HTML
--
Questions
--
Followers
Top Experts
Dedicated server should be fast fast, but images very slow to load
Hi, everyone,
The description of this problem is a little long, but it's really just one problem.
I have a dedicated server running Apache 2.2.3 on Red Hat. I noticed that on the main site that the server runs, FacialSurgery.com, some images are very late to load on many pages -- sometimes taking up to ten seconds to load, sometimes not loading at all.
For example, if you go to a before-and-after page, such as this:
http://www.facialsurgery.com/BAPg1qnd2jqh1_psfd_nl08_hmc3.html
there are a bunch of little thumbnails toward the bottom of the page. Usually, some of those thumbnails might take up to 10 seconds to load, or they don't load at all. You can browse to other patients to see the same thing happen.
Then, on most of the intra-op pages, such as:
http://www.facialsurgery.com/ClkoffTPgt3_2011_01_02mh.html
(caution: there may be a tiny bit of blood pictured on some of the intra-op pages)
...usually a couple of the pictures just won't load, or they take *many seconds to load.
I never remember that being a problem from when I designed the site. I called some friends in other cities to see if they were seeing the same thing, and they were.
The httpd.conf that is *currently running the site is now stripped-down. I took out the other VirtualHost's, made FacialSurgery.com NOT a virtual host, cut down the log levels, etc. Here is a link to the current httpd.conf:
http://www.facialsurgery.com/httpd.txt
I know I must be loading a bunch of modules that I don't need, but as I mentioned, I haven't had this problem forever. Modules that I don't need are being loaded probably because I was too lazy to find out just what they do and remove them if I didn't need them. I'm no expert in Apache -- I just read a lot.
The site needs to be updated, of course -- the html is ponderous and doesn't completely validate, though it's not bad. Although the pages look like static .html files, the URLs get rewritten and call perl programs with parameters taken from the static-appearing URLs, and the html is then generated on the fly. But that should still all happen very quickly. I don't know why it should take forever to get some .jpgs to the user's browser.
Here's a test page I made:
http://www.facialsurgery.com/images.html
In most browsers, some of the little pics on the test page don't load, or they take forever. When I load this page and run "tail -f" on rewrite.log, nothing bad happens. Just: not all of the .jpgs are rewritten at first, and then, ten seconds after trying to load the page I see the last three images appear in the browser window, and there they are in rewrite.log, too. No indication of why they were so late to load.
Okay, so things are clunky. Still, there's a Red Hat physical (non-virtual) server doing nothing at all but serving this one site, and seems to me it should be waaaaaay faster.
I've browsed around to all the "10 ways to speed up your site" pages. I haven't yet contacted tech support at my server farm to see if there might be a problem with the server's connection to the Internet pipes.
Running "free -m" shows that I've got 4 gig, and almost all of it is free.
When I run "top", my load average is 0.15, 0.23, 0.25, and cpu is 99.1%id.
If I try to download a large file to my server, it runs at about 11M/s.
I'm dying to get some suggestions of how to make all the images on these pages blit immediately into place. Seems like it should be possible!
Thanks for any assistance.
--Steve D.
The description of this problem is a little long, but it's really just one problem.
I have a dedicated server running Apache 2.2.3 on Red Hat. I noticed that on the main site that the server runs, FacialSurgery.com, some images are very late to load on many pages -- sometimes taking up to ten seconds to load, sometimes not loading at all.
For example, if you go to a before-and-after page, such as this:
http://www.facialsurgery.com/BAPg1qnd2jqh1_psfd_nl08_hmc3.html
there are a bunch of little thumbnails toward the bottom of the page. Usually, some of those thumbnails might take up to 10 seconds to load, or they don't load at all. You can browse to other patients to see the same thing happen.
Then, on most of the intra-op pages, such as:
http://www.facialsurgery.com/ClkoffTPgt3_2011_01_02mh.html
(caution: there may be a tiny bit of blood pictured on some of the intra-op pages)
...usually a couple of the pictures just won't load, or they take *many seconds to load.
I never remember that being a problem from when I designed the site. I called some friends in other cities to see if they were seeing the same thing, and they were.
