www.StephenJFranco.com , which is not being redirected to my www.StephenJFrancoPhotography.com primary domain. Could you let me know how to fix this problem?
Only one domain can be pointed straight to a SmugMug account at a time. So now, what you should do is point those domains using forwarding to the one that is correctly setup. I have tips on this page here: http://wiki.smugmug.net/display/SmugMug/Multiple+Domains
Only one domain can be pointed straight to a SmugMug account at a time. So now, what you should do is point those domains using forwarding to the one that is correctly setup. I have tips on this page here: http://wiki.smugmug.net/display/SmugMug/Multiple+Domains
--Doc
Hi Doc-
Yep, understood already that one domain can only be pointed straight to SmugMug. However, I went ahead to the link you indicated and read all the way down the page. I noticed the GoDaddy user info at the bottom of the page and went to this link indicated: http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=846429&postcount=7
I tried doing what the instructions indicated for the "additional domains" and set it up as mentioned (noticed the Points to is using 64.202.189.170, but I had it using 208.79.45.23 - which I thought was the new IP). Still no change. Maybe I'm getting confused. Any suggestions???
Ignore what that post says. Do what I say in the wiki. Forward the other domains to the primary one. The other post is mainly about redirecting when changing domains.
Ignore what that post says. Do what I say in the wiki. Forward the other domains to the primary one. The other post is mainly about redirecting when changing domains.
Hi Doc-
I guess I'm not understanding the wiki. O.k. - Before all this "new" stuff rolled out, I could have my primary custom domain (i.e., www.StephenJFrancoPhotography.com) set up so that it redirected to my SmugMug account. Then, I also had my secondary domains fowarded to my primary domain and everything worked beautifully. Now, SmugMug made this change so that I had to update my GoDaddy account with the new IP address, etc. Now, my secondary domains don't work unless I "host a page on the internet somewhere" or "create an Intro page hosted on a web server." Why am I as a Pro Account User having to go jump through all these hoops when it was working just fine previously? So now it sounds like I'm going to have to contact GoDaddy and pay for a hosted page. Am I understanding this correctly?
I am not sure why it worked for you before. We never officialy supported the type of setup as you describe it. We don't officially support multiple domains now. What I am giving you is a work around.
With GoDaddy, use the forwarding. BUT DO NOT MASK. It will work
I am not sure why it worked for you before. We never officialy supported the type of setup as you describe it. We don't officially support multiple domains now. What I am giving you is a work around.
With GoDaddy, use the forwarding. BUT DO NOT MASK. It will work
Hi Doc-
Not sure why it worked either, but for some strange reason (luck of the Gods or something like it) it did in the past. Anyway, I think I have it working now (or soon to be in 24 hours). There was a problem with one of my domains under GoDaddy - so their Tech Support helped. So, if nothing else, that domain problem was uncovered with this SmugMug update. Hmmmm - Maybe luck of the Gods again.... Guess I should go buy a lottery ticket today....
Thanks for the help - sorry to vent on you (updates are usually are a pain for me, because I always encounter problems).
validation that SmugMug sees the correct setup
I recently did the above suggested validation and everything
passed; however I received the following warning.
I am not familiar with that particular error. It does not look to be related to the domain itself. If you are having any trouble, contact me via the help desk. I will take a look and see if we can get it figured out.
I recently did the above suggested validation and everything
passed; however I received the following warning.
"Warning: Message parser reports malformed message packet."
Do I need do be concerned about the warning?
Since the validation passed; can I be assured that
everything is setup properly and that I am
achieving the maximum speed.
I received the same error message with my pass validation but I do not think it is related to the domain itself, just how the validation is reported. My guess at least.
Nice, just found this thread and changed from an 'A' record to a CNAME for http://photos.maiman.net
Don't forget to add a "." to the end of "domains.smugmug.com" if you run your own nameserver (bind), or it won't work.
It should look something like this for a subdomain record:
...Q: Is there a way I can check that my domain is setup correctly from SmugMug?
A: Yes! See these directions for details.
Let us know if you have questions!
All the best,
Baldy
Thanks much for this check link. Tested and worked quickly...Passed!
Acadiana Al
Smugmug: Bayou Oaks Studio
Blog: Journey to the Light
"Serendipity...the faculty of making happy, unexpected discoveries by accident." .... Horace Walpole, 1754 (perhaps that 'lucky shot' wasn't really luck at all!)
0
Options
BaldyRegistered Users, Super ModeratorsPosts: 2,853moderator
What exactly does this measure? Load time for http://www.smugmug.com? Load time for an actual user's homepage? Load time for a category page? Load time for a gallery and all of it's thumbnails and main image in Smugmug view to load?
