Is it just me, or is GP's website slowing to a crawl?

[+Hobo2]

1:42 MST, trying to send an email to a fellow cacher through GC's website, still trying to load and send as we speak, it is now 1:45 nothing yet, tab still shows working.

[+Tequila]

He means Groundspeak, but is just not getting the acronym right. Most say GC.com or GC, not GP.

I know...obviously my attempt at humor didn't work...not that it matters anyway since I'm not seeing the issues he is.

 

Then please do everyone a favour. Read the thread but don't add a comment unless you have a positive contribution to make.

 

The forums are already strained.

 

Obviously a number of people are having this problem and they deserve the respect of the other members and the ability to log their difficulties without being subjected to ridicule or sarcasm.

 

Everyone wants the website to get better and most of us want to help diagnose the issue. Adding sarcastic comments does nothing to help anyone.

 

Thank you for your consideration.

[+tozainamboku]

I'm too lazy to search the forum to one of the earlier threads on the poor performance of the Geocaching.com website. I remember the years where every spring the system would time out continuously when trying to post your logs after a day of caches - particularly on the weekends. The apologist for Grounspeak at the time would tell you just wait till Monday to post your finds, the system can't handle so many users at one time. Eventually Grounspeak would have to give in and upgrade their hardware or add servers to handle all the new load. One year I recall Jeremy posting much what has been posted in this thread. That adding new hardware wasn't the fix but that someone need to fix some fundamental problems with database that caused a bottleneck. He even went so far as to hire some consultants to revamp the database and optimize the SQL, but in the end he still had to upgrade the hardware.

 

Performance issues - especially those due to scalability (the ability of a website to handle growing amounts of traffic and data) are often much more complex than adding hardware. Generally there will be one or more bottlenecks between site bandwidth (the amount of data the site can send/receive over the internet), web server performance (the time it takes to process HTTP request and respond with the HTML), application performance (time it takes to process and generate the information on the webpage), and database performance (time it takes to query for the data from a database and to process updates to the database). Depending on where the bottlenecks are, adding servers may or may not help. It is likely that a major bottleneck on Geocaching.com is the database. Since all the users want to see the latest data all time it is difficult to partition this data so that you can just add more servers to process more. Someone has to be the master gatekeeper of updates to the database. When thousands of geocachers are logging their finds simultaneously, the master is queuing requests that can't be processed until the previous ones have completed. In the past this got so bad that the web server would time-out while waiting for a database request. We aren't seeing much of this happing now. Perhaps the timeout had been increased enough so that most database request will eventually run. The problem with this is that users tend to feel the site is slow. When they click enter they expect to get a response back in a few seconds, at least message saying "Processing your request". But when nothing comes back they think the site is slow or even hung. Unfortunately the web is not very good at handling requests that take a long time to process. Eventually some users get tired of waiting, so they click again - adding another message to the queue someplace and making the site to appear even slower. Eventually what needs to happen is for the database to be redesigned so it can be partitioned. Then the load could be spread out over more servers. A bigger, faster database server may get you some temporary relief but these machines are costly. Instead, I suspect Groundspeak is looking for a longer term solution where the database can scale and be served by several less costly machines instead of single big server that will only need to be replaced again next year when the number of geocachers doubles.

[+Tequila]

Very well said.

 

I have commented elsewhere that perhaps GS should have an embargo on new caching accounts until they can address these problems. Doubt that will happen but things will only get worse until something is done.

[+Hobo2]

Thank you for explaining tozainamboku. You sound very knowledgeable and also sound as if you are trying to focus in on a solution, hope to hear more. By the way, for years now I have been using GP, sorry for the confusion.

[+MickEMT]

tozainamboku's response does point out some possible causes for irregular slowdown issues.

I can remember back when I started, more than one person told me to avoid the site on Sundays as that was the "slow day" due to all the cachers logging finds from Saturday. That's no longer the case.

 

I don't think that anyone is scared to post a site speed issue. Yes, there are those who will put up a reply that could be considered derogatory of the OP, but that happens in pretty much every thread.

That said, if you have an issue, and you do post it, expect that you will be asked for certain information that will enable GC and other knowledgeable individuals to help diagnose the problem. If you called your doctor and told him just "I have a pain", would you expect him to give you a diagnosis without asking more questions?

 

Yes, the site does have performance issues at times, and guess what, it pretty much always will. It's unavoidable, servers go down, hardware fails, power goes out, DOS attacks happen, sometime the site becomes overwhelmed by the volume of users. Put another way things happen.

