"Server Too Busy" at 5:40am?

[+WeightMan]

I never have problems with the server.

Might have something to do with my Latinum membership.

Sluggish and non-responsive servers have been well documented here for quite a while (months and months).

 

You go ahead and give gc that warm fuzzy problem that nothing is wrong and they will not fix it...

 

Why people continue to defend these problems is beyond my comprehension of reasonable understanding. These aren't one or two issues, these are ONGOING issues.

 

Even Jeremy finally admitted to problems here:

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=150414

 

and if you read Jeremy's first post in that thread you will find that he is using the services of an outside consultant to determine what can be done to improve things. That was posted on December 8. Today is December 27, not even three weeks later. I seriously doubt that the work of that consultant is done in that time. I'm certainly willing to give them the benifit of the doubt on the time issue. Things like that take time and, frankly, more time spent in planning usually results in a better solution.

 

I'm with RecDiver on this one. I have seen no problems lately. Certainly not like we had even a year ago before the second database server went online.

[+pppingme]

and if you read Jeremy's first post in that thread you will find that he is using the services of an outside consultant to determine what can be done to improve things. That was posted on December 8. Today is December 27, not even three weeks later. I seriously doubt that the work of that consultant is done in that time. I'm certainly willing to give them the benifit of the doubt on the time issue. Things like that take time and, frankly, more time spent in planning usually results in a better solution.

 

I'm with RecDiver on this one. I have seen no problems lately. Certainly not like we had even a year ago before the second database server went online.

I'm not saying that this outside consultant has or hasn't had time to do anything, my point was that gc finally acknowledged having a problem. I agree, it would take more than three weeks to evaluate, design and implement a solution.

 

As far as not seeing problems?? Did you not use the site yesterday night?? Although it worked and I didn't get any "server busy errors", it was about as slow as could be, to the point I would say is practically unusable. It was slow throughout the day yesterday, too.

[+WeightMan]

and if you read Jeremy's first post in that thread you will find that he is using the services of an outside consultant to determine what can be done to improve things. That was posted on December 8. Today is December 27, not even three weeks later. I seriously doubt that the work of that consultant is done in that time. I'm certainly willing to give them the benifit of the doubt on the time issue. Things like that take time and, frankly, more time spent in planning usually results in a better solution.

 

I'm with RecDiver on this one. I have seen no problems lately. Certainly not like we had even a year ago before the second database server went online.

I'm not saying that this outside consultant has or hasn't had time to do anything, my point was that gc finally acknowledged having a problem. I agree, it would take more than three weeks to evaluate, design and implement a solution.

 

As far as not seeing problems?? Did you not use the site yesterday night?? Although it worked and I didn't get any "server busy errors", it was about as slow as could be, to the point I would say is practically unusable. It was slow throughout the day yesterday, too.

 

Yes, I did use the site last night. I wasn't on much total time, but I did access the site several times over the evening and saw no trouble at all. Of course I do know not to try to access the site at 11:00PM PST since there is a major back up done each day at that time and the servers will be slow then.

 

Since Jeremy has admitted that a problem exists and he is taking steps to alleviate the problem, how is complaining about the problem still existing helping the solution?

[+Recdiver]

I complain, therefore I am.

[+WeightMan]

I complain, therefore I am.

[+StarBrand]

I saw little slowdown over the holiday weekend and I think I get an awful lot out of the service for a mere $2.50 per month ($30/year). As long as they keep it running - I am a happy geocacher.

 

I look forward to anything that is faster and more reliable in general but figure I don't have much say when I get so much enjoyment out of a measly sum. Works great for me 95% of the time or much higher. Doesn't bug me a bit when they get a bit of slow down for a short period of time.

[+Ambrosia]

and if you read Jeremy's first post in that thread you will find that he is using the services of an outside consultant to determine what can be done to improve things. That was posted on December 8. Today is December 27, not even three weeks later. I seriously doubt that the work of that consultant is done in that time. I'm certainly willing to give them the benifit of the doubt on the time issue. Things like that take time and, frankly, more time spent in planning usually results in a better solution.