I ask because I have NEVER ever seen a Smugmug gallery load in 0.156 seconds. I just loaded one of my galleries and it took 5 seconds for the thumbs and main image to show up and some of that probably came from my disk cache.
What exactly does this measure? Load time for http://www.smugmug.com? Load time for an actual user's homepage? Load time for a category page? Load time for a gallery and all of it's thumbnails and main image in Smugmug view to load?
I ask because I have NEVER ever seen a Smugmug gallery load in 0.156 seconds. I just loaded one of my galleries and it took 5 seconds for the thumbs and main image to show up and some of that probably came from my disk cache.
The good news is the measurement takes place on actual person's machines, the people who install the Alexa toolbar. No one knows how many people have it installed, but Alexa claims millions.
The bad news is it makes for very gross averages of pages they visit and configurations of their own machine, network, browser, cache, the size of their monitor (and thus the size of images we serve up, etc.). For some people, their caches are slow because their caches are big so their actual page load times have the perception of being slow.
We used to use the FasterFox plugin to check details about page load times on different configs. Here are the results from a testing service that I used a few moments ago for my home page, http://cmac.smugmug.com, which has a lot on it, in various places around the world:
Your mileage could vary for a lot of reasons, such as we can't serve up images from unlisted or passworded galleries nearly as fast. If you right-click protect an image, you perceive it's load time to be long. If you have a lot of thumbs on the page, depending on your browser, it may be limited as to how many streams it has open at a time. And for the big photo Journal-style gallery that went viral, people noticed it was faster for Safari, which had multiple threads for rendering, than for Firefox, which has one.
The good news is the measurement takes place on actual person's machines, the people who install the Alexa toolbar. No one knows how many people have it installed, but Alexa claims millions.
The bad news is it makes for very gross averages of pages they visit and configurations of their own machine, network, browser, cache, the size of their monitor (and thus the size of images we serve up, etc.). For some people, their caches are slow because their caches are big so their actual page load times have the perception of being slow.
We used to use the FasterFox plugin to check details about page load times on different configs. Here are the results from a testing service that I used a few moments ago for my home page, http://cmac.smugmug.com, which has a lot on it, in various places around the world:
Your mileage could vary for a lot of reasons, such as we can't serve up images from unlisted or passworded galleries nearly as fast. If you right-click protect an image, you perceive it's load time to be long. If you have a lot of thumbs on the page, depending on your browser, it may be limited as to how many streams it has open at a time. And for the big photo Journal-style gallery that went viral, people noticed it was faster for Safari, which had multiple threads for rendering, than for Firefox, which has one.
I'm glad it comes from real people's machines, but I guess I still don't know what the Alexa data you posted is measuring. Certainly the homepage load time is important, but at least as important is the gallery load and render time, including all thumbs and the main image. Do you have Alexa measure the gallery load time through full page render and compare that to a full gallery of your competitors?
I'm glad it comes from real people's machines, but I guess I still don't know what the Alexa data you posted is measuring. Certainly the homepage load time is important, but at least as important is the gallery load and render time, including all thumbs and the main image. Do you have Alexa measure the gallery load time through full page render and compare that to a full gallery of your competitors?
We can't really do that with Alexa, at least to my knowledge. A geek in the know like Don may have better knowledge than I do about how Alexa does its computation, but I believe it's just an average of pages that users with the toolbar visit on a given domain.
We do compare specific pages on our site to pages on sites we admire using other services. But there's only so much weight we can put on purely quantitative numbers because users weight perception so much higher than reality.
I notice quite a few people commented on the expanded Journal style that it seemed very fast. Actually, with the number of large images coming at them, they'd probably be disappointed if they knew what the total page load time was, but the perception is good which is what counts to most people.
We can't really do that with Alexa, at least to my knowledge. A geek in the know like Don may have better knowledge than I do about how Alexa does its computation, but I believe it's just an average of pages that users with the toolbar visit on a given domain.
We do compare specific pages on our site to pages on sites we admire using other services. But there's only so much weight we can put on purely quantitative numbers because users weight perception so much higher than reality.
I notice quite a few people commented on the expanded Journal style that it seemed very fast. Actually, with the number of large images coming at them, they'd probably be disappointed if they knew what the total page load time was, but the perception is good which is what counts to most people.
I can see how Alexa might have a hard time knowing when the page load is done because of the Ajax/JS stuff. It does seem like it would be useful to have some way using some service that measures lots of locations to quantify how much Akamai is really helping you with actual gallery load times.
