Обсуждение: PostgreSQL site, put up or shut up?
This is a serious inquiry, very serious. People are complaining about ads. What do we need in the form of equipment, bandwidth, etc.
On Tue, 7 Jan 2003, mlw wrote: > This is a serious inquiry, very serious. People are complaining about ads. > > What do we need in the form of equipment, bandwidth, etc. FTP is just over 800MB, plan for growth. WEB is just over 90MB, can't tell you what to plan for there. On www/ftp.us I don't even notice the bandwidth, it's less than the normal traffic for Pop4 (an ISP) and the streaming audio uses up even more than that. Vince. -- Fast, inexpensive internet service 56k and beyond! http://www.pop4.net/ http://www.meanstreamradio.com http://www.unknown-artists.com Internet radio: It's not file sharing, it's just radio.
On Tue, 2003-01-07 at 16:46, Vince Vielhaber wrote: > On Tue, 7 Jan 2003, mlw wrote: > > > This is a serious inquiry, very serious. People are complaining about ads. > > > > What do we need in the form of equipment, bandwidth, etc. > > FTP is just over 800MB, plan for growth. > WEB is just over 90MB, can't tell you what to plan for there. > > On www/ftp.us I don't even notice the bandwidth, it's less than the normal > traffic for Pop4 (an ISP) and the streaming audio uses up even more than > that. > > Vince. I guess I don't understand the problem. The ads are very small and completely innocuous. Why would anyone care? Who's complaining and why? -- Greg Copeland <greg@copelandconsulting.net> Copeland Computer Consulting
> -----Original Message----- > From: Vince Vielhaber [mailto:vev@michvhf.com] > Sent: 07 January 2003 22:47 > To: mlw > Cc: pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org; Marc G. Fournier > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL site, put up or shut up? > > > On Tue, 7 Jan 2003, mlw wrote: > > > This is a serious inquiry, very serious. People are > complaining about > > ads. > > > > What do we need in the form of equipment, bandwidth, etc. > > FTP is just over 800MB, plan for growth. > WEB is just over 90MB, can't tell you what to plan for there. > > On www/ftp.us I don't even notice the bandwidth, it's less > than the normal traffic for Pop4 (an ISP) and the streaming > audio uses up even more than that. Disk is cheap, it's the bandwidth that costs. A cursory look at the new portal (which is on a new machine on it's own) is showing about 1Gb since going live on Saturday/Sunday. Of course, these are not just bits of webspace, they are BSD boxes to which we have complete access. There are all sorts of things being run on them - CVS, docbook, distribution builds, Gborg, PostgreSQL, Majordomo, Horde... Regards, Dave.
On 7 Jan 2003, Greg Copeland wrote: > On Tue, 2003-01-07 at 16:46, Vince Vielhaber wrote: > > On Tue, 7 Jan 2003, mlw wrote: > > > > > This is a serious inquiry, very serious. People are complaining about ads. > > > > > > What do we need in the form of equipment, bandwidth, etc. > > > > FTP is just over 800MB, plan for growth. > > WEB is just over 90MB, can't tell you what to plan for there. > > > > On www/ftp.us I don't even notice the bandwidth, it's less than the normal > > traffic for Pop4 (an ISP) and the streaming audio uses up even more than > > that. > > > > Vince. > > > I guess I don't understand the problem. The ads are very small and > completely innocuous. Why would anyone care? Who's complaining and > why? Some folks hate to see ads, some don't. If they were popups or really obnoxious I could see it as a problem, but not them little things. Vince. -- Fast, inexpensive internet service 56k and beyond! http://www.pop4.net/ http://www.meanstreamradio.com http://www.unknown-artists.com Internet radio: It's not file sharing, it's just radio.
