Geocaching.com Down?

[+LostMontanan]

Anyone else having lots of problems with the site today? I can log in, put in my zip, and search for caches, but as soon as I choose one to look at I get an exception error saying the server is too busy...

[+TeamVilla5]

Good question... me, too!

[lakeuk]

Answers simple - it's Sunday, at the end of the weekend everyone want's to log their finds and the site can't cope. Best wait till Monday

[+Bigdawg!]

Every weekend this happens, takes me hours of yelling at the computer instead looking for caches.

Are they doing anything to fix this, I'm already a premium member what else do they want, my first born.

If that would help, I'll send him over. He's pretty good with a computer at 7 years old!

[+nfa]

the Waymarking site is working just fine...

[+What rock?]

Yep. Wish there was a way we could put in a time/date search for reading the forums. If the comp. glitches out while reading them, you can't re-login for the same posts. You can only get the ones since then.

[+ekhoc]

as soon as I choose one to look at I get an exception error saying the server is too busy...

This seems to happen every now and then on Sunday evenings.

[Keystone]

I've entered more than 60 logs and loaded several hundred pages on the site last evening and today. (In other words, a typical weekend for a cache reviewer!) Although the site is very slow, I've only gotten a total timeout error twice. I find that it's less frustrating if I have another window open to work on e-mails, reading the forums, etc., while waiting for pages to load. Eventually, they do!

[+Team GPSaxophone]

I've entered more than 60 logs and loaded several hundred pages on the site last evening and today. (In other words, a typical weekend for a cache reviewer!) Although the site is very slow, I've only gotten a total timeout error twice. I find that it's less frustrating if I have another window open to work on e-mails, reading the forums, etc., while waiting for pages to load. Eventually, they do!

Aha! Keystone broke the site!

[CoyoteRed]

Yesterday I was having a problem loading pages. After the second one, I simply switched to looking at my up-to-date, no-stale-data, off-line, non-Groundspeak approved database and did what I wanted to do.

[+Team GPSaxophone]

Yesterday I was having a problem loading pages. After the second one, I simply switched to looking at my up-to-date, no-stale-data, off-line, non-Groundspeak approved database and did what I wanted to do.

If your database isn't real-time, then you can't avoid stale data

[+ZackJones]

It took me over an hour today to log a find, and then retrieve the TBs I dropped into the cache. Today is the worst I have ever seen the web site

[CoyoteRed]

Yesterday I was having a problem loading pages. After the second one, I simply switched to looking at my up-to-date, no-stale-data, off-line, non-Groundspeak approved database and did what I wanted to do.

If your database isn't real-time, then you can't avoid stale data

 

What makes you think Groundspeak is providing "real-time" information? They have some sort of sensor knowing when a cache is gone, placed, changes, or found? No? That's right, even Groundspeak's data is only as current as the last entry or change by a user. It certainly isn't "real-time."

 

Consider how often a cache is logged or changed, and the frequency of the updates to my database, I'd say my data is at least 95% up-to-date except for the logs. It certainly was as up-to-date as Groundspeak was a couple or three days ago. So, while Groundspeak can be days, weeks, even months behind in the real world, I'm, at best, a few days behind that.

 

So, yes, if you really want to call me on the statement "no-stale-data" then I concede the point, but at least I can look at data that I have a very high confidence in rather than waiting forever.