Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 
Topic Tools
Hot Topic (More than 10 Replies) YaBB v SMF2 performance (Read 8,834 times)
westwegoman
Ex Member
**




YaBB 2.5.2
Re: YaBB v SMF2 performance
Reply #15 - Jul 10th, 2012 at 5:09am
Post Tools
Sad to see another member jumping ship. Not sure who it is yet but I have a clue. Will research to see if I'm correct.

I have hopes that someday soon, YaBB will move forward again. If not, I have a feeling that more will continue to move on to another forum.

Putting it plain and simple, if the ship continues to sit in dry dock, more members will jump to another ship. Sad but true.

As for me, think I'll stick around for a while. For now, I still have hope for a better future. Wink
« Last Edit: Jul 10th, 2012 at 5:33am by WestwegoMan »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bill Myers
God Member
Beta Testers
*****
Offline



Posts: 1,714
Location: Los Angeles

YaBB 2.4
Re: YaBB v SMF2 performance
Reply #16 - Jul 10th, 2012 at 7:32am
Post Tools
WestwegoMan wrote on Jul 10th, 2012 at 5:09am:
As for me, think I'll stick around for a while. For now, I still have hope for a better future. Wink

This is pretty much the way I feel as well.  Smiley

I've been with YaBB from almost the beginning, so I'll most likely be stubbornly staying with it for as long as this forum exists; probably no matter how bad its operations get. I realize this may not seem like a good business decision to make for the site that our YaBB forum is on, but from my perspective, and in the big picture of it all, it's not necessarily a bad decision either.

As badly as the situation appears to be here, because fixing the small stuff is important, the bottom line is that the latest stable version of YaBB actually runs quite well (version 2.4 as I use it, although as I understand it, version 2.5 is also stable, and runs perfectly fine).

Along with possibly misplaced loyalty, another reason I intend to stick around is out of respect for a handful of people I really admire who continue to operate their own YaBB forums. These people are much smarter than I am about this stuff, so my thinking is they must know what they're doing.

Yes, it's true that the latest apparent defector to another forum is one of those people whom I have a lot of admiration for, so I'm feeling conflicted about my own choice to stay with YaBB. On the other hand, the problems with YaBB's own forum here don't affect me since, again, I'm using a stable version, and YaBB's basic features work well with the way I operate our forum.

The glass for me is still half full.  Wink


On a personal note to you Merv, although I'm publicly stating it here in case anyone else is thinking of switching to another forum, remember that you switched, and then came back.

I didn't switch, but I did install the other forum on a couple of sites just to test it out, so like some kind of a nervous Nellie, I'm more or less ready to move from YaBB if or when it's needed.

Meanwhile, I'm still hoping for the best.  Smiley

  

Morning, noon, or night, have a great one!

Note: This forum doesn't allow for us to freely edit our posts or topics to make corrections as needed, so please remember to look for subsequent posts if you see any mistakes or outdated information. Sorry for the inconvenience.
Back to top
IP Logged
 
westwegoman
Ex Member
**




YaBB 2.5.2
Re: YaBB v SMF2 performance
Reply #17 - Jul 10th, 2012 at 7:51am
Post Tools
True. I did come back. I guess I did so because I kind of feel attached to YaBB and the feeling of knowing my way around it pretty good doesn't hurt either.

On the other hand, now knowing about, and who, the latest member was to disembark... Kind of makes one wonder. Is something going on that we don't know? I'm quite surprised to hear of it.

On the third hand, (yes, I have 3) I have been playing around with the other forum just incase.

It just doesn't seem that things are moving along. I know and understand that the guys who do this have lives outside of YaBB, I would hope that they would understand if people move on.

YaBB has been a great learning tool for me and will continue to be, but we all have to keep our options open. I have a small site with little traffic on the forum but I hope that will change one day. If it does and things haven't progressed, I too will have to move on.

Now.... To beat that horse again, aww hell, Nevermind!!! Angry
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Boy
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 358
Location: UK
Re: YaBB v SMF2 performance
Reply #18 - Jul 10th, 2012 at 8:12pm
Post Tools
Bill Myers wrote on Jul 10th, 2012 at 7:32am:
so I'll most likely be stubbornly staying with it for as long as this forum exists

I was in the same boat about 18 months ago, stubbornly sticking with YaBB because:

1) I had one of the largest YaBBs, and was proud of it
2) I had faith that YaBB3 was very close, and would solve the issues I was having
3) YaBB had (still does) a very clean, clear layout
4) Converters are pretty non existent, despite what other forum people say


But the stalling of YaBB3, and then the (apparent) loss of interest from the 2 devs working on it, forced me to look at ways out of YaBB. I waited as long as I possibly could, although had been trialling other software as soon as YaBB3 stalled.


