digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Please Crash my HTTP server.

linuxhaxor.net — I am trying to stress test my server to see how much load it can take. I recently tried a decent amount of optimization through php-cache, mysql-cache, eaccelarator, apache optimization and so on and so forth. I wanted to generate a real-life stress scenario. If you think this is some kind of ploy to get some traffic, feel free not to click it.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • walmartconnect, on 10/11/2007, -7/+71gogogo.
    • GoatBn, on 10/11/2007, -0/+191Site is down and its only been up 6 minutes. A job well done.
      • brundlefly76, on 10/15/2007, -1/+5Someone needs to point this guy to apachebench.
    • SpikeX, on 10/11/2007, -0/+68Well, that wasn't too hard.
    • hoisen, on 10/11/2007, -1/+82"The connection has timed out"

      My work is done here.
    • pavs, on 10/11/2007, -5/+101Thanks everyone for this. No this wasn't ploy to be in the first page of Digg. Yes I did ask you NOT to click it if you think otherwise. Ok site is down, as EXPECTED and MENTIONED earlier. Ok now I gotta get my butt working on making it better.
      Flame all you want....

      Cheers,
      pavs ;)
      • NinjaBoy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+53Crashing servers is what we do here at digg ;)
        • insomniac8400, on 10/11/2007, -24/+7You have to love the slashdot effect when a large group of users from a social site can crash a server in minutes.
          • KennMac, on 10/11/2007, -3/+31Who brought Captain Obvious?
          • MasterQ, on 10/11/2007, -7/+15um... you mean the DIGG effect right?

            slashdot effect = someone threw an M80 into ur server room
            digg effect = you know that block that the building that had your server in it is on? yeah thats kinda not there anymore
      • dbr_onix, on 10/11/2007, -1/+12*Dons tin foil hat*
        Why is there no mention of this "stress-testing" on the website? If I wanted to more-or-less DDoS a website, it'd be fairly easily to register a nickname of the site's owner on Digg/Reddit/etc, and post such an entry asking people to click/refresh the page a lot - not the most effective "attack", but it'd be impossible to prevent (Since they are all valid visitors)

        Paranoia aside, if the articles are cached to static HTML files, and the images are either well compressed, or hosted by a third-party site (Flickr, or Amazon S3, for example), I'd be amazed if any server would go down - The things that take down nearly any server are - CPU usage from repeatedly run PHP scripts, that are making loads of MySQL queries each run (Most Wordpress sites go down because of that), or bandwidth usage, images are generally the largest files on a website (Unless there's videos or other downloads hosted on it, obviously), if you can offload the images to another server, it not only frees up your bandwidth, it reducues the number of hits to the webserver (Since the browser will request the image from another server, not yours), which leads me to my final reason - too many concurrent connections, if you have 100 images on a page, a single visitor to that page will cause 100 new connections from them, to retrive the images. Limiting the number of connections per-IP to ~3-5 will help a lot

        There's probably other things that will help, but none that spring to mind..
        • fak3r, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Nice post, and with hosted accounts you could put your enemy's site out for some time, and/or give them a big bill. And yeah, concurrent users are the thing - I have mine defined at the router which allowed me to get 90,000+ hits one day. No not a record, but running on a home ADSL on a homebuilt FreeBSD box, I was happy.

