adrian is rad



Filed under: — adrian @ 11:43 pm

so I’m trying out a new host over here. It should look the same, but hopefully it’ll be faster.


12 Responses to “oldness”

  1. jesse Says:

    the processing time on the old one is still slow, but the transfer rate is much faster. combining these factors, it’s totally hit or miss as to who wins overall.

  2. adrian Says:

    The old one is the same as it’s always been. The new one is the only one that should show any difference. We’ll called the ‘control.’

  3. jesse Says:

    yes, I understand. to clarify my comment: the “old” page has a faster transfer rate than the “new” page. the “new” page does the server side processing faster than the “old” page.

    ie, using “time” and “wget” to measure total time and tranfer rate and time, a single sample looks like:

    total time = 5.947s
    transfer rate = 337.82 KB/s
    transfer time = 0.10905s

    total time = 6.871s
    transfer rate = 34.04 KB/s
    transfer time = 1.0793s

    of course these numbers vary wildly between samples, and I’m not inclined to collect enough data to make it statistically significant…

  4. adrian Says:

    hmm. Maybe it’s just wishful thinking, but it seems to me that the new host is universally faster to me.

  5. jesse Says:

    total time is probably the only data point listed above that you can get a sense for without any measuring tools. and it’s also probably the only one you care about, unless you start hosting lots of big files or something (like a photoblog – ie – which incidentally is slow as balls to download the images.) as for “new” vs “old”, I’m taking sample points every 5 minutes and I’ll let you know what it looks like after I’ve gotten a fair number.

  6. dolphio Says:

    I can’t remember if there’s a way to do this with wget or not, but maybe you should try to just get the text too – avid readers (like all of us), will have some of this cached.

  7. adrian Says:

    interesting, I’ve also found to be pretty fast.

  8. jesse Says:

    re all the text loads quickly, but then the pictures load slowly, filling in line-by-line. we’re in pretty different geo-locations and ip-locations. also this phenomenon goes away once you get the images cached. try to shift+reload them and see. YMMV.

  9. jesse Says:

    and some stats, based on 235 sample points, sampled every 5 minutes from yesterday afternoon until this morning:

    total time (s) transfer rate (KB/s)
    mean std mean std
    “old” 5.9207 1.4127 280.7420 48.1524
    “new” 2.7428 2.1418 70.2967 27.3734

    looks like my initial statement was correct. “old” has a much faster transfer rate than “new”, but “new” takes less total time (ie spends less time processing server-side). an interesting thing that I hadn’t noticed before is how much more consistent the total time of “old” is. unfortunately consistently greater total time is probably “worse” than inconsistently lesser total time. looks like overall “new” is probably the “better” choice for this blog.

    this geek-rant has been brought to you (like a bunny) by the foundation for better decision making through statistics.

  10. jesse Says:

    blarg, that table came out like crap. who knows what wordpress allows. here’s an attempt with a pre tag:

    total time (s) transfer rate (KB/s)
    mean std mean std
    “old” 5.9207 1.4127 280.7420 48.1524
    “new” 2.7428 2.1418 70.2967 27.3734

    and an attempt with non-breaking spaces:

           total time (s)     transfer rate (KB/s)
              mean    std        mean      std
    “old””   5.9207  1.4127    280.7420  48.1524
    “new”    2.7428  2.1418     70.2967  27.3734

  11. jesse Says:

    darn you proportional fonts! and darn you wordpress for hating pre! the nbsp version is at least somewhat legible… ok this has been ridiculous. soorrryyyy…

  12. adrian Says:

    That’s pretty interesting about the times and confirms my thoughts.

    As for godhatesmath, even ctrl-refreshing it loads pretty fast (each page

Leave a Reply

Spam protection by WP Captcha-Free

Powered by WordPress