i swear...

[beth]

everytime i load hxf recently, it's either down or taking 5 mins per page to load. sup?

[dirrty]

same for me. takes forever to load a page - when i try and reply the page just hangs for a while, then takes me to the advanced posting page and my post has disappeared so i have to type it all again (this just actually happened as i was replying to this lmao so gotta do it again). more or less everytime i've posted on ere within the past few days, i've had to copy the post, try and reply - otherwise wait for it to time out, refresh and try again. so much effort just to bloody reply lol.

i was gonna make a thread about it a few days ago but i thought it was just me so didn't bother - but evidently it's not, so yeah...

[scott]

it is a bit of a nuisance no idea what is wrong with habbox's servers that we always tend to have stuff like this happening all the time

[beth]

same for me. takes forever to load a page - when i try and reply the page just hangs for a while, then takes me to the advanced posting page and my post has disappeared so i have to type it all again (this just actually happened as i was replying to this lmao so gotta do it again). more or less everytime i've posted on ere within the past few days, i've had to copy the post, try and reply - otherwise wait for it to time out, refresh and try again. so much effort just to bloody reply lol.

i was gonna make a thread about it a few days ago but i thought it was just me so didn't bother - but evidently it's not, so yeah...

sameeeeeeee, just had the forever spinning loading wheel when posting this......

---------- Post added 30-04-2012 at 03:10 PM ----------


it is a bit of a nuisance no idea what is wrong with habbox's servers that we always tend to have stuff like this happening all the time

"ex-forum manager"

WHAT ARE YOU OFF????????????

[David]

quick someone call jin

[scott]

sameeeeeeee, just had the forever spinning loading wheel when posting this......

---------- Post added 30-04-2012 at 03:10 PM ----------



"ex-forum manager"

WHAT ARE YOU OFF????????????

it just starts to load then stops for me :(

and yes i am

[beth]

gonna be honest, haven't seen jin in ages. fair play he pays for everything but really doesn't feel like he gives a ****. it seems like the management are focusing their efforts on the client side of habbox too (which is fine) but yknow the forum is breaking everyday and there's people who've been here for years who would like to have some kind of regular service. especially considering quite a few of us donate money via donator to this site.......

and that's a shame scott; i feel you've not been supported enough in yr role at times, but you've been a good manager so thanks for all yr work!!!!!!!!! xxxxxx

[scott]

gonna be honest, haven't seen jin in ages. fair play he pays for everything but really doesn't feel like he gives a ****. it seems like the management are focusing their efforts on the client side of habbox too (which is fine) but yknow the forum is breaking everyday and there's people who've been here for years who would like to have some kind of regular service. especially considering quite a few of us donate money via donator to this site.......

and that's a shame @scott (http://www.habboxforum.com/member.php?u=52752); i feel you've not been supported enough in yr role at times, but you've been a good manager so thanks for all yr work!!!!!!!!! xxxxxx

That's the thing with Jin, this tends to be the time of year that he is here a lot more, he will now be getting ready to go off to festivals till September so I hope it gets sorted soon or it will really start to suffer, especially at a time when posting on the forum has actually started to increase and was being maintained.

[beth]

That's the thing with Jin, this tends to be the time of year that he is here a lot more, he will now be getting ready to go off to festivals till September so I hope it gets sorted soon or it will really start to suffer, especially at a time when posting on the forum has actually started to increase and was being maintained.

yeah and if it's not sorted we'll end up with what happened last year when we were down for a week and all posting just died. the forum seems to be more alive again but it is rly hard with all these outages, do we still have that outage chart anywhere?!

[xxMATTGxx]

yeah and if it's not sorted we'll end up with what happened last year when we were down for a week and all posting just died. the forum seems to be more alive again but it is rly hard with all these outages, do we still have that outage chart anywhere?!

There's this one which shows the whole of April:

http://stats.pingdom.com/0rmh1vp1dnyh/410394/2012/04

[Martin]

yeah and if it's not sorted we'll end up with what happened last year when we were down for a week and all posting just died. the forum seems to be more alive again but it is rly hard with all these outages, do we still have that outage chart anywhere?!

ogod I remember that :( Was just after HxSS if I remember correctly and it felt like all that hard work had been undone LOL

Really hope it gets sorted soon, there must be something pretty wrong with it for the frequency of outtage to be so high. Noticed yesterday there were periods where I was waiting a good 5-10 minutes for a VM to post etc and that shouldn't be happening really and needsa be looked into by Jin ASAP

[beth]

04/30/2012 02:06:50PM 04/30/2012 02:26:50PM 20m
04/07/2012 10:57:50PM 04/07/2012 11:13:50PM 16m
04/29/2012 06:39:50PM 04/29/2012 06:54:51PM 15m
04/08/2012 04:05:50AM 04/08/2012 04:16:50AM 11m
04/09/2012 12:44:50AM 04/09/2012 12:55:50AM 11m

i'm no tech expert but surely they are quite big durations to be having down!?!