There was/is a lot to like about YaBB, but for my site, flat file based YaBB (certainly as it currently is) wasn't a solution. SMF almost fully met our needs, and was, for us, certainly better than anything else we tried.


It was a sad day on 24th September when we made our YaBB readonly, and migrated to SMF. But is was also an exciting new start.

The forum has been more reliable, and a bucketload faster. And the logging is a little bit better IMHO.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Bill Myers
God Member
Beta Testers
*****
Offline



Posts: 1,714
Location: Los Angeles

YaBB 2.4
Re: YaBB v SMF2 performance
Reply #19 - Jul 10th, 2012 at 11:40pm
Post Tools
The Boy wrote on Jul 10th, 2012 at 8:12pm:
There was/is a lot to like about YaBB, but for my site, flat file based YaBB (certainly as it currently is) wasn't a solution. SMF almost fully met our needs, and was, for us, certainly better than anything else we tried.

Particularly with the robust activity in your forum, your move away from YaBB was evidently necessary. I get that. By the way, I for one am grateful for the help you continue to give to YaBBers.

Thank you!  Smiley


For many YaBBers, however, including the YaBB forum I operate, staying with YaBB is most probably a better decision to make than switching. That's my general recommendation.

But of course, this will depend on what's going on in your own forum.  Wink

The unfortunate state of affairs here in this forum shouldn't be a particular concern as long as your own YaBB forum is operating well. After all, the "problems" that continue to plague this forum are easily solvable, which means they're pretty much non-existent for the rest of us.

Spam-bot registrations? We've installed anti-spam mods.

Forum links not working properly? Using a stable version of YaBB solves that.

Missing images? We edit those fixes in a timely manner when we find out about them.

Administration feedback? We're around for that we well.

Happily enough, a newer version of YaBB for most of us isn't really needed even though it'd be pretty cool to update our forum's software with the latest features of other forums. But personally, I'm in no hurry to update the forum I operate. What we have works for us just fine.

Bottom line regarding our respective forums: If they ain't broke, they don't need fixing.  Smiley

Thankfully, if or when our forums break down, we continue to be fortunate enough to have fellow Yabbers helping us despite the way this forum is being managed.

The glass continues to be half full.  Wink

  

Morning, noon, or night, have a great one!

Note: This forum doesn't allow for us to freely edit our posts or topics to make corrections as needed, so please remember to look for subsequent posts if you see any mistakes or outdated information. Sorry for the inconvenience.
Back to top
IP Logged
 
westwegoman
Ex Member
**




YaBB 2.5.2
Re: YaBB v SMF2 performance
Reply #20 - Jul 11th, 2012 at 12:52am
Post Tools
Bill Myers wrote on Jul 10th, 2012 at 11:40pm:
The glass continues to be half full. 

Its a Red Solo Cup, and it has a crack in it. Grin
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Boy
Full Member
***
Offline



Posts: 358
Location: UK
Re: YaBB v SMF2 performance
Reply #21 - Jul 11th, 2012 at 6:45pm
Post Tools
I agree that if you are below a certain size/activity threshold, YaBB (2.5) is stupidly reliable. Ridiculously so. It just purrs along.

If you YaBB is quite busy, as long as Linux disk caching can hold the entire mountpoint in its RAM cache, its reasonably reliable, maybe the odd bit of corruption - esp the first post on pages 2/3/4/5 etc not being visible (fixed quickly by posting on that thread, then deleting that post). Occasionally, the odd more serious corruption that needs the Maintenence Routines running (which is an outage, sadly).  Once Linux starts to struggle with this caching, if the forum has busy waves, IME, you start to see memory errors, and this is when real problems start. Short term solution is to through more hardware at it, but this requirement grows exponentially.

Y3, even in Flatfile form, does help due to AJAX, rather than full page loads.  But Y3 (flatfile) needs a lot of bugs ironed out. SQL versions of YaBB are nowhere near ready, with performance in my testing last year being way slower than flatfile.


