Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 47

Thread: Bandwidth hog

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio
    Posts
    546

    Default

    Could it be the recent software change???? You could display some Google Adsense ads and make a some money per click... Check out this link:

    http://www.google.com/intl/en/ads/
    Last edited by Budster; 05-10-2007 at 05:03 PM.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Fremont, New Hampshire, USA
    Posts
    695

    Default

    The bandwidth hog might be the amount of times Beesource has to connect to these picture hosting servers, download a picture file (k bytes to over a meg sometime) and display it nicely on the beesource forum page you are viewing. Mutliple users - moving large files - looking at the same pictures all day long.
    Last edited by The Honey House; 05-10-2007 at 05:21 PM. Reason: R key acting up again.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Owen, WI, USA
    Posts
    2,551

    Default

    Please please PLEASE don't go to ads. I much apreciate the noncommercial aspects of this site and would be willing to donate more than what I already have and plan to in the future. As someone already noted, if those with slow connections don't want to see the images they can reset their preferences to not open them. The site default could be img off, those that don't wish it on won't have any problems.
    Why punish those of us who like to see the pictures?

    As for membership fees, I think the sensible proposal on the table is for an enhanced membership, with picture posting (viewing?) priveledges, in addition to the regular free membership as we know it. Regular unpaid members could continue to access and post on the other forums.

    Barry, I hope before going to any of the ad selling outfits you will give the membership here a chance to step forward and cover the additional storage space costs. In addition, a little education for those posting huge image files on how to resize to a friendlier format might be called for.
    If you feel paid company sponsorship is a necessity, I would hope the option of paid (noncommercial) membership is offered.
    In case ya can't tell, I HATE commercials, lol. As one who had dial up not too long ago, I remember the slow downloads those ads caused. Those who have slow dialup now can easily avoid the photo gallery or turn off their viewing capabilities but the ads would effect everyone.

    Thanks as always for your continued efforts,
    Sheri

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Westen NY
    Posts
    23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by thesurveyor View Post
    I may have a solution. Can you PM the amount of bandwidth we are talking about. I own company that does offsite data storage for businesses. I have quite abit of bandwidth and could probably help you out. We also do webhosting, but I have made the offer before, I could absorb the cost of the hosting as my contribution to the board.

    I also have some customers that colocate servers at my location. I am unsure how you have beesource set-up, but I am sure that I can probably help.

    I would be more than willing to discuss this issue and see if I can be of assistance.

    You can PM me or you can call 828-527-0131.

    They will answer the phone as Rentavault, just ask for Doug.

    Thanks
    I think there is an offer on the table that would be hard to refuse. I would give it serious consideration and not go the advert route.

    Bob Davis

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Mineral, Nr Richmond VA
    Posts
    177

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Honey House View Post
    The bandwidth hog might be the amount of times Beesource has to connect to these picture hosting servers, download a picture file (k bytes to over a meg sometime) and display it nicely on the beesource forum page you are viewing. Mutliple users - moving large files - looking at the same pictures all day long.
    Does not work that way. The client makes the connection and downloads it direct from the remote server. I think the web admin needs to go back and review what is taking up the bandwidth. We can continue to speculate until the cows come home.. from what I see, it ain't pictures that are hosted on remote servers.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Dunn, NC
    Posts
    82

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Limey View Post
    Does not work that way. The client makes the connection and downloads it direct from the remote server. I think the web admin needs to go back and review what is taking up the bandwidth. We can continue to speculate until the cows come home.. from what I see, it ain't pictures that are hosted on remote servers.

    I agree with this fully, there could be a code issue or something but as far as I have seen all pics have been hosted by third parties which would be no more stress on the servers bandwidth than text.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Saint Clair, MI
    Posts
    148

    Default

    I can see where people putting photo's in their postings uses up space. There are quite a few postings with photos in them. I would either limit time up for those postings i.e., 1-2 weeks or state that everyone must use a link such as photobucket and give directions to do so at top of forum.
    Cindy
    Cindy

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    5,346

    Default Excessive bandwidth usage?

    It would be nice if barry would respond again to this, his thread and provide a little more clarification. What precisely is the bandwidth usage and what feature(s) of this forum are using this excess bandwidth. I would suspect it is just the amount of persons who are posting and viewing these posts, the forum interaction (normal traffic). Since this site does not presently host images, loading images will take bandwidth on the part of those persons viewing them, and from the actual servers where they reside, but not from beesource.
    48 years - 50 hives - TF
    Joseph Clemens -- Website Under Constructioni

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    DuPage County, Illinois USA
    Posts
    9,419

    Default

    I'll reply soon. Been busy and I want to talk with a host tech to get the lowdown first.

    Regards,
    Barry

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Nehawka, Nebraska USA
    Posts
    46,069

    Default

    It might be helpful to put a upper limit on the size of a picture. It seems a lot of people don't know how to resize an 8 megapixel picture down to 640 by 480 or so.
    Michael Bush bushfarms.com/bees.htm "Everything works if you let it." ThePracticalBeekeeper.com 40y 200h 37yTF

  11. #31
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Dunn, NC
    Posts
    82

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Bush View Post
    It might be helpful to put a upper limit on the size of a picture. It seems a lot of people don't know how to resize an 8 megapixel picture down to 640 by 480 or so.
    Thats the thing, It doesnt matter what size the picture, it will not effect this webserver anymore or less than another line of text. the images are served from a third party and the connection for the transfer of the picture data is between the users computer and the third party server, not beesource.