Speaking of volume of user issues, I'm not sure GC could build up the system to handle the volume and keep it running at the same time. Look back 2 to 3 years, how many cachers were using net connections in the field? Now it seems at time like almost every other cacher has a net capable phone and logs finds as they make them. Look at the Iphone app. What's in the future? I don't think it will be that long before a GPS maker comes out with a unit that will make use of a live connection to the site to download the nearest caches, run a Wherigo cartridge right off that site, have live updates of the cache page, allow you to log the find and upload your field notes as you enter them, and probably upload photos or live video at the same time.

 

Sometimes the problem is one of perception. High speed networks are getting faster. I remember how much faster the net seemed when I switched from dial up to an early cable connection. Now, if my connection was only running at the original cable connection speed, I'd be calling it painfully slow. ( 1MBPS then VS 10MBPS now)It's not fair to solely blame Groundspeak for the issues, especially when most people are saying that they are not seeing the same issue. Groundspeak has gotten much better about taking care of site issues quickly, and they are almost constantly "tweaking" the sites.

Edited March 26, 2009 by mtn-man

[+mtn-man]

Of course we know the site and forums are slow. It's fairly obvious even to us on the office T1. I promise you we take this very seriously and if we had a solution it would already be in place, but this is a complicated issue that requires a lot of investigation and planning.

 

With a site as large and as complicated as Geocaching.com it's not enough to simply throw hardware at a problem, although we have done so to a great extent. It requires serious planning and talent to optimize code, and that takes time. How much time we don't yet know, but we are sparing no effort or expense to remedy the situation.

 

In the meantime we are making small tweaks daily to improve performance incrementally while the big solution is cooking. Please hang in there while we work. Thanks.

Probably time to re-quote this from page 1. I will say that some tweaking works, some doesn't. We saw a really slow weekend a couple of weeks ago. Some things did not work well and were rolled back obviously. A lot of what Toz said plays into what Nate said two weeks ago.

[+Hobo2]

Of course we know the site and forums are slow. It's fairly obvious even to us on the office T1. I promise you we take this very seriously and if we had a solution it would already be in place, but this is a complicated issue that requires a lot of investigation and planning.

 

With a site as large and as complicated as Geocaching.com it's not enough to simply throw hardware at a problem, although we have done so to a great extent. It requires serious planning and talent to optimize code, and that takes time. How much time we don't yet know, but we are sparing no effort or expense to remedy the situation.

 

In the meantime we are making small tweaks daily to improve performance incrementally while the big solution is cooking. Please hang in there while we work. Thanks.

Probably time to re-quote this from page 1. I will say that some tweaking works, some doesn't. We saw a really slow weekend a couple of weeks ago. Some things did not work well and were rolled back obviously. A lot of what Toz said plays into what Nate said two weeks ago.

So in a nut shell, what I hear is that's it!

 

We (meaning GC) have invested all we are going to, because just throwing hardware at it won't solve anything. All we can do now is tweek... we are working hard on this daily. GC is so big, and there are so many free people using it, there is nothing left to do for the paying customers. If it is running slow, (we know it is, but it's not that bad) it must be the customers browser or cookie settings. Like it or lump it, there is nothing left for GC to improve upon.

 

Sorry, I'm not buying it. I do believe there are things GC can and should do.

[+Tequila]

I think that is a rather harsh assessment.

 

A more logical, and less emotional, assessment is that the current configuration or hardware/software/applications etc. is such that they are probably hitting bottlenecks that extra hardware will have minimal effect on.

 

I don't mean this as a criticism but if the operation grew exponentially for awhile and upgrades were added without sound long term planning, this type of situation can occur.

 

I suspect that to truly fix this problem is a major undertaking that "could" require a complete operation redesign.

 

As for money, I don't think GS is as wealthy as some would think. Their fixed costs are probably significant.

 

Personally, I would like to see an embargo on new accounts until they can at least improve the situation somewhat.

 

My 2 cents.

[+Hobo2]

I think that is a rather harsh assessment.

 

A more logical, and less emotional, assessment is that the current configuration or hardware/software/applications etc. is such that they are probably hitting bottlenecks that extra hardware will have minimal effect on.

 

I don't mean this as a criticism but if the operation grew exponentially for awhile and upgrades were added without sound long term planning, this type of situation can occur.

 

I suspect that to truly fix this problem is a major undertaking that "could" require a complete operation redesign.

 

As for money, I don't think GS is as wealthy as some would think. Their fixed costs are probably significant.

 

Personally, I would like to see an embargo on new accounts until they can at least improve the situation somewhat.

 

My 2 cents.

I was a bit harsh I guess, but I am tired of hearing what I perceive as excuses... sorry, harsh again. I think you are right on in your analysis, total revamp is required... if the system was built without "sound long term planning". But this is clearly not an option on GC's plate right now.