FWIW, SMF's antispam is every bit as poor as YaBBs.  Obviously, I have seperately installed an antispam module.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
zcybjin
YaBB Newcomer
*
Offline



Posts: 2
Re: YaBB v SMF2 performance
Reply #22 - Jul 12th, 2012 at 3:08pm
Post Tools
I don't know if this technique can be applied to YaBB 2.x to improve performance, but the following is what I discovered while browsing the PunBB forum: "Cache the whole forum - jpcache for punbb" (Please google it, I can not post URL) and "WP Cache like Mod for PunBB which will make fully static PunBB pages" (Please google it, I can not post URL)

It works like this.  Normally there are more guests or bots than logged-in members viewing the forum, so a possible performance hack is to cache the generated page for guests/bots.  A guest/bot gets either a cached page if a non-expired one exists, or a newly generated page which is also being cached for later use.  This caching should not affect guests/bots too much, since they all belong to the same group, and are not identifiable individually.  This page might explain the idea better than I do: "Caching pages with Perl" (please google with "caching pages with perl")

I am not a Perl programmer (I find it hard to learn the Perl notation), but a Perl module seems to be made for this kind of job: CGI::Cache.  Maybe somebody adept at Perl could try this in YaBB?
« Last Edit: Jul 12th, 2012 at 3:11pm by zcybjin »  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Dandello
YaBB Administrator
YaBB Next Team
Operations Team
Beta Testers
Support Team
*****
Offline



Posts: 2,449
Location: Earth

YaBB 2.6.1
Re: YaBB v SMF2 performance
Reply #23 - Jul 12th, 2012 at 4:22pm
Post Tools
The caching idea for guests/bots is definitely one to be looked at - after 2.x/3.x has been debugged and optimized.

A good chunk of the problem with the current YaBB has to do with un-fixed bugs, redundancies, inefficiencies, and catering to older versions of the various databases within the program rather than upgrading the databases to current YaBB format in a separate process. Every time a message or profile file has to be analyzed as to whether it's a 2.5, 2.4 or 2.3 (or older) format before it's displayed takes time and even microseconds add up.

There are other issues as well, including obsolete html and css which can create a unnecessary work for the browser.
« Last Edit: Jul 12th, 2012 at 4:25pm by Dandello »  

If you only have one solution to a problem you're not trying hard enough!
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Bill Myers
God Member
Beta Testers
*****
Offline



Posts: 1,714
Location: Los Angeles

YaBB 2.4
Re: YaBB v SMF2 performance
Reply #24 - Jul 12th, 2012 at 5:30pm
Post Tools
The caching idea for guests and bots ... interesting. Our forum runs quite speedily, so it makes me wonder if the techs operating our server are already doing this with the standard "swap" feature whatever that is.

There's nothing particularly special about the server we use; just a basic standard server.

As of this post, the following stats were being shown:

CPU model: Intel(R) Pentium(R) D CPU 2.80GHz
Number of CPU Cores: 2
CPU MHz: 2799.94
CPU cache: 2048 KB
CPU bogomips: 11205.41

The memory for our server isn't a lot (currently as of this post):

RAM Total: 1.96 GB
Used: 1.87 GB
Free: 84.10 MB

Swap Total: 1.91 GB
Used: 1.01 MB
Free: 1.91 GB

I haven't upgraded our server for a couple of years because there's been no pressing need.

Our forum has always had a far higher number of guests and bots than members online, but then, that seems to be the case in pretty much every forum that allows guests.

As I type this, our current stats are as follows:

Members: 27
Guests: 2610
Search Engines: 443

Oh, this doesn't include the constant barrage of spam-bots that keep trying to register; unsuccessfully.  Wink

I realize our server's stats don't really have anything to do with how efficiently our forum operates; at least not particularly. On the other hand, I suppose there's a recommended minimum in terms of hardware that's needed to allow a server to operate efficiently when a forum is taking up resources.

I would consider our forum to be a medium sized one with a relatively small amount of traffic compared to the traffic that is generated throughout our server's most popular site (currently at 2,647 pages).

Our server is dedicated to just three active domains that we operate, two of which get very little traffic, so that probably makes a big difference in terms of how efficiently our server operates.

This sure beats the old days when we were operating hundreds of sites on many different servers, although I do miss the income that was generated from all that activity.

With some exceptions as needed, I'm down to just three employees; me, myself, and I.  Wink

Edited:
Edited to correct some formatting.
« Last Edit: Jul 12th, 2012 at 5:33pm by Bill Myers »  

Morning, noon, or night, have a great one!

Note: This forum doesn't allow for us to freely edit our posts or topics to make corrections as needed, so please remember to look for subsequent posts if you see any mistakes or outdated information. Sorry for the inconvenience.
Back to top
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo
 
  « Board Index ‹ Board  ^Top