Jump to content

Is Geocaching.com Dying?


Recommended Posts

Whats happening this evening. I am trying to submit some caches that I placed today. But I cannot get to do so. It is taking ages for the pages to appear. :rolleyes:

Before anyone asks, yes I ame running BB 1 meg.

Even Groundspeak is slow.

I think that the answer is that the hobby is getting too popular and the site is getting overloaded.

I shall try again at the crack of the blanket. (Early in the morning). :(

Link to comment

The rate of growth of geocaching in this country can be seen on G:UK's awesome stats pages.

 

The first UK cache was placed in Sept 2000.

At the end of November 2002 there were 1349 caches placed in the UK.

 

So far in 2005 1351 caches have been placed.

 

If that rate of growth is replicated in other countries it's easy to see why GC.com is slowing down a tad!

Link to comment

Actually, looking at the cache page I'm really grateful. I have just ordered a handlebar mount for the garmin. And almost got the bike back into working order after 2 years in the shed. So this looks perfect.

 

And in answer to the first question. Yes, the server has been having slow moments more and more often just lately.

Link to comment
Actually, looking at the cache page I'm really grateful. I have just ordered a handlebar mount for the garmin. And almost got the bike back into working order after 2 years in the shed. So this looks perfect.

 

And in answer to the first question. Yes, the server has been having slow moments more and more often just lately.

I have just downloaded photos. What wonderful cycle paths (In most places) :lol:

Link to comment

Noticed somewhere in the general GC.com stuff a note from Jeremy that "GC.com is on four servers that are currently running very close to capacity". Suspect we are seeing symptoms of this in the big slowdowns, timeouts etc.

 

I have now paid up to become a Premium Member (Shock! Horror!!); I hope that my $30 will go straight towards a new server!

Link to comment
Noticed somewhere in the general GC.com stuff a note from Jeremy that "GC.com is on four servers that are currently running very close to capacity". Suspect we are seeing symptoms of this in the big slowdowns, timeouts etc.

 

I have now paid up to become a Premium Member (Shock! Horror!!); I hope that my $30 will go straight towards a new server!

only 1 server ? i think possibly another 4 may be a better idea

Link to comment

The server slow downs are noticably at times when both US and Europe are active.

 

They would probably get more return on investment if they established a separate European Server system, and then did daily cross atlantic updates.

 

At least that way there would be no excuse for flooding Europe with offers that are only available stateside.

Link to comment

This website is no more! It has ceased to be! 'E's expired and gone to meet 'is maker! 'E's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'e rests in peace! If you hadn't cached 'im on Google 'e'd be pushing up the daisies! 'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'E's off the twig! 'E's kicked the bucket, 'e's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisibile!! THIS IS AN EX-GEOCACHING WEBSITE!!

 

Well at least, it is eer!

Link to comment
Another gripe - Logged on this morning and saw a few new caches. Set up a PQ for new and updated within 50 miles. Previewed it to make sure the new caches were on it - all there. Ran PQ which came in within 10 minutes but no new caches. GRRRR!

 

T

 

All symptoms of multiple servers which individually locally cache database details, and periodically/infrequently update from the main DB server. Ive noticed this a number of times.

 

Another example of this is getting the email alert to someone finding your cache and seeing that the find has been loged in the summary listing, yet when you go to the cache page there is nothing there.

Link to comment

Half the problem is that it is all asp and windows based. They need more servers to cope with the load whereas if they had gone with a different technology it would have coped better on the same hardware.

 

I imagine they are already doing this but they need to look at how the site is structured from a code point of view. Web applications have a tendency to grow organically and this leads to inefficiencies in the code.

 

At the end of the day they will have to throw money at more and more servers.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...