Greg Copeland wrote: > I guess I don't understand the problem. The ads are very small and > completely innocuous. Why would anyone care? Who's complaining and > why? When I loaded the new site for the first time (after the ads were placed there), the ads stalled the loading process until I simply got fed up, hit the "stop" button, and told my browser to ignore all images from the server the ads were coming from. I have no problem with ads being put there, but they should load at least as fast as the rest of the site. They do so currently, but not always, it seems... -- Kevin Brown kevin@sysexperts.com
On Mon, 2003-01-13 at 07:03, Kevin Brown wrote: > I have no problem with ads being put there, but they should load at > least as fast as the rest of the site. Huh!? :-) cheers -- vbi -- Packages should build-depend on what they should build-depend. -- Santiago Vila on debian-devel
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message > I have no problem with ads being put there, but they should load at > least as fast as the rest of the site. They do so currently, but not > always, it seems... The ads are coming from another site, ads.area902.com; thus they are at the mercy of the speed of that site. However, from the Area902.com home page: "Welcome to area902.com. Our site is a new way to understand more about Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island. ... Area902.Com is a Free Service provided by Hub.Org Networking Services" Because hub.org is also displaying the postgresql.org page on the same subnet, so the disparity should in theory be quite controllable. *If* we are going to keep the ads (and my vote is a strong nay), can we not just have them served from the same computer and domain? > FTP is just over 800MB, plan for growth. > WEB is just over 90MB, can't tell you what to plan for there. Sorry to be dense, but what time period is this for? > On www/ftp.us I don't even notice the bandwidth, it's less than the normal > traffic for Pop4 (an ISP) and the streaming audio uses up even more than > that. Sounds like the mirrors could easily absorb more of the traffic from the main page, especially once we get an easier mirroring system in place. -- Greg Sabino Mullane greg@turnstep.com PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200301130923 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: http://www.turnstep.com/pgp.html iD8DBQE+IsxavJuQZxSWSsgRAjBdAJ9y6PwrxmbVsKbGOGQ7DjimPVVeXACg54/9 vGxO0/uBlV4FB8GZSsAptW0= =BALS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Mon, 13 Jan 2003 greg@turnstep.com wrote: > > FTP is just over 800MB, plan for growth. > > WEB is just over 90MB, can't tell you what to plan for there. > > Sorry to be dense, but what time period is this for? Any given day. It's disk space, not traffic. > > On www/ftp.us I don't even notice the bandwidth, it's less than the normal > > traffic for Pop4 (an ISP) and the streaming audio uses up even more than > > that. > > Sounds like the mirrors could easily absorb more of the traffic from the > main page, especially once we get an easier mirroring system in place. The mirrors now consist of the Users Lounge - links, docs and mailing list info. If it shrinks much more there won't be any reason to mirror. Vince. -- Fast, inexpensive internet service 56k and beyond! http://www.pop4.net/ http://www.meanstreamradio.com http://www.unknown-artists.com Internet radio: It's not file sharing, it's just radio.
On 13 Jan 2003 at 9:45, Vince Vielhaber wrote: > On Mon, 13 Jan 2003 greg@turnstep.com wrote: > > > > FTP is just over 800MB, plan for growth. > > > WEB is just over 90MB, can't tell you what to plan for there. > > > > Sorry to be dense, but what time period is this for? > > Any given day. It's disk space, not traffic. I think anyone thinking of putting up a mirror will want to know traffic volumes. -- Dan Langille : http://www.langille.org/
On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, Dan Langille wrote: > On 13 Jan 2003 at 9:45, Vince Vielhaber wrote: > > > On Mon, 13 Jan 2003 greg@turnstep.com wrote: > > > > > > FTP is just over 800MB, plan for growth. > > > > WEB is just over 90MB, can't tell you what to plan for there. > > > > > > Sorry to be dense, but what time period is this for? > > > > Any given day. It's disk space, not traffic. > > I think anyone thinking of putting up a mirror will want to know > traffic volumes. The only info I could give was what I already did. My above statement was to clarify the above numbers. Vince. -- Fast, inexpensive internet service 56k and beyond! http://www.pop4.net/ http://www.meanstreamradio.com http://www.unknown-artists.com Internet radio: It's not file sharing, it's just radio.