[Inseriousity.]

Either my computer's amazing or I am just lucky that I haven't experienced much downtime that everyone else has although I did notice it this afternoon and thought 'oh great here we go again' :(

[scott]

according to the thing it was down for almost an hour yesterday and like 52 minutes today so far which isn't looking too good. looks like a pattern is starting with the downtime

[xxMATTGxx]

04/30/2012 02:06:50PM 04/30/2012 02:26:50PM 20m
04/07/2012 10:57:50PM 04/07/2012 11:13:50PM 16m
04/29/2012 06:39:50PM 04/29/2012 06:54:51PM 15m
04/08/2012 04:05:50AM 04/08/2012 04:16:50AM 11m
04/09/2012 12:44:50AM 04/09/2012 12:55:50AM 11m

i'm no tech expert but surely they are quite big durations to be having down!?!

Yeah they are to be honest, anything over a couple of minutes is beyond a joke.


Either my computer's amazing or I am just lucky that I haven't experienced much downtime that everyone else has although I did notice it this afternoon and thought 'oh great here we go again' :(

Today was one of the bad ones as it did it a multiple times within the same time sort of speak.

[beth]

especially considering the times, 4am/2am isn't too bad. i think habbox in general has accepted it is a mainly a UK/european site and the few timezone lurkers we do have have got used to the 2am back up. but down 20 minutes at 6pm?! that's peak time.

[Richie]

My suggestion is to move to a free host like http://www.000webhost.com/. There would definitely be improvements. In all seriousness though I don't understand, apparently habbox pay tons for their server yet they always seem to go down. I don't understand why habbox would stay with such an unreliable host, unless it's the way jin has set the forum up. I know if I managed a website that had recurring problems with a host I would demand they fix it immediately or i'd hop boats.

The problem isn't entirely down to the server. You can't wipe your bum without toiletroll. Sort out a technician.

[Grig]

isn't that when the server re-boots itself as well.

[froobe]

04/30/2012 02:06:50PM 04/30/2012 02:26:50PM 20m
04/07/2012 10:57:50PM 04/07/2012 11:13:50PM 16m
04/29/2012 06:39:50PM 04/29/2012 06:54:51PM 15m
04/08/2012 04:05:50AM 04/08/2012 04:16:50AM 11m
04/09/2012 12:44:50AM 04/09/2012 12:55:50AM 11m

i'm no tech expert but surely they are quite big durations to be having down!?!

believe it or not that's only ~0.001% downtime


My suggestion is to move to a free host like http://www.000webhost.com/. There would definitely be improvements. In all seriousness though I don't understand, apparently habbox pay tons for their server yet they always seem to go down. I don't understand why habbox would stay with such an unreliable host, unless it's the way jin has set the forum up. I know if I managed a website that had recurring problems with a host I would demand they fix it immediately or i'd hop boats.

The problem isn't entirely down to the server. You can't wipe your bum without toiletroll. Sort out a technician.

And oh my god I seriously hope you are joking.

[beth]

i just got an error trying to get back to this page ffs hxf.

[GoldenMerc]

Its not the server that's rubbish, its the configuration that Jin's done. Was said in a thread previously :P

[Robbie]

Its not the server that's rubbish, its the configuration that Jin's done. Was said in a thread previously :P

yep, has to be. it's madness - i don't know of ANY other forum/site that can't manage their server properly. habbox is supposed to be the largest international fansite but can't keep their server stable - no wonder people are leaving and less people are signing up.

proper don't understand it.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_1zDWpx2Avig/TBrPXK-MQSI/AAAAAAAAAO4/50ppp807UEs/s1600/ostrich_head_in_ground_full.jpg

[beth]

nice bit of 9pm primetime downtime there.

[FlyingJesus]

Personally I enjoyed it

[Martin]

That was a big one haha. Its strange how the timings are so random! :(

[beth]

it's just ******* annoying and absolutely zero seems to be being done.........

[Cerys]

Loving how both habbo and habbox go down for me at the same time.