 

I'm with RecDiver on this one. I have seen no problems lately. Certainly not like we had even a year ago before the second database server went online.

I'm not saying that this outside consultant has or hasn't had time to do anything, my point was that gc finally acknowledged having a problem. I agree, it would take more than three weeks to evaluate, design and implement a solution.

 

As far as not seeing problems?? Did you not use the site yesterday night?? Although it worked and I didn't get any "server busy errors", it was about as slow as could be, to the point I would say is practically unusable. It was slow throughout the day yesterday, too.

Actually, I was using it at those times, and I didn't have any problems. I'm not saying that there aren't any problems in general, I have problems sometimes with the site. But when people are saying that they cannot get onto gc.com or are having problems with it in this thread, and I'm on the site at the same time, the majority of the time I'm not having any problems.

 

Must be my platinum membership. Hug Jeremy, and you could get one too.

[+Cache Liberation Front]

Works great for me 95% of the time or much higher. Doesn't bug me a bit when they get a bit of slow down for a short period of time.

 

If the servers work 95% of the time, than I expect them to charge me 95% of the time. The fact remains, they charge me 100% of the time. Therefore I expect the servers to work 100% of the time. It's really that simple.

 

I'm not trying to be critical, I'm just agreeing with a few others here that a lackadaisical attitude toward downtime isn't helping. Quit lowering your standards.

 

MrW.

[+Ambrosia]

I don't agree that our attitudes are affecting the site. They've heard from everyone. They are geocachers themselves. They are aware of every problem. They are doing their best to work on it between all the other numerous cool things that they are working on for everyone .

[+Cache Liberation Front]

They are doing their best to work on it between all the other numerous cool things that they are working on for everyone .

 

Honestly, I could care less what all those "cool things" are, especially if I can't get onto the site and do the basics like log caches and run PQs w/o having to worry about what time of day it is or what day of the week it is.

 

MrW.

Edited December 28, 2006 by Mr. & Mrs. Wisearse

[+Ambrosia]

They are doing their best to work on it between all the other numerous cool things that they are working on for everyone .

 

Honestly, I could care less what all those "cool things" are, especially if I can't get onto the site and do the basics like logs caches and run PQs w/o having to worry about what time of day it is or what day of the week it is.

 

MrW.

I'm sure that this is at the top of their list, not to worry.

[+Cache Liberation Front]

They are doing their best to work on it between all the other numerous cool things that they are working on for everyone .

 

Honestly, I could care less what all those "cool things" are, especially if I can't get onto the site and do the basics like logs caches and run PQs w/o having to worry about what time of day it is or what day of the week it is.

 

MrW.

I'm sure that this is at the top of their list, not to worry.

 

Sorry, but I've been hearing that for many months now. At first, it felt sincere. Now, it just sounds dismissive.

 

MrW.

[+Ambrosia]

They are doing their best to work on it between all the other numerous cool things that they are working on for everyone .

 

Honestly, I could care less what all those "cool things" are, especially if I can't get onto the site and do the basics like logs caches and run PQs w/o having to worry about what time of day it is or what day of the week it is.

 

MrW.

I'm sure that this is at the top of their list, not to worry.

 

Sorry, but I've been hearing that for many months now. At first, it felt sincere. Now, it just sounds dismissive.

 

MrW.

 

Oh, sure. You're probably right. They probably do not want to make the site faster for some unknown reason, maybe some power hungry deviancy, and they are using our money so that they can sit around all day eating chocolate bon bons and drinking coffee while they laugh at our puney attempts to get noticed.

 

Mmmmmm....chocolate. *drool*

[+Cache Liberation Front]

 

Oh, sure. You're probably right. They probably do not want to make the site faster for some unknown reason, maybe some power hungry deviancy, and they are using our money so that they can sit around all day eating chocolate bon bons and drinking coffee while they laugh at our puney attempts to get noticed.