The httpd.conf that is *currently running the site is now stripped-down. I took out the other VirtualHost's, made FacialSurgery.com NOT a virtual host, cut down the log levels, etc. Here is a link to the current httpd.conf:
http://www.facialsurgery.com/httpd.txt
I know I must be loading a bunch of modules that I don't need, but as I mentioned, I haven't had this problem forever. Modules that I don't need are being loaded probably because I was too lazy to find out just what they do and remove them if I didn't need them. I'm no expert in Apache -- I just read a lot.
The site needs to be updated, of course -- the html is ponderous and doesn't completely validate, though it's not bad. Although the pages look like static .html files, the URLs get rewritten and call perl programs with parameters taken from the static-appearing URLs, and the html is then generated on the fly. But that should still all happen very quickly. I don't know why it should take forever to get some .jpgs to the user's browser.
Here's a test page I made:
http://www.facialsurgery.com/images.html
In most browsers, some of the little pics on the test page don't load, or they take forever. When I load this page and run "tail -f" on rewrite.log, nothing bad happens. Just: not all of the .jpgs are rewritten at first, and then, ten seconds after trying to load the page I see the last three images appear in the browser window, and there they are in rewrite.log, too. No indication of why they were so late to load.
Okay, so things are clunky. Still, there's a Red Hat physical (non-virtual) server doing nothing at all but serving this one site, and seems to me it should be waaaaaay faster.
I've browsed around to all the "10 ways to speed up your site" pages. I haven't yet contacted tech support at my server farm to see if there might be a problem with the server's connection to the Internet pipes.
Running "free -m" shows that I've got 4 gig, and almost all of it is free.
When I run "top", my load average is 0.15, 0.23, 0.25, and cpu is 99.1%id.
If I try to download a large file to my server, it runs at about 11M/s.
I'm dying to get some suggestions of how to make all the images on these pages blit immediately into place. Seems like it should be possible!
Thanks for any assistance.
--Steve D.
Zero AI Policy
We believe in human intelligence. Our moderation policy strictly prohibits the use of LLM content in our Q&A threads.
SOLUTION
membership
Log in or create a free account to see answer.
Signing up is free and takes 30 seconds. No credit card required.
Hi, FishMonger,
Thanks for helping. You don't want to see the perl code -- they're spaghetti. But they take less than 0.1 second to complete.
And, at least on my systems, even images.html, where no perl is exectued, fails to deliver all the images without a big delay.
--Steve
Thanks for helping. You don't want to see the perl code -- they're spaghetti. But they take less than 0.1 second to complete.
And, at least on my systems, even images.html, where no perl is exectued, fails to deliver all the images without a big delay.
--Steve
More: let's say I try to load:
http://www.facialsurgery.com/images.html
when I "tail -f" the access log, I see that, when a couple images show up very late, around 15 seconds after the rest of the page loads, those images only appear in the access.log exactly at the time they appear, with a date stamp 15 seconds after the date stamp of the other 30 images, which show up in the access.log instantaneously.
So does my server only receive the request from the browser late? Or does the server receive all of the image requests immediately, and only "processes" the late photos later? Is there a way to tell?
And why should the problem be the same for many different browsers? And for the same few photos each time? There doesn't seem to be any problem with the photos as they exist in their directories.
More yet: I created another test file:
http://www.facialsurgery.com/images_b.html
In images.html, it's often jpgs number 3, 4, and 5 that show up late. So in images_b.html, I moved those jpgs to the bottom of the page. And now its the 4th, 5th, and 6th images that load very late, and the images at the bottom of the page load fine. And it happens the same in Chrome and Safari.
Something very fishy is happening.
/SD
http://www.facialsurgery.com/images.html
when I "tail -f" the access log, I see that, when a couple images show up very late, around 15 seconds after the rest of the page loads, those images only appear in the access.log exactly at the time they appear, with a date stamp 15 seconds after the date stamp of the other 30 images, which show up in the access.log instantaneously.
So does my server only receive the request from the browser late? Or does the server receive all of the image requests immediately, and only "processes" the late photos later? Is there a way to tell?