[David]

no wonder everyones jumping ship

[xxMATTGxx]

Loving how both habbo and habbox go down for me at the same time.

That's because it's owned by the same people, shhh don't tell anyone. Only one person can sort this and unfortunately I don't control them, every time we have problems I alert the person and inform them that the server is being a *****. I've been told he will look into it tomorrow when he can.

[wixard]

**** jin, let's overthrow his rule

[Chippiewill]

Can we just give up on being on a dedi now and just switch to EC2 already.. it would be so much easier.

[Recursion]

Can we just give up on being on a dedi now and just switch to EC2 already.. it would be so much easier.

Why? EC2 is so much more expensive for little to no gain for a site like Habbox, as before, it's the way the server's configured that's the issue...

[Chippiewill]

Why? EC2 is so much more expensive for little to no gain for a site like Habbox, as before, it's the way the server's configured that's the issue...
Because clearly they're too lazy to configure it properly so hopefully chucking resources at it will fix it.

[froobe]

Because clearly they're too lazy to configure it properly so hopefully chucking resources at it will fix it.

Chucking resources at an improperly configured server (and in your mind, a more expensive server too) is not only a waste of time but a waste of money too.

Throw nginx on the current server, properly configure it and I'm sure it'll most likely run perfectly.

[Chippiewill]

Chucking resources at an improperly configured server (and in your mind, a more expensive server too) is not only a waste of time but a waste of money too.

Throw nginx on the current server, properly configure it and I'm sure it'll most likely run perfectly.
I agree but Jin seems less resistive to wasting money than to spending time to configure the server properly.

[GommeInc]

I agree but Jin seems less resistive to wasting money than to spending time to configure the server properly.
How so? The last time a random sum of money was spent for no reason was that chat system a few years ago for about £100 approx. It was the last time money was burnt, then wee'd on, then flushed down the toilet... Or it may as well of been. Jin/whoever seem happy to just stick masking tap on something that is rupturing, than to spend money to get a a dedicated service to do it or actually solve the problem. I wouldn't say they are less resistant to spending money at all.

EDIT: That said, didn't they have a server which far exceeded their needs?

[Recursion]

Chucking resources at an improperly configured server (and in your mind, a more expensive server too) is not only a waste of time but a waste of money too.

Throw nginx on the current server, properly configure it and I'm sure it'll most likely run perfectly.

You don't need Nginx, HxF would run fine (even on a non-optimized) install of Apache IMO. That said, what they could do with is 1. getting rid of cPanel, 2. installing an LNMP stack and 3. getting some form of backup in place that doesn't murder the place.


How so? The last time a random sum of money was spent for no reason was that chat system a few years ago for about £100 approx. It was the last time money was burnt, then wee'd on, then flushed down the toilet... Or it may as well of been. Jin/whoever seem happy to just stick masking tap on something that is rupturing, than to spend money to get a a dedicated service to do it or actually solve the problem. I wouldn't say they are less resistant to spending money at all.

EDIT: That said, didn't they have a server which far exceeded their needs?

From what I understand, yes.

[Chippiewill]

3. getting some form of backup in place that doesn't murder the place.
I still have not quite worked out why there needs to be five minutes of downtime everynight just to backup a days worth of posts.

[Grig]

just died for a bit there

[David]

That's because it's owned by the same people, shhh don't tell anyone. Only one person can sort this and unfortunately I don't control them, every time we have problems I alert the person and inform them that the server is being a *****. I've been told he will look into it tomorrow when he can.

any word yet?

[beth]

20-30 minutes then?

http://i.imgur.com/B5wyP.png

[Grig]

OK within the last hour it's been ridiculously bad. Do we have an update when this will be fixed :P?

[Martin]

OK within the last hour it's been ridiculously bad. Do we have an update when this will be fixed :P?



I agree haha! There have been a couple of good 10-15 minute downtimes in the past hour or so and it's quite frustrating haha!

Jin's been informed so I guess all we can do is wait unfortunately. I'm sure everything will be fine soon! :D

[Recursion]

I still have not quite worked out why there needs to be five minutes of downtime everynight just to backup a days worth of posts.

I don't get it either, I can backup servers and virtualised platforms with NO downtime whilst the systems are still running, why can't Habbox backup a damned MySQL database? :S

[Tomm]

The whole setup seems a disaster. I'd hate to imagine if the person responsible actually worked for a business. Wonder how long they'd last before they were fired.