 

Mmmmmm....chocolate. *drool*

 

I'm not so arrogant as to speculate on Groundspeak's motives. However, I prefer to judge by actions rather than words.

 

Their words: "We see there's a prob and we're on it." That was not a day, not a week, but MONTHS ago.

Their actions: *birds chirp and the servers continue to fail*

 

You be the judge.

 

MrW.

[+OXCACHER]

Wow I just ran across this thread and I have to chime in.

 

It is almost time to renew my premium membership and I have been asking myself, why?

 

I can't always get the pq's when I want or need them, a PM service.

 

Servers are having issues.

 

I have been tounge lased by Groundspeak employees and my local reviewer.

 

I don't agree with "it only cost 3 bucks a months, what can you expect?". I actually expect a quality service for my money.

 

I would get fired if I didn't deliver it in my business, why shouldn't I expect it from services I pay for?

 

Spend the money, fix the servers, and give me the quality service I am paying for or continue with the current service and at least don't charge me for it. Maybe Waymarking can bring in the big bucks? []

[+OXCACHER]

XXX

Edited December 28, 2006 by TalesFromTheSurface

[+StarBrand]

...Their words: "We see there's a prob and we're on it." That was not a day, not a week, but MONTHS ago.

Their actions: *birds chirp and the servers continue to fail*

 

You be the judge.

 

MrW.

 

ok - i judge things to be working very well and I will re-iterate that I rarely see any problems and when I do they usually last a very short period of time.

 

They have stated that a cure is in the works - that is enough for me. As always, if you think you can do better - by all means please show us all how to do it. I am open minded, I'll check out your site.

[+OXCACHER]

...Their words: "We see there's a prob and we're on it." That was not a day, not a week, but MONTHS ago.

Their actions: *birds chirp and the servers continue to fail*

 

You be the judge.

 

MrW.

 

ok - i judge things to be working very well and I will re-iterate that I rarely see any problems and when I do they usually last a very short period of time.

 

They have stated that a cure is in the works - that is enough for me. As always, if you think you can do better - by all means please show us all how to do it. I am open minded, I'll check out your site.

 

Have 60,000 people send me 30.00 each and I am on it! I think I could do it on a budget like that and have a candy bar or two

 

The servers are waiting on you, please forward me all your cache, oh I meant cash!

 

Edit: I just went to your homepage from your profile and it is down []

 

Edit 2: Feel free to look at my profile and follow the Visit Homepage link. It doesn't get the traffic this site does, only about 25,000 hits a month, but it has been running for allmost a year for only a little more than my Premium mebership here. It services 109 members...go figure?

 

Poster with down website supports website with server problems???

Edited December 28, 2006 by TalesFromTheSurface

[+OXCACHER]

After sleeping on it, I realize my last post was a bit aggressive. I get frustrated with the system like some of the previous posters however, the wimsical "everything is going to work out" or "its only a few dollars a month" posts don't help resolve the issues. Post your problems so the Groundspeak staff is aware that there are problems that need to be addressed.

 

There is middle ground.

 

Groundspeak is aware of the server problems and a couple of months in the prblem solving department really isn't a long time. Its only a long time if you are on the receiving end.

[+OienLabs]

I think this thread is sound. If we experience problems we should tell Groundspeak. It is called feedback.

 

No news is good news? I don't think so. Let them hear. So they know what to work with.

[+Ambrosia]

It's good to let Groundspeak know when things are happening, yes. It just gets dragged out and people go on and on, and act like Groundspeak doesn't care. It's the attitude that bothers me.

[+OXCACHER]

It's good to let Groundspeak know when things are happening, yes. It just gets dragged out and people go on and on, and act like Groundspeak doesn't care. It's the attitude that bothers me.

