PDA

View Full Version : A few suggestions (some about cloudflare)


chaoticlapras
May 13th, 2013, 11:26 PM
1. Please can we remove cloudflare? It is responsible for our downtimes, and most members are annoyed at these. 2. Mobile friendly theme? I am stuck using the christmas theme and that still takes ages to load. 3. Remove users with zero posts that have not logged in for more than six months? Also remove permanently banned users that have been banned for over six months? This will make us faster and help remove downtimes. Please reply with your thoughts!

Mariah Carey
May 13th, 2013, 11:29 PM
I'll leave the technical stuff to Audy or Steve or whatever, but as far as I know there is at least one mobile friendly theme, lol.
Edit: Yeah, there should be one in the theme thingy that says [WIP] Mobile Skin!

Also, I agree with your point about deleting those members, though I'd make the time frame at least a whole year, just to be safe. A year and a half, maybe. No more than that though.

Jak
May 13th, 2013, 11:30 PM
I agree with Cloudflare. I feel six months is too short of an amount of time to delete members that haven't posted anything. You never know who will come back. I'd say a year is a good window. Plus it takes up potentially good usernames. Banned members may possibly appeal their ban and be unbanned, so I'm afraid banned members will have to stay.

I think almost everyone that sees this thread will agree with you about Cloudflare, haha.

droomph
May 14th, 2013, 06:49 AM
Idk does cloudflare even help?

Mr. Downstairs
May 14th, 2013, 06:57 AM
2. Use Modern, especially if you're on a touch screen.
3. I'm good with removing users with 0 posts and haven't logged on for six months. I'm also good with removing permabanned users, but I think both of those are an admin thing and neither of them are contributing factors to the problem.

Belldandy
May 14th, 2013, 07:30 AM
I thought I read that Cloudflare actually helps handle the load better?

Dunno.

Also, "yes" to removing perma-bans, no post-members and inactive >1y members. No point in keeping them around just to clog space! They're like cancer cells -there to hog resources, but not contribute.

As well, maybe put in that thing like Reddit, where if >1,500 users come online, block out guests and force them to register while letting members continue to access the board. It's because of overly-curious non-registered masses that PC suffers downtimes :\

Adventure
May 14th, 2013, 07:47 AM
I thought I read that Cloudflare actually helps handle the load better?

Dunno.

Also, "yes" to removing perma-bans, no post-members and inactive >1y members. No point in keeping them around just to clog space! They're like cancer cells -there to hog resources, but not contribute.

As well, maybe put in that thing like Reddit, where if >1,500 users come online, block out guests and force them to register while letting members continue to access the board. It's because of overly-curious non-registered masses that PC suffers downtimes :\
Yeah, I read that too. About Cloudflare helping with some stuff.

I think we should delete members with 0 posts who have been inactive for 1 year or more. There have been many examples of members returning after long absences, but most often less than a year, and usually they had more than 0 posts anyways.

Actually maybe 6 months would be enough, since if they made an account but didn't post, it's not very likely that they intended to come back and stay active at some point, is it? And should they decide to do, they can just make a new account. It's like, if you hog a username without posting, suit yourself :p

Also, I think they already implemented that thing. Seen the adorable Porygon + Joltik page? It doesn't always let me log in though.

Belldandy
May 14th, 2013, 08:27 AM
No, I haven't seen it. I kept getting booted off yesterday because of "server overload" or "the server is too busy."

Which is why I didn't think it was implemented. I was logged in (box ticked off; saved in browser) and it still didn't let me through lol

Melody
May 14th, 2013, 10:54 AM
Cloudflare isn't causing any downtimes. Rather it's what saves us from worse downtimes during extremely busy times by serving up a cached copy of the page as needed. Of course this doesn't manage to save much bandwidth, but it does save some, as static elements such as images hosted on PC don't often change. Additionally the block on guests usually only kicks in during times of extremely high guest traffic when an extraordinary number of guests are browsing. If you don't see the page, it's because the server has a logged in session for you, even if you can't get it.

I presume each usergroup has a "Priority" in the server anyways, with staff requests getting the most attention during times of load and moving down as you go down the chain.

Belldandy
May 14th, 2013, 02:58 PM
Additionally the block on guests usually only kicks in during times of extremely high guest traffic when an extraordinary number of guests are browsing.

Yeah, apparently it's supposed to kick in at >1,500 or >2,000 users, guests+members. I know yesterday before I was booted, I saw around 1,450 users online in total. If I get the "server overload" message, should it not in theory give that message to the guests and let me through in lieu of them? I thought that that's what this Joltik thing served for (though I've never seen it... It was mentioned higher up in this topic.)

And "going down," what is that? Staff->Supporter->User->Guest (?)

Oryx
May 14th, 2013, 03:36 PM
Just because you're seeing Cloudflare when PC is down doesn't mean that it causes the downtimes. A lot of really big websites use Cloudflare to handle big loads, we just don't have enough horsepower for the load sometimes. It had nothing to do with Cloudflare and removing it wouldn't help.

Also I'm not sure removing members that never visit and never posted would help much either. I'm not sure that's our problem.

Jak
May 14th, 2013, 05:31 PM
Also I'm not sure removing members that never visit and never posted would help much either. I'm not sure that's our problem.

It would at least free up good usernames. I'm sure it sucks for members to come here, have a username they want in mind, and it's taken by someone that joined in 2005, never posted, and hasn't been on since then.