Isn't that where the real meat and potatoes of photo sharing speed is? Multiple Ajax calls per page, a bunch of javascript, lots of thumbs to load, large main image to load. All that stuff is what happens on a Smugmug gallery page.
Click a thumb, how long until the new main image is loaded? Click a page indicator, how long until a new page is loaded? Hit full screen slideshow, how long until you get your first fullscreen image? It doesn't sound like Alexa is giving you any of these numbers, but that's the real interactive experience that viewers judge.
BaldyRegistered Users, Super ModeratorsPosts: 2,853moderator
edited July 31, 2009
As usual, you have some great points. And of course we care about where they make us faster and that may be a little bit depressing. Akamai is very expensive and partly it's expensive because of its world-wide coverage. So we pay them a bundle to get fast in areas of the world where we mainly have surfers but few subscribers (cough, Asia).
Comments
http://help.smugmug.com
Is there an approximate ETA for the switch? Looks promising, I'm really looking forward to the speed increase
[/geek]
Hi! I was wondering if anyone was aware or any problems with smugmug with regard to modified domain names.
My smugmug site is: http://karenpavlovic.smugmug.com
My purchased domain is: www.karenpavlovicphotography.com
This has been up and working for over a month and now, all of a sudden, when I try to access my website I get an "Access Denied" error in IE. "I don't have permission to use the server"
I've made no significant changes. My custom homepage in smugmug hasn't changes (www.karenpavlovicphotography.com), I have my domain with Active Domains and the CNAME record (domains.smugmug.com) and A record (208.79.45.23) haven't changed either.
Any suggestions?
Thanks!
Karen
http://help.smugmug.com
Cool - is there any way for us to confirm if we've been Akamaised? Apart from the speed of course!
The reason I ask is that I am pretty sure I have been configured correctly, and I haven't noticed an increased in speed... It might be to do with me being on the other side of the world though... So I hoped there was another way to confirm if my site is being cached by Akamai for everyone else...
EDIT - Figured it out...
This is a trace to smugmug.com... It gets the usual 200 odd ms and hops all the way to San Jose...
This is a tracert to my site through the custom hostname (nzsnaps.com). It resolves to an Akamai box and the latency is suitably shorter - indicating it's being served only from Sydney, in Australia, not the other side of the world...
I get similar times and the same route if I add www in front of nzsnaps.com, but it doesn't resolve to Akamai.. odd.
And finally, I go to my smugmug site with the smugmug based URL...
That IS nice and short!
Regards
Neil G
http://www.nzsnaps.com (talkiet.smugmug.com)
Either I'm blind or there is an inconsistency in the instructions. I have the CNAME correct I think (www.captivephotons.com to domains.smugmug.com), but the A record is the question.
I am using 208.79.45.23.
However, the test recommended at the beginning of this thread:
http://www.smugmug.com/homepage/dig.mg?hostname=www.captivephotons.com
Yields a "fail" based on using that address:
FAIL: Custom hostname captivephotons.com is pointing to 208.79.45.23 (www.smugmug.com) instead of 96.6.244.77 (domains.smugmug.com).
What's the right address for the "A" record? It appears the documentation says one thing and the test program another? Or maybe I'm just not reading it correctly?
Stick with what the docs say. I think the tool needs to be updated. The opperative goal is that your non-cnamed address (i.e. the non-www version) goes to our server and gets redirected to the correct url, which is then akamaized.
http://wall-art.smugmug.com/
The dig tool has been fixed
SmugMug API Developer
My Photos
Hi Doc-
I wanted to let you know that the speed did finally improve significantly. However, I noticed today that my four other domains that are fowarded to my primary domain with the updated ARecord pointed to 208.79.45.23 and the CNAME upated to www (host) and @ (points to) are going to the the main SmugMug home page instead of my primary domain. For example, one of my other four domains is www.StephenJFranco.com , which is not being redirected to my www.StephenJFrancoPhotography.com primary domain. Could you let me know how to fix this problem?
Thank you,
Stephen
Only one domain can be pointed straight to a SmugMug account at a time. So now, what you should do is point those domains using forwarding to the one that is correctly setup. I have tips on this page here: http://wiki.smugmug.net/display/SmugMug/Multiple+Domains
--Doc
http://help.smugmug.com
Hi Doc-
Yep, understood already that one domain can only be pointed straight to SmugMug. However, I went ahead to the link you indicated and read all the way down the page. I noticed the GoDaddy user info at the bottom of the page and went to this link indicated: http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=846429&postcount=7
I tried doing what the instructions indicated for the "additional domains" and set it up as mentioned (noticed the Points to is using 64.202.189.170, but I had it using 208.79.45.23 - which I thought was the new IP). Still no change. Maybe I'm getting confused. Any suggestions???