 

When this thread started there were a few whimsical replys that made it appear unimportant. That is why I felt the need to post, to let them know it is. That bothers me.

[+Ambrosia]

Well, good. It is evened out then.

[+OXCACHER]

And alas the real problem presents itself, denial

[+Ambrosia]

It's not just a river in Egypt.

[+OXCACHER]

Thanks for helping me prove my point Goodnight

[+Ambrosia]

As has been said over and over. Yes, the site could be faster. Yes, the site is down sometimes. Groundspeak has admitted that and said they are working on it. For me to say otherwise, would be saying that they are lying.

 

But, a good portion of the time that some people say the site is slow or down, others are saying that it is not. If two people are trying and one is on gc.com and the other is not, then that means that there is not a problem with the site at that time. It is a problem with the other person's provider or browser or computer. This has happened so many times when someone says that the site is slow or down, that it should be realized that this problem isn't as bad as it is being made to appear here on this thread.

 

That is not denial, that is logic.

[+pppingme]

But, a good portion of the time that some people say the site is slow or down, others are saying that it is not. If two people are trying and one is on gc.com and the other is not, then that means that there is not a problem with the site at that time. It is a problem with the other person's provider or browser or computer. This has happened so many times when someone says that the site is slow or down, that it should be realized that this problem isn't as bad as it is being made to appear here on this thread.

 

That is not denial, that is logic.

No, this isn't "logic"...

 

GC does have at least TWO web servers, and the underlying structure is unknown (does each web server have access to its own sql server, which are then replicated?)

 

So, just cause one user is fine and another is broken absolutely does NOT mean its a user (isp, etc) issue, it could VERY WELL still be an issue on the GC side. And with the number of complaints, it HAS to be a GC issue...

[+Thrak]

It's definitely on the GC side. I don't have any issues with any other sites. It's ALWAYS the gc.com site. This morning there are a few new caches in my email and I would have loved to be FTF on them but I can't get to the cache pages - or any other gc.com pages. I've been getting the "server too busy" error all morning.............

[+Harriet the Spy]

I think it must be sunny everywhere and everybody is frantically trying to plan their day caching with the limited sun.... just like me

[+1NatureMom]

Happenes every year this time. our site spikes this time. Santa brings oodles of newbies GPSr's and they hit the internet to find out about their new toy, find us, etc.,etc.,etc..... What is cute is the newbies who find our site & wanna know how to use their large GPS car mount/mapping receiver to find caches in the woods

 

patience grasshoper, patience.

[+1NatureMom]

In the meantime, this may help you find caches for today........do you have WAP interface on your cell phone? you can enter wap.geocaching.com on your bluetooth phone...You can search for new caches via zip codes.

Happy Caching! Happy New Year!

[+kc8bdr]

I have been trying to get in to the site for about a half hour, no luck keep getting “Server Too Busy”

 

Jim

Kc8bdr

[k9swx]

I have been trying to get in to the site for about a half hour, no luck keep getting “Server Too Busy”

 

Jim

Kc8bdr

Yup, same here in Illinois. Maybe they need to reboot it?

[+MtnGoat50]

In the meantime, this may help you find caches for today........do you have WAP interface on your cell phone? you can enter wap.geocaching.com on your bluetooth phone...You can search for new caches via zip codes.

Happy Caching! Happy New Year!

 

You can use the wap interface on a computer also, just enter, wap.geocaching.com, in the address line. It seems to be working, but it's not very convenient to use. Whatever works, I guess.

[+MrCOgeo]

In the meantime, this may help you find caches for today........do you have WAP interface on your cell phone? you can enter wap.geocaching.com on your bluetooth phone...You can search for new caches via zip codes.

Happy Caching! Happy New Year!

 

You can use the wap interface on a computer also, just enter, wap.geocaching.com, in the address line. It seems to be working, but it's not very convenient to use. Whatever works, I guess.