 

In my opinion they do have the money... I can do the math quite easily. Moreover the free people do pay, this I feel is misleading and why they have not shuffled these people off to another sister site. In fact free users may be more profitable than we know, considering revenue gained from adds which paying customers do not see. Plus there is the marketing of the name, which as anyone can see in the game, brings in extra revenue which most everyone who plays has to pay one time or another.

 

I think the tipping point has passed, and GC is just not willing to see it. Most all the well explained fixes come from, and are obvious too, players who do see the trouble from their knowledgeable and technical backgrounds, not from GC's.

 

Embargo, no, this would be indeed harsh. But as long as CG isn't going to upgrade, and thinks tweaking is the only thing left to do, we as members may want to think about going free as well. I mean think about it, it just might be the answer. GC could say they are short of finds because it's free, saving face as it were. We, with all the other technical gizmos, new mapping software, etc, coming along, can hunt now without much of what is on GC's website anyway, so why pay? This may be a win, win, option for all.

 

Thanks for your comments!

 

PS. Do you have to pay to post a new cache, I don't know because I've always paid to play.

Edited March 29, 2009 by Hobo2

[+Tequila]

No. Posting new caches is free for everyone. Don't lose sight of the fact that new caches published by everyone is 'real product. Without caches, all the TB's and coins, and PQ's are meaningless.

[+MickEMT]

Well, I do know that Jeremy was talking some time ago about "Project Peonix" AKA Geocaching.com vers. 2.0

From what I can remember, the new version would tie together the GC, Waymarking and Wherigo sites in to one site.

[+bigwheel]

For what it is worth, since my last post a couple of weeks ago, I have had little problem. The slow generation of pocket queries was tough to deal with, but it seems to me things seem much better.

 

If so, thanks for addressing it...

 

Cache on all!!

Bigwheel

[+BrrrMo]

He means Groundspeak, but is just not getting the acronym right. Most say GC.com or GC, not GP.

 

Thanks mtn_man, I did mean Groundspeak. BrrrMo

[+Hobo2]

Very slow yesterday trying to email a friend, but today it seems to be very fast!!!

 

Thanks for your effort!!!

[+Hobo2]

More trouble!

 

I loaded some TB's Friday afternoon and everything went fine unless I stopped for a moment, then it would take up to a full 4 minuets to reload the page. This seems to be the main trouble. If I keep flipping pages quickly, for the most part it works fine, but if I stop, then GC stops too.

 

I don't know about others, but when I'm loading info to a page, I usually find mistakes or think of more info or colors I'd like to add, this is where most of my frustration starts. I can't just sit a read carefully, I have to keep the pages flipping or everything grinds to a slow crawl.

[+Hobo2]

By the time I loaded the above note, it stuck on me again. I waited another 4 minuets for it to load, then I got this message:

 

PHP Fatal error: Maximum execution time of 45 seconds exceeded in E:\Inetpub\forums\GC\ips_kernel\class_db_mysql.php on line 457 PHP Fatal error: Maximum execution time of 45 seconds exceeded in E:\Inetpub\forums\GC\sources\ipsclass.php on line 1111

 

I was waiting much longer than 45 sec.

Edited April 4, 2009 by Hobo2

[+Wintonian]

By the time I loaded the above note, it stuck on me again. I waited another 4 minuets for it to load, then I got this message:

 

PHP Fatal error: Maximum execution time of 45 seconds exceeded in E:\Inetpub\forums\GC\ips_kernel\class_db_mysql.php on line 457 PHP Fatal error: Maximum execution time of 45 seconds exceeded in E:\Inetpub\forums\GC\sources\ipsclass.php on line 1111

 

I was waiting much longer than 45 sec.

 

This one I'm regualy reciveing.

 

Although the fourms are often slow I have noteced that in IE8 if I turn the "in pivate filtering" on they are normaly faster - thats my experience anyway.

[+MACH1SCJ]

Sorry if I am posting in the wrong spot.

 

I have ran 5 POCKET QUERIES today & only recieved one of them. I use aol & have never had a problem before. I ran one twice with it not showing up in my in box & then made a new one & still nothing then made a copy & it showed up within seconds. then tried to copy the first one & still nothing.

 

GC shows them as generated & has locked me at 5 per day. I will be leaving early in am & will------- oh***-well.

 

Thanks for any help

Edited April 5, 2009 by MACH1SCJ

[+Hobo2]

Just moving this issue to the top!

[+MickEMT]

This has turned in to a non issue. Come on Hobo, the horse you're beating is so dead even the bones have turned to dust.

[+Loony Lori]

I am having the same trouble...I have to log out then back in.....I think they need to update something in the software. I know I am not the only one having trouble. What's going on, do you think????

[+Lil Devil]

What's going on, do you think????

I think they're workin' on it and you need to be patient.