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Saint Clair, MI
    Posts
    148

    Default

    People are putting pictures in their posts some that are very large and take up a lot of space. By restricting megapixils it would save room. Obviously links to photo sites do not contain the megapixils of the pictures they are linked to.
    Cindy
    Cindy

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Dunn, NC
    Posts
    82

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by summersetretrievers View Post
    People are putting pictures in their posts some that are very large and take up a lot of space. By restricting megapixils it would save room. Obviously links to photo sites do not contain the megapixils of the pictures they are linked to.
    Cindy
    wow, I cant believe that. Can anyone show me the button to upload pictures onto this site?

  14. #34
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Whitefield, Maine USA
    Posts
    6,624

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Soilman View Post
    Thats the thing, It doesnt matter what size the picture, it will not effect this webserver anymore or less than another line of text. the images are served from a third party and the connection for the transfer of the picture data is between the users computer and the third party server, not beesource.
    Everyone read what Soilman and a few others have said again. To illustrate, I looked at the source of two pages, both from this forum, one with links to offsite images and one with an inline image. Here's the one with links, it uses an href tag to create a clickable link that will open in a new window and load the image into it:

    <a href="http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l306/madison68/apiary.jpg" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://i99.photobucket.com/albums/l3...n68/apiary.jpg</a>

    Here's the one with the image displayed inline, using the <img src=" tag with the only difference being that the image will be retrieved by the user's browser and displayed in-line in the page:

    <img src="http://i190.photobucket.com/albums/z7/williamandlea/Honey%20Labels/weed.jpg" border="0" alt="" />

    In both cases the image proper is stored offsite and the bandwidth utilized to download the image is between the viewer's computer and the host serving up the picture. Beesource isn't involved at all.

    If Beesource stored the images locally and served them up then yes, it would impact Beesource's bandwidth utilization. As implemented, it does not. In otherwords, there's no more bandwidth-utilization issue associated with the Photo Gallery forum than there is with any other forum.

    Reducing images to a size suitable for downloading over a dialup connection is a separate (though important) issue.

    If the Photo Gallery forum is responsible for a disproportionately large segment of the total Beesource bandwidth utilization, it is only because it's a very popular forum and receives more hits than the other forums.
    Dulcius ex asperis

  15. #35
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Whitefield, Maine USA
    Posts
    6,624

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by summersetretrievers View Post
    People are putting pictures in their posts some that are very large and take up a lot of space. By restricting megapixils it would save room. Obviously links to photo sites do not contain the megapixils of the pictures they are linked to.
    Cindy
    With all due respect Cindy, you are laboring under a common misconception of how browsers compile, process, and display the pages you view. Think of it this way: When you load a URL into your browser, your computer makes a connection to the server hosting the page and retrieves the page source. Contained within that page source are instructions your browser understands that allow it to format the page for viewing. Included in that page source are the addresses (URLs) of various elements that are to be displayed in the page. These addresses can be for buttons, images, or text (content) and your browser makes a separate connection to the respective server to obtain those various elements. It's possible and even quite likely when viewing a web page that the various elements you end up looking at were obtained from a variety of different servers located wherever. When all those elements have been retrieved, your browser then compiles the page and displays it for you.
    Dulcius ex asperis

  16. #36
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Danbury, CT
    Posts
    2,887

    Default

    Thanks for clearing this up George....
    Always question Conventional Wisdom.

  17. #37
    Join Date
    Dec 1999
    Location
    DuPage County, Illinois USA
    Posts
    9,419

    Default

    Okay, I can now write with certainty and share what's happening.

    George, you and others are quite right. I jumped the gun and assumed the increase was the photo forum since that is the major difference from the old board to the new one. Yes, there is healthy traffic in this forum, but, looking over the bandwidth stats of the last several months, there is a consistency month to month, day to day. The number one bandwidth hog URL for the entire beesource domain is: [SIZE=-1]/forums/showthread.php
    [/SIZE]accounting for 28 percent.

    It was cheapest to move up into the next larger package than to be paying for overage every month. Besides, they were willing to lower the storage space and give me a credit for it since I don't use much of the alloted amount. So, for just a few dollars more per month, we're set for now. A sign that the board is healthy and growing. That's a good thing.

    The new site design and logo are coming along. It's a refreshing change. Once that part is done, I'll start working on developing the board with RSS, two tiered membership, inclusion of forum header images, etc.

    I will setup an image guideline with restrictions so we don't get images that overly large to view. I thought people would do this on their own, but guess not.

    Regards,
    Barry

  18. #38
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Whitefield, Maine USA
    Posts
    6,624

    Default

    Carry On Barry. Onwards! Upwards!
    Dulcius ex asperis

  19. #39

    Default

    Pictures at 6:00!
    "To bee or not to bee"

  20. #40
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Lake county, Indiana 46408-4109
    Posts
    3,536

    Default

    " I thought people would do this on their own, but guess not. "

    Some of US may not bee smart enough
    Ed, KA9CTT profanity is IGNORANCE made audible
    you can`t fix stupid not even with duct tape

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Ads