Thanks!
http://help.smugmug.com
Hi Doc-
I guess I'm not understanding the wiki. O.k. - Before all this "new" stuff rolled out, I could have my primary custom domain (i.e., www.StephenJFrancoPhotography.com) set up so that it redirected to my SmugMug account. Then, I also had my secondary domains fowarded to my primary domain and everything worked beautifully. Now, SmugMug made this change so that I had to update my GoDaddy account with the new IP address, etc. Now, my secondary domains don't work unless I "host a page on the internet somewhere" or "create an Intro page hosted on a web server." Why am I as a Pro Account User having to go jump through all these hoops when it was working just fine previously? So now it sounds like I'm going to have to contact GoDaddy and pay for a hosted page. Am I understanding this correctly?
With GoDaddy, use the forwarding. BUT DO NOT MASK. It will work
http://help.smugmug.com
Hi Doc-
Not sure why it worked either, but for some strange reason (luck of the Gods or something like it) it did in the past. Anyway, I think I have it working now (or soon to be in 24 hours). There was a problem with one of my domains under GoDaddy - so their Tech Support helped. So, if nothing else, that domain problem was uncovered with this SmugMug update. Hmmmm - Maybe luck of the Gods again.... Guess I should go buy a lottery ticket today....
Thanks for the help - sorry to vent on you (updates are usually are a pain for me, because I always encounter problems).
Have fun,
Franco
I recently did the above suggested validation and everything
passed; however I received the following warning.
"Warning: Message parser reports malformed message packet."
Do I need do be concerned about the warning?
Since the validation passed; can I be assured that
everything is setup properly and that I am
achieving the maximum speed.
www.rlsimaging.com
http://help.smugmug.com
http://wildworldphoto.net
http://photostuff.org
Don't forget to add a "." to the end of "domains.smugmug.com" if you run your own nameserver (bind), or it won't work.
It should look something like this for a subdomain record:
Smugmug: Bayou Oaks Studio
Blog: Journey to the Light
"Serendipity...the faculty of making happy, unexpected discoveries by accident." .... Horace Walpole, 1754 (perhaps that 'lucky shot' wasn't really luck at all!)
I ask because I have NEVER ever seen a Smugmug gallery load in 0.156 seconds. I just loaded one of my galleries and it took 5 seconds for the thumbs and main image to show up and some of that probably came from my disk cache.
Homepage • Popular
JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
Always include a link to your site when posting a question
The bad news is it makes for very gross averages of pages they visit and configurations of their own machine, network, browser, cache, the size of their monitor (and thus the size of images we serve up, etc.). For some people, their caches are slow because their caches are big so their actual page load times have the perception of being slow.
We used to use the FasterFox plugin to check details about page load times on different configs. Here are the results from a testing service that I used a few moments ago for my home page, http://cmac.smugmug.com, which has a lot on it, in various places around the world:
Your mileage could vary for a lot of reasons, such as we can't serve up images from unlisted or passworded galleries nearly as fast. If you right-click protect an image, you perceive it's load time to be long. If you have a lot of thumbs on the page, depending on your browser, it may be limited as to how many streams it has open at a time. And for the big photo Journal-style gallery that went viral, people noticed it was faster for Safari, which had multiple threads for rendering, than for Firefox, which has one.
Homepage • Popular
JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
Always include a link to your site when posting a question
We do compare specific pages on our site to pages on sites we admire using other services. But there's only so much weight we can put on purely quantitative numbers because users weight perception so much higher than reality.
I notice quite a few people commented on the expanded Journal style that it seemed very fast. Actually, with the number of large images coming at them, they'd probably be disappointed if they knew what the total page load time was, but the perception is good which is what counts to most people.
Isn't that where the real meat and potatoes of photo sharing speed is? Multiple Ajax calls per page, a bunch of javascript, lots of thumbs to load, large main image to load. All that stuff is what happens on a Smugmug gallery page.
Click a thumb, how long until the new main image is loaded? Click a page indicator, how long until a new page is loaded? Hit full screen slideshow, how long until you get your first fullscreen image? It doesn't sound like Alexa is giving you any of these numbers, but that's the real interactive experience that viewers judge.
Homepage • Popular
JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
Always include a link to your site when posting a question