Subject:
|
Re: LUGNET not accessible due to traffic load
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Tue, 4 Jan 2005 14:24:08 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
816 times
|
| |
|
|
On Tue, Jan 04, 2005 at 02:16:15PM +0000, Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> > Now I am no expert on servers, Internet traffic, and such things,
> > but I do know that this might require additional costs to allow more
> > MB of traffic each month. Is the next level too costly, or can we
> > have a bake sale to cover the costs.I bet some people might be
> > willing to buy a T-Shirt to support the next level of traffic
> > transfer.
>
> Hopefully that's not needed. If more bandwidth was available, but
> nothing was done to throttle spiders, they would suck up the
> additional bandwidth too.
I believe this isn't an issue of bandwidth limits, but of server load.
When the server gets too busy, the CPU just doesn't keep up with all the
requests, and the load goes up. And once the load hits a magic number
(20, I think?) the server starts to refuse new connections.
So the solution isn't more bandwidth, it's more CPU - which I think we
(the community) bought last April? So all we need to do it switch to
the new servers.
> What I wonder is, is there a clever way to autodetect and
> block/throttle spiders without requiring manual intervention? I have
> no idea.
There's a few things that you can do, some of which are running on
Peeron, some I've experimented with. All require new code though, which
AFAIK is a problem right now.
--
Dan Boger
dan@peeron.com
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: LUGNET not accessible due to traffic load
|
| (...) I'm one but this is just me talking, not an official answer. I think the guesses are good though. (...) I have noticed it too... when Todd does, he looks into it. Lately, it usually has been spiders (webcrawlers, bots, whatever) hammering the (...) (19 years ago, 4-Jan-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
3 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
