Some Thanks for Andrew

[SkyJammer]

Just wanted to publicly thank Andrew for helping me the past few months. I had a very, (very) popular website that basically chewed up all of the processor, and Andrew was nice enough to unsuspend my account so that I could rework it into a straight-HTML site, removing the processor-chewing PHP code. And when I forgot my CP password again, he's reset it. Plus, he was able to reassure me with a SSL question I had.

Thanks for the prompt attention, Andrew.

-Phil

[samsam]

Just out of curiosity, how much traffic (visitors, hits etc) does very popular mean?

I'm always curious about some of the bigger sites on Dathorn, and what sort of popularity level I can aspire to and yet still stay within my account limits :-)

samsam

[timg]

The question is unanswerable

Remember that it is not simply visitors/hits that determines bandwidth. It has to do with how demanding your pages are on a server. If you have low-weight static pages, you could have an awful lot of hits without making a big dent on your limit. But if you're running a number of PHP scripts etc., you'll have to divide that number considerably.

[samsam]

thanks timg.

I'm aware of all those variables, and how they can affect bandwidth, CPU utilisation etc etc.

There sure is no simple way to reliably indicate traffic volume, but as a rough measure hits and visitors is close enough for someone to get a feel for the scale of a site. That's all I was after, I guess.

[nefadol]

According to my stats, the highest number of visitors my most popular site got was around 2,500 in a day. It's average was around 1,000, but now is at around 500 (I down scaled the site a lot). At it's peak it was doing around 1-2 gigs/bandwidth a day, but the site was just using basic php includes and a useronline script.

I think it really just matters on the kind of processes you're running, but being a bandwidth hog isn't that great in my opinion either.