ChiefsPlanet - ChiefsPlanet Random ChiefsPlanet Stats

ChiefsPlanet (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)

- Nzoner's Game Room (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)

- -

Random ChiefsPlanet Stats (https://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=187154)

Quote:

Originally Posted by StcChief (Post 4857024)

this is an initial indicator that the server is up to the task for game day action....

do you have stats on number concurrent users vs posting stats.... and db response time... this is likely a tough one but a real indicator of
is the server "horse enough" to handle concurrency and still give decent response. databases in general are I/O bound.

Unfortunately not. vBulletin's software only records info about the quantities of posts and that type of thing, so there's no server-performance data in there. Somewhere around here, I posted graphs generated by an external service that monitors response times, though. Let me see if I can find that.

Here we go. This is referring to April 26th.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaFace (Post 4717109)

In case anyone cares about stuff like this, here's how things performed yesterday.

Server load (number of processes waiting in queue):
http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/8742/loadpf8.png

I don't have any historical data from the old server, unfortunately, but I'm told that last year during games this graph would have been well above 4.0 the entire time. Not to mention that the new server has a dual-core processor (I think anyway), so it can handle higher loads without croaking.

CPU Usage:
http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/4014/cpuxw6.png

Network Usage:
http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/1353/networknl5.png

RAM Usage:
http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/1261/ramusageah1.png

Ping Response:
http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/3673/pingfb2.png
This one just tells how long it takes the server to respond to a generic request, but isn't that useful it determining actual response of the Planet, since that depends a lot on the database response time, too.

Lounge HTTP response time:
http://img72.imageshack.us/img72/9366/httprr6.png
This one is probably the most meaningful. This is how long it took to actually load the Lounge. However, this is probably much faster than it happens for the average user due the fact that 1)most of our network connections aren't near as fast as the service I used to generate these graphs and 2)it doesn't load any graphics at all; it just transfers the raw HTML from the page and times how long it takes to get it.

Overall, it looks like the server got pretty stressed at times, but the actual response time didn't take a hit at all. Oddly, response time was pretty slow for around 20 minutes this morning between 7:45 a.m. and 8:00 a.m. CDT. Not sure about that one, but it doesn't seem to be load-related.

Anyway, just thought some of you might find this type of thing interesting.

In case anyone cares, here's how we did today. The top is server load; the bottom is the amount of time it took to load the Lounge.

Neat - I found a plugin that generates the demographics of our entire member database (for those who answered the questions anyway):

Code:

Age Range         Percentage

Under 20        2.74%

20 - 29                26.97%

30 - 39                31.42%

40 - 49                19.02%

50 - 59                7.83%

60 - 69                1.63%

Over 70                10.40%



Gender                 Percentage

Males                94.27%

Females                4.76%

Undisclosed        0.97%

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaFace (Post 5010477)

Neat - I found a plugin that generates the demographics of our entire member database (for those who answered the questions anyway):

Code:

Age Range         Percentage

Under 20        2.74%

20 - 29                26.97%

30 - 39                31.42%

40 - 49                19.02%

50 - 59                7.83%

60 - 69                1.63%

Over 70                10.40%



Gender                 Percentage

Males                94.27%

Females                4.76%

Undisclosed        0.97%

There are that many chicks? Where are we all at? Surely you men can't intimidate that many of us.

I figure "undisclosed" has GOTTA be Ultra Peanut.:p

Self-licking ice cream cone.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaFace (Post 5010477)

Neat - I found a plugin that generates the demographics of our entire member database (for those who answered the questions anyway):

Code:

Age Range     Percentage

Under 20    2.74%

20 - 29        26.97%

30 - 39        31.42%

40 - 49        19.02%

50 - 59        7.83%

60 - 69        1.63%

Over 70        10.40%

 

Gender         Percentage

Males        94.27%

Females        4.76%

Undisclosed    0.9%

Claythan        0.07%

ROFL

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaFace (Post 5010477)

Neat - I found a plugin that generates the demographics of our entire member database (for those who answered the questions anyway):

Code:

Age Range         Percentage

Under 20        2.74%

20 - 29                26.97%

30 - 39                31.42%

40 - 49                19.02%

50 - 59                7.83%

60 - 69                1.63%

Over 70                10.40%



Gender                 Percentage

Males                94.27%

Females                4.76%

Undisclosed        0.97%

I'm thinking we all need to work on attracting some more females to the planet. Just think we can have "I have a Date" threads all day! If we get enough ladies here maybe Goatse will find one he can handle.

I've been being a geek and analyzing some of our recent months, and I discovered that September was our first ever 100,000-post month. So hooray I guess.

Interestingly, our "user activity" for the year is actually down a bit. That stat measures how many users log in each day, regardless of whether they actually post. So, if that stat is right, we've got fewer active users, but they're more active in terms of posts.

I'm a little skeptical of that, however, as UA dropped about 20% IMMEDIATELY after the server switch and has never recovered, which kind of makes me think that the old software measured that stat differently than the new software. It certainly did with regard to thread count, as the software claims that we were averaging about 12,000 threads per day on the old software.

Age Range Percentage
Under 20 2.74%
20 - 29 26.97%
30 - 39 31.42%
40 - 49 19.02%
50 - 59 7.83%
60 - 69 1.63%
Over 70 10.40%

Gender Percentage
Males 94.27%
Females 4.76%
Undisclosed 0.9%
Claythan 0.07%</pre>

Aw...aw....**** you!

As of today, there have been more posts in 2008 than in any other year. Yay.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaFace (Post 5323097)

As of today, there have been more posts in 2008 than in any other year. Yay.

Damnit Carl! :cuss:

Oh, I guess I should mention that the old record was 828,512, and I expect us to end up around 860,000.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaFace (Post 5323104)

Oh, I guess I should mention that the old record was 828,512, and I expect us to end up around 860,000.

I've really stepped it up this year.