On Mon, Jan 13, 2003 at 10:01:38AM -0500, Vince Vielhaber wrote: > On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, Dan Langille wrote: > > > On 13 Jan 2003 at 9:45, Vince Vielhaber wrote: > > > > > On Mon, 13 Jan 2003 greg@turnstep.com wrote: > > > > > > > > FTP is just over 800MB, plan for growth. > > > > > WEB is just over 90MB, can't tell you what to plan for there. > > > > > > > > Sorry to be dense, but what time period is this for? > > > > > > Any given day. It's disk space, not traffic. > > > > I think anyone thinking of putting up a mirror will want to know > > traffic volumes. > > The only info I could give was what I already did. My above statement > was to clarify the above numbers. And there was a statement upthread from someone (Marc?) indicating that the bandwidth was down in the noise for them (as an ISP). Ross
On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, Ross J. Reedstrom wrote: > On Mon, Jan 13, 2003 at 10:01:38AM -0500, Vince Vielhaber wrote: > > On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, Dan Langille wrote: > > > > > On 13 Jan 2003 at 9:45, Vince Vielhaber wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon, 13 Jan 2003 greg@turnstep.com wrote: > > > > > > > > > > FTP is just over 800MB, plan for growth. > > > > > > WEB is just over 90MB, can't tell you what to plan for there. > > > > > > > > > > Sorry to be dense, but what time period is this for? > > > > > > > > Any given day. It's disk space, not traffic. > > > > > > I think anyone thinking of putting up a mirror will want to know > > > traffic volumes. > > > > The only info I could give was what I already did. My above statement > > was to clarify the above numbers. > > And there was a statement upthread from someone (Marc?) indicating that > the bandwidth was down in the noise for them (as an ISP). That was me and what I was referring to with, "The only info I could give was what I already did." Vince. -- Fast, inexpensive internet service 56k and beyond! http://www.pop4.net/ http://www.meanstreamradio.com http://www.unknown-artists.com Internet radio: It's not file sharing, it's just radio.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Ross J. Reedstrom [mailto:reedstrm@rice.edu] > Sent: 13 January 2003 15:16 > To: Vince Vielhaber > Cc: Dan Langille; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL site, put up or shut up? > > > And there was a statement upthread from someone (Marc?) > indicating that the bandwidth was down in the noise for them > (as an ISP). I think that was Vince talking about 1 mirror. The January stats to date (bear in mind it didn't go live until the 4/5th Jan), for the Portal and idocs *only* (ie, not including gborg, techdocs, developer, user-lounge, archives, fts, pgadmin, odbc, jdbc or ftp) are: Total Hits 1339547 Total Files 1064536 Total Pages 324346 Total Visits 58178 Total KBytes 2712883 In other words, 2.7Gb in 8/9 days. I'm not sure I'd call that noise :-) Regards, Dave.
On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, Dave Page wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Ross J. Reedstrom [mailto:reedstrm@rice.edu] > > Sent: 13 January 2003 15:16 > > To: Vince Vielhaber > > Cc: Dan Langille; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org > > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL site, put up or shut up? > > > > > > And there was a statement upthread from someone (Marc?) > > indicating that the bandwidth was down in the noise for them > > (as an ISP). > > I think that was Vince talking about 1 mirror. The January stats to date > (bear in mind it didn't go live until the 4/5th Jan), for the Portal and > idocs *only* (ie, not including gborg, techdocs, developer, user-lounge, > archives, fts, pgadmin, odbc, jdbc or ftp) are: > > Total Hits 1339547 > Total Files 1064536 > Total Pages 324346 > Total Visits 58178 > Total KBytes 2712883 > > In other words, 2.7Gb in 8/9 days. > > I'm not sure I'd call that noise :-) It's irrelevant. The portal and idocs aren't being mirrored and the question was about mirrors. Vince. -- Fast, inexpensive internet service 56k and beyond! http://www.pop4.net/ http://www.meanstreamradio.com http://www.unknown-artists.com Internet radio: It's not file sharing, it's just radio.
