1,105,450 Community Members

Site acting sluggish??

Member Avatar
Dani
The Queen of DaniWeb
20,573 posts since Feb 2002
Reputation Points: 1,356 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 931 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 204 [?]
Administrator
Featured
Sponsor
 
0
 

Is it just me, or has the site been acting super sluggish all day today?

LastMitch
Deleted Member
 
4
 

Is it just me, or has the site been acting super sluggish all day today?

You mean slow? It's working fine. I guess it's the weather because it's actually raining now around the area.

Member Avatar
phorce
Veteran Poster
1,016 posts since Jul 2011
Reputation Points: 119 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 133 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 29 [?]
Featured
 
0
 

@LastMitch - You aren't from the UK are you? (Just asking because it's "Flooding" atm)!

Member Avatar
<M/>
Industrious Poster
4,473 posts since Apr 2012
Reputation Points: 106 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 139 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 114 [?]
Featured
 
0
 

I kind of feel it being quite "sluggish", it could be from the other countries being quite inactive.

Member Avatar
Dani
The Queen of DaniWeb
20,573 posts since Feb 2002
Reputation Points: 1,356 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 931 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 204 [?]
Administrator
Featured
Sponsor
 
0
 

I don't mean sluggish in terms of activity. I mean sluggish in terms of a server issue and pages taking slightly longer to load.

Member Avatar
Ancient Dragon
Achieved Level 70
27,668 posts since Aug 2005
Reputation Points: 5,234 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 3,040 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 115 [?]
Team Colleague
Featured
Sponsor
 
0
 

I thought it was just my isp, but apparently not. It's working normally now.

Member Avatar
<M/>
Industrious Poster
4,473 posts since Apr 2012
Reputation Points: 106 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 139 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 114 [?]
Featured
 
0
 

Oh in that case, there is no problem by my opinion.

Member Avatar
Mike Askew
Posting Shark
927 posts since Nov 2010
Reputation Points: 129 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 85 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 25 [?]
Featured
 
0
 

@Phorce, I've managed to avoid flooding in the UK where I'm from :)

Member Avatar
JorgeM
IT Addict
6,421 posts since Dec 2011
Reputation Points: 581 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 963 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 172 [?]
Moderator
Featured
Sponsor
 
0
 

Seems OK today.

Member Avatar
Dani
The Queen of DaniWeb
20,573 posts since Feb 2002
Reputation Points: 1,356 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 931 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 204 [?]
Administrator
Featured
Sponsor
 
0
 

Got it sorted out!! It was a DNS issue connecting to the Memcached servers via hostname instead of IP address. Even adding them to the hosts file didn't fix the issue. Switched over to IP and there was a ten-fold improvement.

Member Avatar
JorgeM
IT Addict
6,421 posts since Dec 2011
Reputation Points: 581 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 963 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 172 [?]
Moderator
Featured
Sponsor
 
0
 

That would mean that there is a delay somewhere in the name resolution process. Check the flow of the DNS traffic. On networks where there are several DNS "hops" to get to the authoritative zone, I've seen (on occasion) where DNS adminstrators have mistakenly used forwarding and/or conditional forwarding incorrectly and have introduced extra "hops" which result in slower queries.

Even adding them to the hosts file didn't fix the issue

That doesnt make sense. Once you add the host name to the HOSTS file, this bypasses the need to query a DNS server for resolving a query to that host name. I am not familiar with Linux, but on Windows, that action causes the hostnames to be immediately loaded into cache.

Are you sure it wasnt a fluke? You may want to try to reproduce it, and if it comes back, take a packet capture, assuming you are interested in all that extra work.

Member Avatar
Dani
The Queen of DaniWeb
20,573 posts since Feb 2002
Reputation Points: 1,356 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 931 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 204 [?]
Administrator
Featured
Sponsor
 
0
 

We're not talking about a ridiculously long amount of time: a difference of about 0.5 seconds. Definitely not a fluke, as I've spent upwards of two full days on the issue.

Member Avatar
JorgeM
IT Addict
6,421 posts since Dec 2011
Reputation Points: 581 [?]
Q&As Helped to Solve: 963 [?]
Skill Endorsements: 172 [?]
Moderator
Featured
Sponsor
 
0
 

hmm... You can definately measure a difference between performing a DNS lookup vs accessing the IP directly. I wouldnt expect 500ms unless there was a problem (with too many hops, or network latency), but that's fine.

I am still wondering why you would still see any latency when you tried using the HOSTS file (not that I would recommend you maintain a HOSTS file unless its a machine or two).

In any case, it may not be worth your time to find the actual issue if its working good now. I am sure that your brain is in overdrive working on more new DaniWeb features...

You
This article has been dead for over three months: Start a new discussion instead
Post:
Start New Discussion
Tags Related to this Article