Server provisioning isn't as simple as clicking "make it go faster" in some administration page.
It's generally not processing power and bandwidth that's slowing things down on the back end. A talking point would be connection limits for each part of the stack. SSL is more costly in terms of connections, than an unsecured connection. You could have something blazing fast like a NoSQL setup paired off with a traditional DBMS. There are natural bottlenecks that you try to build around when you're developing something. But, again, simulating load and traffic is guess work.
You don't know how it will work in scenario "x", until scenario "x" has occurred.
cybernoise posted:
Um, I dunno, maybe something simple like having a server that has enough processing power and bandwidth to handle a large influx of users that was obviously going to be expected. It's not like you haven't experienced this before (Ghosts ordering was *exactly* the same shambles).
This is where people make very simple statements without realizing the sheer amount of complexity their statement would introduce. So I inevitably have to say "it's not that simple", and it's not.
cybernoise posted:
You could have separated out the downloads and ordering to different servers. So people who want the freebie download get one server, the people ordering the basic stuff another server and the physical stuff that costs a *lot* of money get another server.
That's what a CDN is for.
cybernoise posted:
Or you could have also separated out the servers for different regions (which you probably did in this case) but obviously whoever you partnered with in the UK/Europe is f**king hopeless!
Anyhow, relax. It's being sorted out.
Also, as time goes on I'm turning into this:
Get Off My Lawn when it comes to trollish shit on the internet.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 12/02/2011 05:51PM by jarrettwold.
