Most users ever online ...
 

"Most users ever online was 82, 4 Hours Ago at 10:20 PM."

Is there some particular reason for the recent surge of viewers? Lately, the server seems stretched to its limits sometimes.

The problem is AOL...

When an AOL user opens up multiple windows, AOL's proxy server uses a different IP address for each window sometimes, and that makes the forum software think that they are requests from different users...

I don't know how to fix this...

If we set the limit too high then we run the risk of crashing the server... If we run it low enough to be safe then one or two AOL users can use up all the IP slots...

I'll try raising the limit a little bit to see if that helps...

In the mean time, if you use AOL, please don't open up 30 different windows when you read the forum...

:unsure:

[QUOTE=Xyzzy]The problem is AOL...
When an AOL user opens up multiple windows, AOL's proxy server uses a different IP address for each window sometimes, and that makes the forum software think that they are requests from different users...
I don't know how to fix this...
[/QUOTE]

First a question: Is the server hosted somewhere or do you have physical access to it and could add some fancy box to the setup if you feel so?

Perhaps it is possible to modify the forum software in a way that _all_ connections from a fixed [URL=http://webmaster.info.aol.com/proxyinfo.html]pool[/URL] only account for one IP? If the percentage of AOL users is relatively low, maybe that helps.

Another idea: It should be possible to NAT all incoming AOL traffic to one IP on the router/paket-filter (depending what system you use). If you also add a low priority queue for that aggregated traffic, it should help in high-load situations and not hinder AOL-users much in low-load situations.

Or how about setting a general bandwidth-limit for the www-service on the server? I think the server crashes because of the high query-load but perhaps setting a bandwidth-limit that equals e.g. 20-30 users on average (you can measure thet value beforehand) would help. If the server then gets a high load, it would get slower but still work. In addition to the bandwidth-limiter/queuer you could still use a high IP-based value in the forum-software to cap off extremly high loads before they grind the server to a halt. But if your current router/filter setup deos not support this, you would need at least an old spare box with a decent software (e.g. OpenBSD/pf :) ) to get it working.

Just some ideas here...

The forum software has a load limit trigger, but it only works on a Linux server and we use FreeBSD...

The actual problem with the load is we use a shared database server that has to pool resources over several accounts... They have the maximum connections set kind of low and we cannot adjust this... Once we hit that limit the server starts throwing errors, so people start clicking the link again and again and next thing you know the server crashes...

There are a lot of better solutions, but since this one is "free" it is probably best... The whole idea of this forum has been to make it free and without ads...

So we could spend a lot of money trying to make it better or just make do with what we have...

We don't have a physical box all to ourselves and most of the configuration files are off limits... To be honest, getting our setup to do what it does now has been a serious learning experience because we have to do everything in a roundabout way... The fact it works at all amazes me...

We also do not have any access to the network crap either... I've never seen the box at all... It is just a remote hosted web account somewhere in Pennsylvania, I think...

[QUOTE=Xyzzy]
There are a lot of better solutions, but since this one is "free" it is probably best... The whole idea of this forum has been to make it free and without ads...

So we could spend a lot of money trying to make it better or just make do with what we have...
[/QUOTE]

Thanks for the background info, Xyzzy. I really like the forum the way it is now. And the "too many users" is not really a big problem. I was just thinking about some experimentation with an overall bandwidth limit instead if the IP limit/timeframe.

If you have no access to the config/box that is no option. btw: i think i should use this place to thank you for setting this whole forum up so well :bow:

[QUOTE=Xyzzy]The problem is AOL...

When an AOL user opens up multiple windows, AOL's proxy server uses a different IP address for each window sometimes, and that makes the forum software think that they are requests from different users...
I don't know how to fix this... :unsure:[/QUOTE]IF the server could collect IP - username pairs, then could it politely refuse all but the first few for the same user?

Of course, that won't work for the guests. And they are the most likely to open eleventy-one windows.
You would have to set up generic users guest1, guest2, guest3, ...
then if someone requests a page without logging in, use the next free id to log them in.
But they've got cookies disabled, so ..., and the server would keep stats on them ... Messy, messy, messy.

Ahh, a thought. While I am reading *new* threads, I open separate reply windows as I go. After I'm finished, I go back to write and post each reply.
If an AOL user did this, each window might be a new user? And that user would persist until timed out?
Glad I'm not AOL.
:bow: I second TauCeti's salute :bow:

[QUOTE=Maybeso]After I'm finished, I go back to write and post each reply.
If an AOL user did this, each window might be a new user? And that user would persist until timed out?
Glad I'm not AOL.
:bow: I second TauCeti's salute :bow:[/QUOTE]

I had AOL at one time; believe me, it sucks. Badly. Broadband, on the other hand, is awesome.

I third TauCeti's salute :bow:

[CENTER]:bow: I fourth TauCeti's salute :bow:[/CENTER]

I highly value this forum and appreciate all the hard work that you've put into it.

:bow: I fifth TauCeti's salute :bow:

Just an update
 

"Most users ever online was 358, December 13th, 2004 at 05:57 AM." :smile:

[QUOTE=cheesehead]"Most users ever online was 358, December 13th, 2004 at 05:57 AM." :smile:[/QUOTE]

Impressive, though I can't figure out what was so important...