It could be one possible stop-gap but...

one slight problem with using the WAP interface (wap.geocaching.com) is that

it is still having errors at the time of this posting with 5 digit waypoints (i.e. GC100KA)

Edited December 30, 2006 by MrCOgeo

[+Thrak]

In the meantime, this may help you find caches for today........do you have WAP interface on your cell phone? you can enter wap.geocaching.com on your bluetooth phone...You can search for new caches via zip codes.

Happy Caching! Happy New Year!

 

Nice idea but..... I just tried two new caches listed in my email and neither one of them shows up when I search by GC number and the only other alternative is to painfully scroll through a zillion other caches looking for the new ones. I tried that and finally found one of them (with the exact gc number that the site claimed wasn't found) but it's just way too much work. I do caching for fun - not for work.

[+WascoZooKeeper]

I think this explains the problem.

[+Nazgul]

Currently getting this, and when I'm not the response is highly variable:

 

Server Error in '/' Application.

Server Too Busy

Description: An unhandled exception occurred during the execution of the current web request. Please review the stack trace for more information about the error and where it originated in the code.

 

Exception Details: System.Web.HttpException: Server Too Busy

 

Source Error:

 

An unhandled exception was generated during the execution of the current web request. Information regarding the origin and location of the exception can be identified using the exception stack trace below.

 

Stack Trace:

 

[HttpException (0x80004005): Server Too Busy]

System.Web.HttpRuntime.RejectRequestInternal(HttpWorkerRequest wr) +146

 

Version Information: Microsoft .NET Framework Version:1.1.4322.2300; ASP.NET Version:1.1.4322.2300

[Aushiker]

G'day

 

Here we go again ... "server too busy" at 1:22 AM PST.

 

Andrew

[+ReadyOrNot]

Everyone should give TPTB a little break on this one. Clearly it's not in their interest to delay a fix for this problem. They probably want it fixed more than anyone else. Trying to troubleshoot problems like these can be extremely difficult and it's not as cut and dry as you might think.

 

Wait, what am I saying? I bet they are all sitting in their offices reading the forums having a good chuckle at how many folks are mad and putting pressure on them. Hook me up with some of that lovin'!!!!

 

[Aushiker]

Everyone should give TPTB a little break on this one.

 

How long do you consider a "little break" should be? IIRC this has been an issue since April 2006 .... some 8 months ago ...

 

Regards

Andrew

Edited December 31, 2006 by Aushiker

[+ReadyOrNot]

Everyone should give TPTB a little break on this one.

 

How long do you consider a "little break" should be? IIRC the last TPTB posting on the subject was April 2006 .... some 8 months ago ... problem remains unresolved.

 

Regards

Andrew

 

I've been battling an intermittent crystal reports problem with one of my .net Apps for over 6 months now. Do you think I enjoy getting phone calls everytime it crashes? Do you really think that they don't want to fix the problem? Do you think they aren't trying to fix the problem? If you answered Yes, then I don't know who can help you. If you answered No, then all you can do is wait until they get it figured out.

 

Perhaps during the down times, you can do a little bit of reading on asp.net, IIS, SQL Server and Windows Server 2003. In addition to figuring out the problem, you have to figure out how to fix the problem with minimal downtime (which is a feat in and of itself)

[+Nazgul]

1021am PDT 12/31/06:

 

Server Error in '/' Application.

Timeout expired. The timeout period elapsed prior to completion of the operation or the server is not responding.

Description: An unhandled exception occurred during the execution of the current web request. Please review the stack trace for more information about the error and where it originated in the code.

 

Exception Details: System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException: Timeout expired. The timeout period elapsed prior to completion of the operation or the server is not responding.

 

Source Error:

 

An unhandled exception was generated during the execution of the current web request. Information regarding the origin and location of the exception can be identified using the exception stack trace below.

 

Stack Trace:

 

[sqlException: Timeout expired. The timeout period elapsed prior to completion of the operation or the server is not responding.]