          In the future, images from hosted services, pre-cached pages, mysql tweaked for any dynamic pages, etc.
      • fak3r, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4oh, and I'm a BIG fan of mod_security - using that will drastically cut down on the crap your server has to deal with, esp wordpress comment spam. get rules at gotroot and you'll be much more locked down.
    • KlayBorg, on 10/11/2007, -24/+5This server has so much fail...
      Wait, I am sorry, I shall never make a joke from /b/ again, that place is ***** up.
    • z33Tec, on 10/11/2007, -2/+134I am trying to stress test my checking account. Please wire $5 to my checking account. If you think this is just a ploy to get free money, feel free not to send the money.
      • IEatHamburgers, on 10/11/2007, -0/+48Give me your name, social security number and your bank & account number and I'd be glad to assist!
      • Tricky, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Sorry, but I only conduct business if I know someone's home address. Send me a picture of you in front of your house and your address and I'll send you plenty!
    • Seidoger, on 10/11/2007, -18/+6Oh hai
      IM IN YR WEB SURVR, DOWNGRADIN UR TOOBZ, LOL!!11
      • Seidoger, on 10/11/2007, -7/+5Oh please downdiggers, where is the LOLCAT in you!
      • diggn_it, on 10/11/2007, -6/+5EATIN SOME HUMBURGZ!
    • ToddFFW, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6You can optimize the server to the brim, but without adequate bandwidth, you're SOL... Run a little mrtg and it will probably be > bandwidth available
  • jaygee, on 10/11/2007, -5/+336your site took over 25 seconds to load, think you may want to start over
    • pavs, on 10/11/2007, -3/+36so far so good. i am also checking from an external connection. It could be because there are a lot of snapshots (pictures), which could be the reason for the load time. My average load time, at this moment is 3-5 seconds. Nothing significant so far. Obviously I am expecting it to go down. I want to see how far it can go.

      pavs
      • KibibyteBrain, on 10/11/2007, -4/+73How the hell is asking digg to bring down your servers a meaningful stress test? Its something like an engineer stress testing a bridge design by simulating a nuclear attack on it.
        • mtheoryx83, on 10/11/2007, -0/+16He's not asking digg to hit it to see IF it will fail...he is wanting to find out WHEN it will fail.
        • sishgupta, on 10/11/2007, -0/+16Your analogy is too extreme imho.
          The digg effect is more like a really bad storm, the bridge should be able to handle it every single time. Bridge makers can calculate how much a bridge can handle and thankfully because it isn't a good idea to stress test a live bridge. How do you calculate what a server can take? I'd say the best way is to stress test it.
        • sacherjj, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9With the proper logging, you can figure out the weakest link that caused the bridge to fail. You just need logging that has nanosecond accuracy. Luckily it is a little easier on web servers.
        • GiggleStick, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8They kind of did that. They built all kinds of structures and stuff and then blew a nuke to see what it would do to them. They also didn't bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki very much to preserve it so they could study the effects of a nuke on a regular city (i.e. not bombed to hell already).
          • RussellDovey, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6They were also able to study the effects of a nuke on tens of thousands of civilian refugees who had fled the aforementioned, bombed to hell cities. The US almost certainly learned this technique from watching what the British did to Dresden.
          • Wartz, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Actually both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were relatively untouched compared to places like Tokyo, which was pretty much burned to the ground via incendiaries.
    • pavs, on 10/11/2007, -39/+3so far so good. i am also checking from an external connection. It could be because there are a lot of snapshots (pictures), which could be the reason for the load time. My average load time, at this moment is 3-5 seconds. Nothing significant so far. Obviously I am expecting it to go down. I want to see how far it can go.

      pavs
    • sanj0hn, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Few minutes to load on my computer (DSL connexion, Luxembourg, Europe). Not so great...
    • unusualbob, on 10/11/2007, -0/+34anyone have a mirror? oh wait.
    • coit, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6It loads?
    • lukas88, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Only took about 5-10 seconds for me. Cable line, denver CO
  • horrorpunk, on 10/11/2007, -4/+87I'm using opera on a T-1 line,

    took about 30 seconds to fully load.
    • h0lyc0w, on 10/11/2007, -21/+7SERVER DOWN.
      MIRRAAR ANYONE?
    • dorkino, on 10/11/2007, -0/+58A T1 line would probably take about 30 seconds to fully load any website these days.

