Downtime

[Skemcin]

Many folks might have not been able to access the forum yesterday for a good portion of the afternoon and evening. Although I am not sure what caused the outage, the site is up and running and we are looking into what might have caused the downtime.Sorry for the inconvenience.

[Skemcin]

UpdateI've spoken with folks at invision and learned that they had a server failure - not much new in that department if you ask me. Since this seems to be periodically happening, I'd like folks to refer to their hosting blog when these situations occur to get more up to date information.As for the IPS Drive Error, some of the admin tools I used just before the server outage seemed to have resolved those errors.

[vchris]

I'm kinda getting tired of all these outages and IPS Drive Error. I'm not even surprised to see those errors anymore. I think it's time for you guys to find a better hosting service. These guys don't seem very reliable.

[Skemcin]

I'm kinda getting tired of all these outages and IPS Drive Error. I'm not even surprised to see those errors anymore. I think it's time for you guys to find a better hosting service. These guys don't seem very reliable.

I have made the suggestion to the site owners twice now to which I have not received a reply. Since we do not have all out access to the entire application, we can only work with what we have. I am learning more about this application and I think I am now knowledgeable enough to resolve the IPS Driver Errors on my own through the admin tool - but hat is only if the IPS driver error is only affecting the public interface.I agree, the time has come and gone, researching a new location should be a priority. The thing is that they pay I think $10 a month for this and thats about all the revenue they get - google ads may be breaking even. So moving, no matter how it is looked at, will be costly.I do not think it will get moved, so I am taken steps to becoming more capable to respond to various issues - but I am tied by the server rights I'm assigned.

[Html]

For a paid service this shouldn't be expected. If was a free web host, completely different story.Hmm there is heartinternet? UK based hosting.HeartInternet

[aspnetguy]

For a paid service this shouldn't be expected. If was a free web host, completely different story.Hmm there is heartinternet? UK based hosting.HeartInternet

The problem is that it is relatively cheap shared hosting so if some other account on the server takes thing down everyone goes down. Or if another accoutn gets DOS attacked everyone feels the pain. That is the downside of shared hosting although dedicating is generally not practical unless you have high traffic/revenue making sites.

[lilyofthevalley]

Ok, I'll throw a hook in here. And for those who have seen my oh so here and there posts know, I am a n00b and don't know a heck of a lot about server side or some of the proper terminology here.I don't know how large your site is overall. Although I saw your Alexa rating, for whatever that's worth, it doesn't really give me an idea of your storage or bandwidth usage either, so it's tough to say whether you're going to find something comparable price wise, even with shared. However, if I assume that because this isn't a mondo heavy graphics site, and although there's probably quite a few more pages here than I've read so far but not so many as to rival the Library of Congress, the price might be about right for your storage and bandwidth needs.Having assumed that...I understand what aspnetguy's saying about sharing can be a drag, and I have no idea of which application is giving you headaches, or what kinds of components you would need installed on a server to be able to do what needs to be done around here. I'm guessing since you've had downage, you're not dealing with mirrors or anything like that at this point. And, from what I can see, most of what is here is pretty bare bones because you don't need much more to do what it is you do. This site exists to serve a community on the net in an informational way that doesn't involve really badly scripted how to do mini movies, or drive us nuts with lots of flashing ads and talkies (god I hate the talkies--but I digress). Am I right so far? I'm worried I might not be due to the un-named application, but if I don't ask, I won't know for sure.If my assumptions are correct, what if someone who had a dedicated server that only had a handful of small barely noticed by the world sites they webmistress on it would be willing to share if the server met your needs because you guys deserve better if better can be had in this manner? Especially a server that no one in their right mind would take the time to do a DOS attack on, given the sites that live there, and if the price can stay where it is now? I'm talking about a dedicated server rented from one of the big muckety muck companies, not one run out of a basement that will go down during a blackout or when the river floods said basement during a storm.Would the owners be willing to consider that? I mean, there'd be a lot of questions in the process as far as who needs what, and how and if to get what needs to be gotten, but I'm just throwing it out there as a possibility for a starting point. It's also the type of dedicated server where if the bandwidth goes beyond the contract, it stays up...so no worries about the site suddenly crashing because I download 1 million HD movies, full screen with bonus features for no good reason at all. And no worries about one of the other sites suddenly being a spam farm or the like that gets the server locked out either. But it could be that you need a totally different set up, which my one underlying concern overall at this point.If they are willing to consider it, lemme know. Ok, back into my "why can't they all just meet us halfway here" mode for building a new site or two...

[Skemcin]

lilyofthevalley - thanks for your reply and I think the assumptions you made are pretty (if not completely) accurate.I think the biggest challenge right now isn't even the server downtime. There are ways I think that can be addressed and I'll get to that after I address the bigger concern. I feel the bigger concern is the disconnect we (at least as moderators) have with the site owners. Don't get me wrong, I am not meaning any disrespect at all and I'm not implying that this is an inherently horrible thing. My only point is that it is a fact of the matter. With the ultimate control of what happens being in there hands (as it should) and the infrequent contact between us (specifically moderators) it is hard to look at certain types of changes that could improve the site - mainly physical location and physical updates. Everything outside and anything physically related to the site, we (as moderators) have been empowered to handle. Under the circumstance I think we have been able to do a pretty good job. In any respect, we will not be able to have a good discussion related to moving the site or anything like that until the communication gap can be resolved.As for the next biggest challenge from my perspective, downtime can be handled better if we (one or all moderators) are empowered to directly be in contact with our discussion board host. I think it is important to mention that we are only talking about the discussion board when we talk about the "site" both here and in my previous statements. Adding one to the contacts at the provider is not that complicated and does allow one to have more direct access to support - rather than general (otherwise) public information. With access to support, issues can be documented and escalated and certain demands can be made - including a request to have the site moved to a new/different shared environment due to the sporadic issues the current has been having. That, for instance, would be the first line of duty for me if I were given access. Additionally support access would also allow diagnosis and resolutions to be much quicker with the ability to interact with the provider.All in all, I'd like to see a little better communication (at least) between the owners and the moderators or (at the very least) an additional contact with the provider so that issues can be handled rather than monitored.