I manage a postgresql database and I have a continuous backup (i.e if it fails I can restore to within a few minutes/seconds of the failure occurring or, if I choose, any time before) using WAL (write ahead log) which runs 24/7, requires zero downtime and is quite easy to setup - you don't need to be a expert, just follow some simple instructions in the manual.


I don't get it either, I can backup servers and virtualised platforms with NO downtime whilst the systems are still running, why can't Habbox backup a damned MySQL database? :S

[scottish]

needs to get the **** sorted.

[froobe]

I don't get it either, I can backup servers and virtualised platforms with NO downtime whilst the systems are still running, why can't Habbox backup a damned MySQL database? :S


The whole setup seems a disaster. I'd hate to imagine if the person responsible actually worked for a business. Wonder how long they'd last before they were fired.

I manage a postgresql database and I have a continuous backup (i.e if it fails I can restore to within a few minutes/seconds of the failure occurring or, if I choose, any time before) using WAL (write ahead log) which runs 24/7, requires zero downtime and is quite easy to setup - you don't need to be a expert, just follow some simple instructions in the manual.

These nerd chats make me get a boner (just kidding). (Hi Tom (not you Tom Ferg), haven't spoken to you in ages).

But yeah it needs to be sorted.

[FlyingJesus]

So like we obv have people here who would be able to do us some good, would it not be a fab idea to let one of them tinker about and save us from the fiery pits of downtime? Would be nice to see what Mr Garner thinks since there are some potential fixes being stated here

[xxMATTGxx]

So like we obv have people here who would be able to do us some good, would it not be a fab idea to let one of them tinker about and save us from the fiery pits of downtime? Would be nice to see what Mr Garner thinks since there are some potential fixes being stated here

More like Mr Jin as I don't have access to get any of these problems fixed. I inform Jin quite a few times in regards of the server, so it's more like a waiting game then anything.

[FlyingJesus]

Jin is reliable in himself and trusting of his staff

Oops sorry I thought this was the "post a lie" thread

[scottish]

lmao ^

and yeh whenever jin comes back his only fix seems to be move to a new server which does absolutely nothing to help.

[Chippiewill]

seriously, where the **** is jin?

We need to get this **** sorted before he becomes unreachable for four months like he does every summer. We don't want uptime to go down the crap tube again because Jin can't poke his head around for a second and let recursion (Or one of his supposed server expert friends) loose on the server.

[Stephen]

It's stupid that jin would rather let the forum die than trust a longtime member on here

[Chippiewill]

Last christmas was an excellent example of how damaging downtime is to forum activity, I certainly wouldn't want that to happen again.

I would like to re-raise the issue that there should always be someone within 24 hours notice who can sort out the server.

[Recursion]

Last christmas was an excellent example of how damaging downtime is to forum activity, I certainly wouldn't want that to happen again.

I would like to re-raise the issue that there should always be someone within 24 hours notice who can sort out the server.

I know a fair few times where the site has just died whilst I'm trying to make a post... it just means that HxF loses out on that post because, to be honest, I can't be assed to remember (or even do it) to come back and post the content later... I'm sure that other people have this problem too so it's simple math on how many posts the forum is losing out on. As you say, last Christmas was ridiculous.

I don't want to say that whoever's managing the server is doing a crappy job, but I do think that Jin needs to place somewhat more trust in people like @xxMATTGxx (http://www.habboxforum.com/member.php?u=1020); so that perhaps the more technically minded people around here could help him fix things when **** does hit the fan.

[Chippiewill]

so that perhaps the more technically minded people around here could help him fix things when before **** does hit the fan.
Fixed, or at least I'd hope so.

[Recursion]

Fixed, or at least I'd hope so.

One step at a time, my friend :P

[GommeInc]

You'd think things would be taken more seriously considering people have invested their time and money into Habbox. It makes you wonder why people bother to donate :/

[beth]

You'd think things would be taken more seriously considering people have invested their time and money into Habbox. It makes you wonder why people bother to donate :/

this is my point here.

i know jin funds a lot of habbox off his back, but there's many of us who have donated to help the server. well, nothing is being done to fix the problems?!

i don't know if jin is coming to the end of his time funding habbox but it certainly doesn't seem that far off.

gonna be honest if the forum was hosted on a far cheaper more basic site it'd probably have less downtime.

[GommeInc]

this is my point here.

i know jin funds a lot of habbox off his back, but there's many of us who have donated to help the server. well, nothing is being done to fix the problems?!

i don't know if jin is coming to the end of his time funding habbox but it certainly doesn't seem that far off.

gonna be honest if the forum was hosted on a far cheaper more basic site it'd probably have less downtime.
Don't forget the time and effort by those who have worked on and for Habbox. It seems a wasted effort on their part.