      I do remember when having a T1 was considered impressive. No, not so much now, with the exception of the upload speed.
    • Tias, on 10/11/2007, -4/+10Ouch! I feel your pain, you should get DSL or something. There you'd at least get 20Mb or so.
      • dbr_onix, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4But about a 40th of that speed in upload speed. And the DSL line will have a much higher contention ratio (More people using the same lines,so it could easily be a lot slower than 20MB, where as the T1 line is likely to have very few, or no one else using it)
        A DSL line's upload speed will (in most cases) slow down the connection far more than having a ridiculous download speed will speed it up.
        But then again, the price difference between a T-1 line and a DSL one does make DSL a better option for most people..
  • MavRevMatt, on 10/11/2007, -3/+87Nice site. BTW stresstester/sitedestroyer -- http://www.gigaloader.com/
    • pavs, on 10/11/2007, -0/+39thanks. gigaloader doesn't simulate a real-life stress scenario. nor does most stresstester. If I am going to die - better die by digg ;)
      sorry about the previous double post. Mr browser acts funky with digg. Hopefully this won't be another double post......
    • RussellDovey, on 10/11/2007, -4/+15thanks. gigaloader doesn't simulate a real-life stress scenario. nor does most stresstester. If I am going to die - better die by digg ;)
      sorry about the previous double post. My browser acts funky with digg. Hopefully this won't be another double post.......
    • bitszor, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2http://openwebload.sourceforge.net/ -- Also a good utility for stress tests.

      I should create a similar program and call it "InstantDiggEffect"
  • underdog5004, on 10/11/2007, -11/+3Only took me about 3 seconds to load @ 15 diggs
  • stmiller, on 10/11/2007, -0/+22Hey pavs, what type of hardware are you running your server on? Just curious.
    • pavs, on 10/11/2007, -1/+21Hardware is nothing fancy. Not by a long shot. This is a 2 year old P4 2.6 with 750mb RAM . However ever since I optimization I had a huge improvement in performance. I want to know it's limits. Unfortunately i only had about 60 digg hits. As a matter of fact I had more traffic from stumbleupon than from digg :( http://www.linuxhaxor.net/diggthis.jpg
      pavs
      • n0comment, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2site is not responding after 1.30h - so I guess it is NOT Digg proof
  • dsn0wman, on 10/11/2007, -6/+3Here is the report from website optimization.com

    http://www.websiteoptimization.com/services/analyze/wso.php?url=http://www.linuxhaxor.net/
    • trogdoor, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Oh so ironic that that link is taking ~60 seconds to load.
      • Aythun, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4No, it isn't. That site has to query the server of the site it's evaluating. If that site is taking a while to load, so will the results.
  • SirNoobius, on 10/11/2007, -2/+429.9 secomds here
  • Lylepalooza, on 10/11/2007, -2/+247We get to break something? Dugg
    • Sic133, on 10/11/2007, -0/+57And it's done! Where is mah cookie?!!?
      • tomi, on 10/11/2007, -0/+28setcookie("cookie","Sic133",time()+3600);

        There you go. Act fast.
  • retral, on 10/11/2007, -3/+211"I am trying to stress test my server to see how much load it can take."
    Apparently.. not much.
    • mgarde, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2retral - good point - but pavs, how much did it take?
  • arctic, on 10/11/2007, -43/+7"if you think this is some kind of ploy to get some traffic, feel free not to click it."
    okay i won't. buried as lame
    • UglyBunny, on 10/11/2007, -2/+19looks like you're the one buried as lame...
  • woojoo, on 10/11/2007, -2/+52What site?
  • Onyxblaze, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3nice site btw.
  • DiggUmFrog, on 10/11/2007, -0/+97Im calling it... 10:53pm PST.
  • chrisinsocalif, on 10/11/2007, -4/+30Only if it has porn.
  • ravan46, on 10/11/2007, -38/+3Are you ***** kidding me? We are not your test subjects!!!
    • kosmoX, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9Ahem........click.
    • varmit, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5I wont do it!............BANG!
    • halleyscomet, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6The submitter wasn't calling you his / her test subject, just asking for volunteers.
  • srosebush, on 10/11/2007, -0/+68Crashed upon request.
  • kevincross, on 10/11/2007, -1/+120thanks for playing "can you digg it", try again.
  • jevidon, on 10/11/2007, -3/+56under normal circumstances if a page took this long to load I would have already lost interest in whatever content might be on the site and I would have already moved on...
    • loganisamonkey, on 10/11/2007, -4/+6What if it had copies of a Jessica Alba sex tape? I'd wait the 30 seconds.
    • Salgat, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2If a webpage takes 10 seconds or more to load, then its a fact that the majority of visitors will leave before it loads.
  • Dokument, on 10/11/2007, -7/+1Ive heard squid is the best. is that true?
    • BladeMelbourne, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4Squid is a proxy server, not a web server like Apache...