System.Data.SqlClient.SqlCommand.ExecuteReader(CommandBehavior cmdBehavior, RunBehavior runBehavior, Boolean returnStream) +742

System.Data.SqlClient.SqlCommand.ExecuteReader(CommandBehavior behavior) +45

System.Data.SqlClient.SqlCommand.System.Data.IDbCommand.ExecuteReader(CommandBehavior behavior) +5

System.Data.Common.DbDataAdapter.FillFromCommand(Object data, Int32 startRecord, Int32 maxRecords, String srcTable, IDbCommand command, CommandBehavior behavior) +304

System.Data.Common.DbDataAdapter.Fill(DataSet dataSet, Int32 startRecord, Int32 maxRecords, String srcTable, IDbCommand command, CommandBehavior behavior) +77

System.Data.Common.DbDataAdapter.Fill(DataSet dataSet) +38

Groundspeak.Web.SqlData.SqlConnectionManager.FillDataSetSP(String StoredProc, ParameterList Params, Int32 Timeout, Database database) +628

Groundspeak.Web.SqlData.SqlGalleryController.CreateImage(Int64 UserID, Int64 GalleryID, Guid ImageGUID, String Name, String FileName, String FileDesc, DateTime DateTaken, String XmlData, Int64 WptRefID, Int64 LogRefID, DBImageDataSources DataSource, Decimal Latitude, Decimal Longitude) +1489

Groundspeak.Web.Gallery.GalleryImage.Create(Int64 UserID, Int64 GalleryID, Guid ImageGUID, String Name, String FileName, String FileDesc, DateTime DateTaken, String XmlOutput, Int64 WptRefID, Int64 LogRefID, ImageDataSources DataSource, Double Latitude, Double Longitude) +299

Geocaching.UI.ImageUploadPanel.ProcessImageForWebService(UploadedFile& File) +1081

Geocaching.UI.ImageUploadPanel.ProcessFile() +772

Geocaching.UI.ImageUploadPanel.btnUpload_Click(Object sender, EventArgs e) +7

System.Web.UI.WebControls.Button.OnClick(EventArgs e) +108

System.Web.UI.WebControls.Button.System.Web.UI.IPostBackEventHandler.RaisePostBackEvent(String eventArgument) +58

System.Web.UI.Page.RaisePostBackEvent(IPostBackEventHandler sourceControl, String eventArgument) +18

System.Web.UI.Page.RaisePostBackEvent(NameValueCollection postData) +33

System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequestMain() +1292

 

Version Information: Microsoft .NET Framework Version:1.1.4322.2300; ASP.NET Version:1.1.4322.2300

[+pppingme]

I've been battling an intermittent crystal reports problem with one of my .net Apps for over 6 months now. Do you think I enjoy getting phone calls everytime it crashes? Do you really think that they don't want to fix the problem?

At some point you have to give in and call a professional... To look at your example, how many hours have you spent on this issue? Now look at it like this, whats your hourly pay? If you were to call in a pro, even at 10 times your pay, and that person is able to fix the problem in a couple hours, isn't that worth it? Isn't that a better allocation of resources? How many other problems have you had to defer working on because of this problem?

 

Sometimes you just have to admit defeat and call in help.

 

Perhaps during the down times, you can do a little bit of reading on asp.net, IIS, SQL Server and Windows Server 2003. In addition to figuring out the problem, you have to figure out how to fix the problem with minimal downtime (which is a feat in and of itself)

I have, I'm well versed, I'm also certified in some aspect on everything you just mentioned. I consult and design infrastructure on large scale sites.

 

As stated before, this site is generating somewhere in the range of 3-5 million a year in revenues, they clearly don't know how to scale the site, this has been known for quite some time, and they are finally calling in someone else to help. This should have been done a year ago.

