Comments | trustmetrics: Overloaded

ciphergoth in trustmetrics

Overloaded

Aug 13, 2003 19:23

One other thing:

Sorry! The load on this computer is too great to calculate the results for
username. It's only a very little computer and many people are trying to use at the moment. I'm afraid there's nothing I can do to fix this, so please just keep trying.

Why do people keep telling me that it's not working for them and quoting this ( Read more... )

Comments 24

kensei August 13 2003, 11:28:59 UTC

Ok. Will do.

ciphergoth August 13 2003, 11:43:13 UTC

The version running on the web site has a few small differences from the 0.01 version, in particular in how it prevents overload. Look in

http://hacks.ciphergoth.org/trustflow

for a patch.

argithness August 14 2003, 14:30:50 UTC

hey, you dont know me, but to help with the load, you could link to other mirrors (i'll be running a few, if i could figure out how to patch it ;) )

argithness August 14 2003, 15:00:21 UTC

i have it setup on my test server (not production one....yet)
http://nerdtopia.org/trustflow/trustflow.cgi

it seems to ...not like mod_perl on apache 1.3
(note the production server runs apache 2...yeah ironic that its the production server...though its not entirely configured with mod_perl yet)
either way, it's on a p3 600 w/ 384 ram
the production is a p3 933
and i have a few other boxes i can run it on.

Thread 7

Reading... matthew_g August 13 2003, 12:29:13 UTC

I have no particular suggestion for how to phrase it better without getting snarky :)

But thanks for offering the machine and your programming. I think it's cool.

Re: Reading... ciphergoth August 13 2003, 13:02:16 UTC

or "even snarkier" - I do tend to towards the snarky as you may have noticed...

thanks!

Re: Reading... matthew_g December 13 2004, 10:57:18 UTC

My suggestion for improving the wording is to make it more specific. Instead of "It's only a very little computer and many people are trying to use at the moment.", say "Sorry, I can only calculate results for 5 people at a time, and I'm already calculating results for 5 people." Better yet, make it queue instead of showing an error message.

Re: Reading... ciphergoth December 13 2004, 12:06:16 UTC

I considered making it queue, but if there are more people wanting to use the service than the machine can process the queue grows without bound. I guess it could queue a further, say, twenty people, but what's the point? If you make people reload, the people who care enough to try later will be the ones who get results...

I did run a mirror for a bit... gymli August 13 2003, 12:41:26 UTC

...but sadly it killed most everything else on my computer - and once i had it leashed back so i could use mine, it was pretty much unusable.

:(

We need someone with a big pipe (oo-er) and a big box (oo-er) to host it really. My main problem was running out of memory.

Just a compliment mymindrevealed August 13 2003, 14:21:42 UTC

I patiently attempted to access TrustMatrix and I was aware your 'puter was swamped. Just tried back every couple of hours and of course got through.

It was great. I have met many new and interesting people as a result.

I am sorry you have to hear gripes it. I wanted to thank you for giving me some wonderful additions to my LJ friend list :)

Derek

nikoleta_g August 13 2003, 15:54:17 UTC

if i were to look at someone's friends list would my user name come up for everyone on that list even if i didn't acutally go to their own individual journal or not?