      Unless you were being sarcastic, then I apologise for replying.
  • shellwe, on 10/11/2007, -12/+2buried as lame since it was a broken link, did we already break the server?
  • Battlecry, on 10/11/2007, -4/+5Dead for me.

    Edit: Wait, there it goes... Took about 3 minutes.
    • nogami, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Doesn't matter - if the page doesn't load in less than 5 seconds it might as well be dead. I'm not going to hang around for it.
  • Puppetfunk, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2It just says the connection timed out.
  • dollars5, on 10/11/2007, -1/+37down as requested :)
  • SteveCUBE, on 10/11/2007, -6/+3I guess that failed. Won't even load.
  • saxmanb, on 10/11/2007, -9/+368Sometimes, at night, I stress test my wife to see how much of a load she can take.

    giggdy giggdy goo
    • nanoware, on 10/11/2007, -10/+4LMAO!!!!!!
    • sockpuppets, on 10/11/2007, -2/+40She prefers to be load balanced on my fat pipe when she's at my place.
    • chrisdancy, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8hee hee he said "load"
    • psyjoniz, on 10/11/2007, -7/+4best digg comment -ever- ....... +10,000
    • DolFan, on 10/11/2007, -8/+4Dugg strictly for the "Family Guy" reference. :)
    • seniorfrito, on 10/11/2007, -6/+1lol instead of saying giggdy giggdy goo, you should have said "He's Quagmire, he's Quagmire, Giggady, Giggady, Let's Have Sex!"
  • raptordrew, on 10/11/2007, -6/+2dead? 55 seconds and counting
  • amdahlj, on 10/11/2007, -3/+20You're Welcome.
  • ohLook, on 10/11/2007, -4/+13It's dead, now bury this story.
  • MalDON, on 10/11/2007, -7/+1Wow, down already. You should invest in the Grid.
  • oepapel, on 10/11/2007, -3/+10It's official, 63 diggs and it's dead.
  • chrisjlee, on 10/11/2007, -11/+3Your server sucks. Its only at 65 diggs and your server is dead.
    • h0lyc0w, on 10/11/2007, -10/+1pavs you are an idiot. Ur server is dead.
      • callmejordy265, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Lets see your guy's servers then, eh?
  • djdigital, on 10/11/2007, -4/+6It sucks.
    Down after 70 diggs.
  • KevinDupuy, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1Won't load for me...
  • dubbedout, on 10/11/2007, -10/+1It's not even loading now...buried as lame.
  • CompIsMyRx, on 10/11/2007, -1/+80DiggDoS complete!
  • Zipp425, on 10/11/2007, -6/+1Down.
  • SLYK, on 10/11/2007, -1/+67mirror?



    just kidding.
  • withincontext, on 10/11/2007, -1/+12Dead. Buried.
  • Azewaldo, on 10/11/2007, -1/+17Dude, you're dead. Mission accomplished
  • ihate2regist, on 10/11/2007, -4/+66In Soviet Russia...
    • h0lyc0w, on 11/03/2007, -1/+42Im in ur...
    • Battlecry, on 11/03/2007, -0/+45Step 1: Ask Digg to crash your server...
    • FluffyArmada, on 11/03/2007, -1/+40I for one welcome our....
    • WaterDragon, on 11/03/2007, -0/+37But will it bl...
    • nvncbl, on 11/03/2007, -0/+36Pics or it didn...
    • ZMerlin, on 10/11/2007, -0/+33It's a series of tu...
    • javierror, on 11/03/2007, -0/+35Not to be a grammar nazi, but...
    • sl9sl9, on 11/03/2007, -1/+27www.goat...
    • Valarauka, on 11/03/2007, -0/+30All your bas....
    • coldskool, on 10/11/2007, -1/+28future stupid jo....
    • 89vision, on 10/11/2007, -0/+28***** ipho...
    • Giga, on 10/11/2007, -0/+18Combo brea....
    • psykiv, on 11/03/2007, -1/+22***** THE RI...
    • gremos, on 10/11/2007, -0/+14I am bo...
    • Suplyndmnd, on 10/11/2007, -1/+15Joke is dead. Stop kicking the h.....
    • vrta, on 11/03/2007, -2/+2409 F9 11 02 9D 7...
    • chingy1788, on 11/03/2007, -0/+21This has been enhanced by Adob...
    • reyalp, on 10/11/2007, -3/+122008 RON PA....