[+ReadyOrNot]

I've been battling an intermittent crystal reports problem with one of my .net Apps for over 6 months now. Do you think I enjoy getting phone calls everytime it crashes? Do you really think that they don't want to fix the problem?

At some point you have to give in and call a professional... To look at your example, how many hours have you spent on this issue? Now look at it like this, whats your hourly pay? If you were to call in a pro, even at 10 times your pay, and that person is able to fix the problem in a couple hours, isn't that worth it? Isn't that a better allocation of resources? How many other problems have you had to defer working on because of this problem?

 

Sometimes you just have to admit defeat and call in help.

Which they have done

 

Perhaps during the down times, you can do a little bit of reading on asp.net, IIS, SQL Server and Windows Server 2003. In addition to figuring out the problem, you have to figure out how to fix the problem with minimal downtime (which is a feat in and of itself)

I have, I'm well versed, I'm also certified in some aspect on everything you just mentioned. I consult and design infrastructure on large scale sites.

 

As stated before, this site is generating somewhere in the range of 3-5 million a year in revenues, they clearly don't know how to scale the site, this has been known for quite some time, and they are finally calling in someone else to help. This should have been done a year ago.

 

See note in red above. I agree with you to a point. As far as my crystal reports problem, I have been working directly with the crystal reports folks on the problem. They don't know what's causing it as well. The point without going off topic is that they clearly understand there is a problem. If it was a quick fix, it would be fixed. They've tried fixing it themselves and can't, so they've called in consultants. It seems to me that they are doing everything they can at this point and what reason do you have to think otherwise?

 

This topic struck a nerve with me because I've been dealing with end-users doing basically the same things. As much as I try to explain the problem, they just want it fixed, which I think is fine, but when you start questioning peoples motives, that's where it goes too far. I've had end-users accuse me of having some kind of financial motivation for not getting it fixed. There is nothing I want more than to have everything work perfectly and I'm sure TPTB have the same motivation (why wouldn't they?)

 

Just my $0.02

[+braveheart814]

I also can not get the home page to load in my browser.

Any recommendations I can try will be appreciated, thanks.

[Neos2]

I also can not get the home page to load in my browser.

Any recommendations I can try will be appreciated, thanks.

Hit page refresh a lot and cross your fingers.

 

Try some other time than a Sunday over a holiday weekend in the US.

 

Seriously. Sunday's are traditionally busy days on the site, as folks who have been out caching all weekend try to log their finds. Holidays are even busier, as many of us have time off from work, and go caching with some of that extra free time.

[+WascoZooKeeper]

I also can not get the home page to load in my browser.

Any recommendations I can try will be appreciated, thanks.

Hit page refresh a lot and cross your fingers.

 

Try some other time than a Sunday over a holiday weekend in the US.

 

Seriously. Sunday's are traditionally busy days on the site, as folks who have been out caching all weekend try to log their finds. Holidays are even busier, as many of us have time off from work, and go caching with some of that extra free time.

Not to mention all those shiny new GPSr's that Santa left under many Christmas trees. Every year this is one of the heaviest volume periods of the whole year -- new trinkets + vacation time = server overload.

 

Ooooooh . . . . shiny!!

[Aushiker]

This topic struck a nerve with me because I've been dealing with end-users doing basically the same things. As much as I try to explain the problem, they just want it fixed, which I think is fine,

 

G'day

 

Thanks for your comments, but you appear to overlook one small thing. The last communication I can find on the topic was eight months ago ... now I may have missed something in between times and if I have and it is a regular update then I would agree your comments are valid, however if not, then I disagree with you.

 

Communication is very important ... keeping the people paying for this service abreast of developments is low cost and effective and would reduce, I believe, significanlty the level of agnst being experienced by the users.

 

Assuming no response which is my experience so far, I have no idea if Groundspeak is dealing with the issue or ignoring it and it would seem neither do you.

 

At the end of the day communication on the matter regularly is not costly and achieves a lot.

 

Cheers

Andrew