|
|
| Author |
Message |
| 25 new of 68 responses total. |
scg
|
|
response 25 of 68:
| 
Sep 1 04:16 UTC 1997 |
In addition to the bandwidth problems, there are also system resource problems
with increasing the number of telnet ports too much. We should discuss that
when the new connection goes in. I won't say we definitely should increase
the number of telnet ports right away with the new connection, but we
certainly should once we have the new computer online.
Richard, do you have a better solution for handling situations where we have
more users wanting to get on than we can support? Please explain, in detail,
how it would be implemented and what advantages *and disadvantages* it would
be likely to have.
|
davel
|
|
response 26 of 68:
|
Sep 1 11:24 UTC 1997 |
Right. I basically could not ever get in, at all, via telnet before the
queue. I suppose I could write a Procomm script that would attack-telnet,
but that hardly seems like a better solution.
|
janc
|
|
response 27 of 68:
|
Sep 1 14:57 UTC 1997 |
This was discussed in another item. Basically the conclusion was that we will
probably increase the number of people who can simultaneously telnet in, but
we will not eliminate the queue.
The increase in the number of slots will be modest at first. We need to see
how well Grex's CPU can handle the added load. If we can get the 670 running
as well, we will be able to make more substantial increases.
|
valerie
|
|
response 28 of 68:
|
Sep 1 15:08 UTC 1997 |
This response has been erased.
|
richard
|
|
response 29 of 68:
|
Sep 1 22:53 UTC 1997 |
#24...see I dont or didnt knwo this...I never had a problem telnetting
in prior to the countdown...neverused any programs or anything...rarely
ever got the "all ports are busy" And if I did, it was just an extra
clicl of the mouse to get right back in. I had worse problems telnetting
into mnet than I neverhad into here.
Now I come on in the morning and Im number forty in the countdown and
get timed out half the time when I get to ogin because I
dont want to stare atmy grex screen like a zombie waiting for the que.
|
senna
|
|
response 30 of 68:
|
Sep 1 23:58 UTC 1997 |
i hated the old system... took me ages, if I got in at all. essentially, I
had no choice but to telnet to grex every five seconds waiting for a port to
free up. At least with the queue I can leave for a bit.
|
valerie
|
|
response 31 of 68:
|
Sep 2 00:09 UTC 1997 |
This response has been erased.
|
orinoco
|
|
response 32 of 68:
|
Sep 2 00:55 UTC 1997 |
I also have never run into the problem of telnet not accepting me prior to
the queue. Now I dial in almost all the time, so this really doesn't affect
me much, but...
|
janc
|
|
response 33 of 68:
|
Sep 2 16:04 UTC 1997 |
There may be some modicum of truth to that. With the old system, if people
got "all ports busy" a few times, they probably went away. Now, if they get
"you are number 10 in the queue" they are more likely to wait around and
eventually log on. More people logging on means more people on the system,
so the periods of full utilization are longer than they used to be.
Basically, if you make it easier to wait for a connection, more people will
wait, so there will be fewer times when there is no wait. This definately
means better utilization of Grex, with more users on more of the time, but
it could lead to the perception that Richard and Orinoco report of Grex being
harder to get onto.
|
richard
|
|
response 34 of 68:
|
Sep 2 16:18 UTC 1997 |
#33...thats what I mean, if it increases usage load overrall then
the que defeats its own purpose. Plus nobody wanting to run
new use is going to wait around if they are down in the que somewher
like fifteen or twenty. At some point, the curiousity factor is outweighed
by the time/trouble it takes to get in.
check how often new user was run on average before the que was installed
against how often it is run now...bet you'll find a difference
|
valerie
|
|
response 35 of 68:
|
Sep 2 19:09 UTC 1997 |
This response has been erased.