      god you're right, that is annoying
    • JarekB, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11It's a tra....
    • TheSmiddy, on 10/11/2007, -13/+1CRAAAWWWLLLLIIIIIIINNNNGG INNN MYYY....
    • elvenseven, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2BEWBS or.....
    • nuudles, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1and my mom got scared and said you're mo...
    • yohnstoppable, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5Ellipses will interrupt this sent...
    • RussellDovey, on 10/11/2007, -5/+4* ab is away - gone, if anyone talks in the next 25 minutes as me it's bm
      being an ***** -
      HAHAHA DISREGARD THAT, I SUCK *****

      http://bash.org/?5775
    • misterjangles, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9... FTW!
    • ChronicColonic, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5That's because Bush is an idio...
    • chicagodj, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9Do a barrel...
    • Cyber_Akuma, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9But can it run lin...
    • IEatHamburgers, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5THIS IS SPAR...........................................
    • AZTriGuy, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5Dup...
    • edru, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3BREAKI....
    • davdav, on 10/11/2007, -5/+5░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░
      ░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░░░░
      ░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░
      ░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░░░
      ░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒░░▒▒
      ░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒
      ░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒
      ░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒██▒▒▒
      ░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒██▒▒▒▒▒
      ░░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒██▒▒▒▒▒▒▒
      ░░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒██▒▒▒████▒▒
      ░░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒
      ░░░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒
      ░░░░░░██▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒████
      ░░░░██░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒
      ░░██░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒
      ░░██░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒
      ░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒
      ░░░░░░░░▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒▒
      ░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░██░░░░░░░░
      ░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░██████░░░░░░
      ░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░░
    • DrummerAndrew, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4DON'T READ THIS! In 1998, two sisters were wat......
    • rrobster, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2New version of Firef......
  • aphexcoil, on 10/11/2007, -3/+11It won't load for me. I would say your stress test has failed. Good luck with your future optimizations!
    • Giga, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Stress tests to find out WHEN it fails generally don't fail, he found out the information that he wanted. That is a successful stress test.
  • mateo60, on 10/11/2007, -0/+28Dead after 82 diggs. Nice server. :P hehe
  • thechosen, on 10/11/2007, -3/+20Ah! Reverse psychology!

    *Click*
  • h0lyc0w, on 10/11/2007, -11/+3Ahem. pavs? your junk server just crashed.
  • majordannyboy, on 10/11/2007, -10/+2dead @ 1:57am EDT
  • jevidon, on 10/11/2007, -1/+21the number of diggs is irrelevant. what matters is that it appeared on the "Newly Popular" tab which the majority of Digg viewers see first. If it took 300 diggs to have made it to that page it would still have been up at 200 diggs...
    • n00854180t, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9Yeah, people acting like number of Diggs on the story == page views are hilarious.
    • Tilton53, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Exactly this site might have gotten a couple thousand hits while having a low number of diggs.
  • frostcrow, on 10/11/2007, -9/+183My grandma's website loads faster than yours and she does it the old fashion way with tubes and dump trucks and she has to come to your house to draw it, by hand, on your screen.
  • GaryS278, on 10/11/2007, -16/+6http://duggmirror.com

    heh
    • Outdoor83, on 10/11/2007, -0/+8Duggmirror didn't even get it... he/she should work on the server.
    • ZeRux, on 10/11/2007, -12/+2Duggmirror isn't relevant here as the submitter wanted to see digg effect on his website. RTFA next time.
  • Rulsky, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3OOOpppsss...we did it again

    Another server crashed by the diggers at 74 digs.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 257 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.