[Stephen]

I say fire jin

[Recursion]

And it was just down again...

[scottish]

10 hours into the day and already 30 min downtime nice.

[beth]

surprised it isn't longer....

[Recursion]

surprised it isn't longer....

give it time...

[beth]

give it time...

i did just spend 5 minutes loading this post. is that enough time to give it?

[Stephen]

Everyone call 999 and ask for a fire en jin

Edited by Jordan (Forum Super Moderator): Please do not pointlessly post

[Lee]

You can reduce your loading time by messing with your settings, for example I have mine set to load 40posts per page, and my internet is normally up to it and loads in no time. If your having bad loading times loading threads decrease it to 5 (I think you can can't you :O ) instead of 10 per page and that can be a temporary fix...

[Tomm]

Aside from any server/database issues the loading time is not helped by the way the forum is currently setup / crappy vBulletin (I'm not a expert on vBulletin so I don't know who to attribute blame to for some stuff).

Firstly, static assets are being served from the same domain as the forum so it has to send cookies with every request for static files. Some of the static JS files are not minified and still have development comments left in or have whole blocks of code commented out. None of the static assets make proper use of browser caching and some are actually set up to be non-cachable by browsers (lol?) For some reason we need to load 13 individual javascript files from the same domain, would be better if these could be combined. Similar setup with the CSS, 5 stylesheets are being loaded and it would be better if these were combined if possible. The order of javascript and CSS files are wrong which may result in slower performance downloading the CSS files. Loading the default page for www.habboxforum.com (i.e what new users would see first) results in CSS being loaded of which 68% is not actually used on that page (assuming it is used on other pages, this would be fine if the stylesheets were actually cached properly). Some static assets are not being served with gzip compression despite Accept-Encoding: gzip headers being sent.

Anyway, just my quick 5 minute assessment of looking at the default page on HxF. Although this of cause does not help the situation with a wait time of nearly 1 second before the server actually even starts to transfer data to the client on index.php.


You can reduce your loading time by messing with your settings, for example I have mine set to load 40posts per page, and my internet is normally up to it and loads in no time. If your having bad loading times loading threads decrease it to 5 (I think you can can't you :O ) instead of 10 per page and that can be a temporary fix...

[Chippiewill]

In terms of static assets it's not so bad on the main site as they have image assets coming from all sorts of places (Which is going to cause so many problems once the SPDY spec starts getting finished):
davzy.com
photobucket
tinypic
mattgarner.net
habbox.com
www.habbox.com (Seriously, this doesn't help but will in the long run slow down load times)
habboxforum.com (Why are you grabbing emoticons off of hxf in the first place?)
--
However there is something to be said for having static assets being loaded off the same domain as it it's more efficient with HTTP requests, but I think once you're got more than three images on a page it makes sense to reduce the individually small cookie headers.

Also I know it seems cool to load stuff dynamically but stuff like this:
http://habbox.com/drink/9/s/Inseriousity.
is just asking for the server to die.

at above: I believe that vbulletin does some CSS dynamically so they're not entirely in control of what css is sent.

[Chippiewill]

At this point I'm fairly certain that the server's performance is due to a lousy connection. I've been doing some work on habboxwiki today, specifically the script which loads rare values off of habbox.com. When it's running on the wiki it can run off and fetch 10 values in no time at all, where as when I've been using it on my local setup grabbing just three values has been taking up to 30 seconds. The only difference is that on HabboxWiki it's grabbing it from the same server meaning the request never leaves the machine. Or for those who don't understand:
http://i.imgur.com/DAfCa.png

This is backed up by some ping tests I've just done showing that habbox has around 11% packet drop (Also 30% of the requests the time spiked) whereas google had about 2%. So it's not the webserver, not even cpanel which is causing the issue here (much to the chagrin of recursion I'm sure) and at a guess I'd say it's somewhere between the server's ethernet port and the data-centre's outward connection, it could just be the server's connection is being maxed out by the 250 odd guests (Most of which being bots mind you) that are permanently on the forum.

[Tomm]

Why the hell do you need cPanel lol? Talk about waste of resources.

Also why do you have to scrape the data via HTTP if you're on the same server. Why not just connect directly to the database that contains the rare value information? You'd only need read access (i.e select) so there would hardly be any security implications considering that data is available publically anyway?