|
aruba
|
|
response 36 of 68:
|
Sep 2 20:34 UTC 1997 |
Re #34: You miss the point of the queue, Richard - the point was to be more
fair to people trying to telnet in, the same way that it's fairer (and more
civilized) to stand in line at the bank that it is to mob the tellers, with
the biggest person getting in first.
|
robh
|
|
response 37 of 68:
|
Sep 2 22:00 UTC 1997 |
Yep, and the manager(s) of the bank should ignore the ranting of
the big people. >8)
|
senna
|
|
response 38 of 68:
|
Sep 3 01:28 UTC 1997 |
That's funny, my rampant use of newuser has slowed down quite a bit :)
|
valerie
|
|
response 39 of 68:
|
Sep 3 02:08 UTC 1997 |
This response has been erased.
|
dang
|
|
response 40 of 68:
|
Sep 7 17:10 UTC 1997 |
Actually, if the queue is causing grex to be used more fully more of the time,
then I would maintain that it is working great. I would be happy of grex was
full *all* of the time.
|
valerie
|
|
response 41 of 68:
|
Sep 9 17:14 UTC 1997 |
This response has been erased.
|
dang
|
|
response 42 of 68:
|
Sep 9 23:50 UTC 1997 |
Because that would mean that people are using it. (Okay, so that's obvious,
but...) It means that Grex still has room to grow, that people are
communicating. It means that Grex is a little slower, and so it increases
the effect of that filter that selects for people who *like* it here, rather
than people who use Grex just for email. It means a higher chance that people
will wander into conferences, and so more people to talk to here. It makes
me feel better about donating my time to Grex. Afterall, I probably wouldn't
want to donate my time to a system that isn't used. It means that I feel
better about donating money for better hardware and better internet
connections. They're likely to be used. I've never said to myself "I think
I won't Grex today, because it's too slow." I have a multitasking computer,
and a multitasking brain. If Grex is slow, I do something else while I'm
waiting. So, more people on Grex is a good thing, in my opinion. If there's
a time of day when not many Americans are on, I'm happy to see people of other
nationalities from other parts of the planet filling Grex up. This is also
why I think the queue is a great thing. It allows everyone equal access to
Grex, even while Grex is full. It allows Grex to be fuller.
|
mta
|
|
response 43 of 68:
|
Sep 10 00:24 UTC 1997 |
Amen, Daniel!
|
davel
|
|
response 44 of 68:
|
Sep 10 10:58 UTC 1997 |
Well, *most* of the time lately Grex hasn't been slow enough to scare people
off, I think. But there comes a point when that *is* an issue, somewhere
before you start getting 10-second lag for every character you type.
|
senna
|
|
response 45 of 68:
|
Sep 10 23:41 UTC 1997 |
I've only occasionally been "scared" off of grex when lag is really, really
bad, usually because there's very little else to do due to computer problems
of my own and because I'm spoiled by dialin speeds. I usually multitask my
eyes out when I'm bored. It works for me, and I'm not the only one who does
it.
|
valerie
|
|
response 46 of 68:
|
Sep 12 21:36 UTC 1997 |
This response has been erased.
|
senna
|
|
response 47 of 68:
|
Sep 13 02:42 UTC 1997 |
I've had to do it; It's annoying.
|
valerie
|
|
response 48 of 68:
|
Sep 13 13:25 UTC 1997 |
This response has been erased.
|
richard
|
|
response 49 of 68:
|
Sep 13 20:18 UTC 1997 |
Hopping into and out of mail on grex, its like wearing twenty pound
weights on each leg. You can do it, but it is unbearably slow.
I cant imagine using grex for my regular email...I type so fast that
grex (or rather Pine on grex on rare occasions when I use it) takes
forever to catch up. I've found myself three and four paragraphs ahead.
I wouldnt recommend grex for email to anyone...use a .forward file and
do email elsewhere, even if its m-net or nether or some horribly
over-commercialized place on the web like Hotmail. Grex has to be one
of the worst places to do email on the entire 'net.
|