> -----Original Message----- > From: Vince Vielhaber [mailto:vev@michvhf.com] > Sent: 13 January 2003 15:42 > To: Dave Page > Cc: Ross J. Reedstrom; Dan Langille; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL site, put up or shut up? > > > On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, Dave Page wrote: > > > > Total Hits 1339547 > > Total Files 1064536 > > Total Pages 324346 > > Total Visits 58178 > > Total KBytes 2712883 > > > > In other words, 2.7Gb in 8/9 days. > > > > I'm not sure I'd call that noise :-) > > It's irrelevant. The portal and idocs aren't being mirrored > and the question was about mirrors. It's not irrelevant. The original question was a complaint about the ads and why we have them - this shows the amount of traffic we get for a small portion of the site which can give some idea how busy other bits of the sites might get. Regards, Dave.
On Mon, 2003-01-13 at 10:47, Dave Page wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Vince Vielhaber [mailto:vev@michvhf.com] > > Sent: 13 January 2003 15:42 > > To: Dave Page > > Cc: Ross J. Reedstrom; Dan Langille; pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org > > Subject: Re: [HACKERS] PostgreSQL site, put up or shut up? > > > > > > On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, Dave Page wrote: > > > > > > Total Hits 1339547 > > > Total Files 1064536 > > > Total Pages 324346 > > > Total Visits 58178 > > > Total KBytes 2712883 > > > > > > In other words, 2.7Gb in 8/9 days. > > > > > > I'm not sure I'd call that noise :-) > > > > It's irrelevant. The portal and idocs aren't being mirrored > > and the question was about mirrors. > > It's not irrelevant. The original question was a complaint about the ads > and why we have them - this shows the amount of traffic we get for a > small portion of the site which can give some idea how busy other bits > of the sites might get. > Perhaps this means we need to put more focus in finding ways to get other parts of the site mirrored. Robert Treat
On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, Dave Page wrote: > > On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, Dave Page wrote: > > > > > > Total Hits 1339547 > > > Total Files 1064536 > > > Total Pages 324346 > > > Total Visits 58178 > > > Total KBytes 2712883 > > > > > > In other words, 2.7Gb in 8/9 days. > > > > > > I'm not sure I'd call that noise :-) > > > > It's irrelevant. The portal and idocs aren't being mirrored > > and the question was about mirrors. > > It's not irrelevant. The original question was a complaint about the ads > and why we have them - this shows the amount of traffic we get for a > small portion of the site which can give some idea how busy other bits > of the sites might get. Go back and reread the end of it. The first part was about the ads, the second was about mirrors. As far as your numbers go, wait a few months and look again. Any time there's a major change it'll get busy and then settle out. Combine that with everyone talking about it and you'll have even more traffic as folks get curious and go look. Vince. -- Fast, inexpensive internet service 56k and beyond! http://www.pop4.net/ http://www.meanstreamradio.com http://www.unknown-artists.com Internet radio: It's not file sharing, it's just radio.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message > Go back and reread the end of it. The first part was about the ads, > the second was about mirrors. Sorry for the confusion: Dave is right, I just asked the question wrong. I am not really concerned about the mirrors, but how much traffic the main portal endures, and if that number justifies the putting of advertisements on the site. The answer to the first appears to be about 320 MB per day, or about 9 gigs per month. Not too shabby, but not too bad either. To be totally fair, we should also factor in all the other sites (subdomains) that hub.org is providing. I see the big questions as: What prompted the redesign to put the ads on every page of the site, when before they were only on the opening "flags" page? How much monthly revenue do the ads bring in, and can we (the community) provide an alternative to this income, perhaps via direct contributions? -- Greg Sabino Mullane greg@turnstep.com PGP Key: 0x14964AC8 200301131149 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: http://www.turnstep.com/pgp.html iD8DBQE+Iu5+vJuQZxSWSsgRAjkSAJ9Yit8t0GIwigsdf5DZtDVA71vZCgCgz29S kgC4JGdxFigBpjaHH9KFnaA= =z1RC -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
greg@turnstep.com wrote: > Area902.Com is a Free Service provided by Hub.Org Networking Services" > > Because hub.org is also displaying the postgresql.org page on the same subnet, > so the disparity should in theory be quite controllable. *If* we are going > to keep the ads (and my vote is a strong nay), can we not just have them > served from the same computer and domain? Don't do that! Then I can't do "Block all ads from this server" in Mozilla. :-) -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 359-1001+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania19073