Options
Are the Smugmug servers overloaded?
jthomas
Registered Users Posts: 454 Major grins
For at least the last two or three months I have found that my galleries are extremely slow to load. Are your servers overtaxed, or do I just have too many pictures stored there?
0
Comments
Short answer: No. We are constantly bringing new hardware online, investing huge amounts of money in our datacenters and infrastructure. More on that is here:
http://blogs.smugmug.com/onethumb/2006/08/28/take-a-peek-inside-our-datacenters/
http://blogs.smugmug.com/onethumb/2006/11/04/amazon-two-guys-in-a-dorm-0-the-next-youtube/
User experiences can depend on lots of factors. And it sounds like you are having troubles, and we'd like to help. SmugMug hasn't been slow for months, but your site is, for you.
Can we start by doing this: http://smugmug.speedtest.net and click on the yellow pyramid. Share the result with us? Oh and if you could post your site please, that would help. Put it in your Profile, too (You! upper left, Dgrin screen). Thanks!
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
Just for grins and because I can, ran this test just a moment ago and got the following:
Firefox 2.0.0.1
Ping: 108ms
Download: 4914 kbps
Upload: 1750 kbps
I'm on the east coast and have no basis upon which to judge. Are these good, middle of the road, or poor? Just curious.
My Photos
Thoughts on photographing a wedding, How to post a picture, AF Microadjustments?, Light Scoop
Equipment List - Check my profile
Well my DSL rated at 462k and upload at 120k. Not the best but I gues could be worse.
Now I know why my wedding album uploads are terrible. I think I need to move.
Scott
ASSUMING that the "last mile" for your link is the bottleneck (it is for a lot of people). That would appear to be a 5 meg cable modem connection, with a 2 meg uplink. The top of the line cable modem connections are 10 meg, and a fairly rare and expensive in most places. 5M connections are not even available everywhere, so they're "pretty good". It's not at all uncommon for a cable connection to have a roughly 10:1 down:up ration, so that 5M down should have 512K up, but you have 3.5 times that... so in terms of your up/down balance you're doing very very good.
For contrast, I'm on the biggest cable connection available in town without a custom negotiated contract, I have a similar 5M down that you have, and I have what locally is considered a rather large uplink (it's not a normal consumer account, it's a business account) at 1M, but you're almost double my uplink speed.
To smugmug's servers, I got the other day 4933 kbps down and 957 kbps up.
(and to wrap this post back to jthomas' original question... his site loads just as fast as any other smugmug site for me... in other words, "don't blink, you'll miss it loading.")
http://wall-art.smugmug.com/
with a friends Verizon FIOS in New York I get
7000 down 1700 up
smooth upload no problems.
Why they don't have FIOS in the city yet I'll never understand, but I have Verizon's numbers on my cell and they will be hearing from me tomorrow.
dak.smugmug.com
My upload/download speed is 1316/209...not too bad since my adsl connection is 1500/256.
I seriously hanging out for my local telephone exchange to get upgraded to adsl2+ in march... 24,000/1000 will be very very sweet
SmugMug API Developer
My Photos
I guess that's pretty good?
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
Maybe because it's *insanely* expensive to deploy? About the only markets that they've rolled it out in are the ones where they are under very heavy competition.
http://wall-art.smugmug.com/
but i am experiencing really really slow smugmug tonight. just tonight. normally it is pretty speedy. tonight it is taking minutes to load a website. some eventually times out.
interesting. i thought the smugmug have servers in San Jose. i live in Santa Clara which is just a few miles from San Jose.
If things have felt slow over the last couple of days, we've had database hardware issues that caused us to run some extra hot backups of our master database. That'll slow things a tad, which can easily be amplified with any net-turbulence out there. It looks like the last one we ran is done right now, though. We should be screamin' right now from a systems standpoint.
If things have felt slow over the last few months, I'd certainly like to see a traceroute to see where you are coming from. We've continuously added new batches of servers, bigger routers, load balancers, etc., that have pushed our capacity way way above what we actually need. We're up to 6 gigabit links to the internet, and we're going to add another in the next few days. We did drop some providers, but I doubt that you'd see that big of a difference in speed.
I'm trying the speed test now. The "ping" time was 102ms, the download speed was 50 kbs, and it seems to have hung on the upload test - no response for about 5 minutes now. I'll report when I get it.
My ISP is Adelphia Cable, currently being taken over by Comcast. Therein may lie the problem.
I usually have no problem with the Digital Grin. Response is very snappy. It's just my Smugmug site.
Most other web sites I visit work fine; it's just my Smugmug site that is slow.
I don't know how it gets the distance, but we all know it's a lot more than 350 mi from VA to CA.
Also try a speedtest to the Washington DC pyramid, i'm interested to see the results.
FWIW, i'm in Gainesville on Comcast and my speeds are fine to smugmug
It must be something going on with your connection since this speed test has nothing to do with Smugmug itself.
At any rate, here are the results to DC:
Something is badly broken.
Sounds like your firewall or NAT are blocking traceroutes. If you're using a Mac, you can do "traceroute -I" to get around it, likely.
Otherwise you'll have to tell your firewall/NAT to allow things like traceroute & ICMP.
Don
NAT => ???? I'm not familiar with this abbreviation.
I don't know what's blocking traceroute on this machine. It is a new (November 06) Dell XPS 410 running WinXP. It may be some software preloaded by Dell which is causing the problem.
Maybe the problem was on this end. I'll see if it lasts.
Yah partly, but customers in Manhattan would suck up the extra cost for it anyway. I asked a fiber guy when they were installing it nearby in Queens and he said it's partly because they haven't figured out an easy way to wire the fiber under the streets and through all the 10+ story buildings. Plus all the electric and phone cables go underground in Manhattan.
They have it in Westchester and Queens. Where I work in White Plains, for example, I stopped by a friends house to upload some of my pics while I was on lunch break... I can get up 50 pics in half an hour but on my home DSL it took 3:30 for the same pics.
Considering I know Verizon in Manhattan is trying to go high speed Wi-Fi even in subways soon I'm trying to be patient...
dak.smugmug.com
gobble.
From Franklin, OH(just north of Cincinnati)
Tim
Speak with sweet words, for you never know when you may have to eat them....
Can you copy/paste the text to us here in dgrin, instead of a picture?
http://wall-art.smugmug.com/
Please note my post # 26 above. My problem may be solved.