At this point I'm fairly certain that the server's performance is due to a lousy connection. I've been doing some work on habboxwiki today, specifically the script which loads rare values off of habbox.com. When it's running on the wiki it can run off and fetch 10 values in no time at all, where as when I've been using it on my local setup grabbing just three values has been taking up to 30 seconds. The only difference is that on HabboxWiki it's grabbing it from the same server meaning the request never leaves the machine. Or for those who don't understand:
http://i.imgur.com/DAfCa.png

This is backed up by some ping tests I've just done showing that habbox has around 11% packet drop (Also 30% of the requests the time spiked) whereas google had about 2%. So it's not the webserver, not even cpanel which is causing the issue here (much to the chagrin of recursion I'm sure) and at a guess I'd say it's somewhere between the server's ethernet port and the data-centre's outward connection, it could just be the server's connection is being maxed out by the 250 odd guests (Most of which being bots mind you) that are permanently on the forum.

[Chippiewill]

Also why do you have to scrape the data via HTTP if you're on the same server. Why not just connect directly to the database that contains the rare value information? You'd only need read access (i.e select) so there would hardly be any security implications considering that data is available publically anyway?
Because the chances of me getting DB access are pretty slim and the wiki uses heavy duty caching. But yes it would be more efficient.

[Recursion]

This is the second server at the second company as far as I'm aware now, I can't see the connection being the problem at different datacenters...

Davzy.com is David's personal hosting account, hosted away from Habbox IIRC so that needs changing soon anyway.

Also, I don't despise cPanel, by all means it has it's place in client facing roles but at a place like Hx, there's simply no need (it's also extra £££, assuming it's licensed for the entire server and not virtualised at all).

[Chippiewill]

This is the second server at the second company as far as I'm aware now, I can't see the connection being the problem at different datacenters...
Maybe neither connection is good enough to handle the traffic?

[Tomm]

I don't see any reason why you would be denied DB access. All you would need is select only access to the table that has the data in, you'd not be able to access anything else or even change any values.

Also I can confirm the packet loss but I don't think it is the major factor here.



--- habboxforum.com ping statistics ---
3649 packets transmitted, 3246 received, 11% packet loss, time 3648936ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 1.783/2.941/26.681/0.722 ms



Because the chances of me getting DB access are pretty slim and the wiki uses heavy duty caching. But yes it would be more efficient.

[Chippiewill]

I don't see any reason why you would be denied DB access. All you would need is select only access to the table that has the data in, you'd not be able to access anything else or even change any values.I'll look into it if I find the time, but it's up-to Matt if I get access (Technically I could do it with just the DB structure) and for the moment at least it doesn't noticeably increase page time loads in the slightest. However if I were to do it via DB I would want to look into using mediawiki's DBAL which involves a lot of trial and error and documentation studying.


Also I can confirm the packet loss but I don't think it is the major factor here.
Although it would be slightly indicative of an overloaded connection, no?

[Recursion]

I'll look into it if I find the time, but it's up-to Matt if I get access (Technically I could do it with just the DB structure) and for the moment at least it doesn't noticeably increase page time loads in the slightest. However if I were to do it via DB I would want to look into using mediawiki's DBAL which involves a lot of trial and error and documentation studying.


Although it would be slightly indicative of an overloaded connection, no?

Not necessarily, no. It could be because of your wireless connection, bad packets, the server dropping the ICMP packets, or any number of other factors.

I find it quite.... annoying perhaps? that Jin hasn't bothered to reply even though we're almost 10 pages in.

My packet loss isn't so bad, but I didn't run for as long:


--- habboxforum.com ping statistics ---
228 packets transmitted, 224 received, 1% packet loss, time 227352ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 6.951/7.942/52.369/3.261 ms

[Chippiewill]

Not necessarily, no. It could be because of your wireless connection, bad packets, the server dropping the ICMP packets, or any number of other factors.
I averaged with a comparison of Google and Habbox, it's not my connection.[/QUOTE]


I find it quite.... annoying perhaps? that Jin hasn't bothered to reply even though we're almost 10 pages in.
I don't find it annoying that Jin hasn't bothered to reply, he's a busy guy. I find it annoying that there isn't a person around who can fix the server and can do it with 24 hours notice.


My packet loss isn't so bad:


--- habboxforum.com ping statistics ---
228 packets transmitted, 224 received, 1% packet loss, time 227352ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 6.951/7.942/52.369/3.261 ms

Might have been the time you were doing it or w.e.