And why should the problem be the same for many different browsers? And for the same few photos each time? There doesn't seem to be any problem with the photos as they exist in their directories.
More yet: I created another test file:
http://www.facialsurgery.com/images_b.html
In images.html, it's often jpgs number 3, 4, and 5 that show up late. So in images_b.html, I moved those jpgs to the bottom of the page. And now its the 4th, 5th, and 6th images that load very late, and the images at the bottom of the page load fine. And it happens the same in Chrome and Safari.
Something very fishy is happening.
/SD
SOLUTION
membership
Log in or create a free account to see answer.
Signing up is free and takes 30 seconds. No credit card required.
Hi,
Sorry for the delay. Still having no luck. The server farm doesn't see a problem, maybe because they are there!
Here are a couple of traceroutes to the site in question. Can anyone help me interpret them? "peer1" is the name of the server farm company. They are in Fremont, CA. (by the way, I have always been verrrry happy with their tech support)
---------------------
This from Des Moines, IA:
s-s-computer:~ paul$ traceroute facialsurgery.com
traceroute to facialsurgery.com (216.65.63.184), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets
1 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 1.159 ms 0.525 ms 0.526 ms
2 * 172.30.71.81 (172.30.71.81) 6.437 ms 8.064 ms
3 172.30.1.145 (172.30.1.145) 8.188 ms 7.409 ms 7.792 ms
4 12.249.52.13 (12.249.52.13) 7.695 ms 8.517 ms 6.515 ms
5 cr2.kc9mo.ip.att.net (12.122.150.206) 24.985 ms 26.253 ms 23.747 ms
6 cr1.dlstx.ip.att.net (12.122.28.85) 71.548 ms 54.260 ms 45.439 ms
7 12.122.212.9 (12.122.212.9) 23.925 ms 23.748 ms 23.857 ms
8 * * *
9 if-2-2.tcore2.dt8-dallas.a
10 if-8-2.tcore1.lvw-losangel
11 if-2-2.tcore2.lvw-losangel
12 if-3-2.tcore1.sqn-sanjose.
13 66.110.8.50 (66.110.8.50) 88.993 ms 88.037 ms 90.889 ms
14 * * *
15 * * *
16 vlan3.fmt6509-1.fmt.peer1.
17 * * *
18 * * *
19 * * *
20 * * *
21 * * *
22 * * *
23 * * *
24 * * *
25 * * *^C
---------------------
---------------------
This from Northern California:
1 192.168.168.1 (192.168.168.1) 0.583 ms 0.420 ms 0.362 ms
2 10.22.7.1 (10.22.7.1) 2.228 ms 2.239 ms 2.723 ms
3 10.254.6.254 (10.254.6.254) 9.395 ms 7.633 ms 6.955 ms
4 10.252.70.1 (10.252.70.1) 12.120 ms 9.502 ms 6.159 ms
5 172.20.7.153 (172.20.7.153) 11.607 ms 8.417 ms 7.274 ms
6 172.20.8.225 (172.20.8.225) 21.584 ms 24.140 ms 18.152 ms
7 172.20.8.217 (172.20.8.217) 23.514 ms 18.353 ms 16.420 ms
8 172.20.105.1 (172.20.105.1) 18.346 ms 16.329 ms 20.980 ms
9 172.20.200.254 (172.20.200.254) 18.262 ms 22.326 ms 24.385 ms
10 172.24.0.4 (172.24.0.4) 32.965 ms 19.416 ms 26.196 ms
11 xo-edge.calwisp.com (64.55.111.65) 20.028 ms 25.480 ms 25.022 ms
12 216.55.44.129 (216.55.44.129) 46.137 ms 29.933 ms 50.207 ms
13 vb1510.rar3.sanjose-ca.us.
14 * * 207.88.14.226.ptr.us.xo.ne
15 xe-1-1-0.sjc12.ip4.tinet.n
16 peer1-gw.ip4.tinet.net (77.67.70.202) 41.664 ms 36.517 ms 37.546 ms
17 10ge.ten1-1.sj-mkp2-dis-1.
18 216.187.88.174 (216.187.88.174) 32.243 ms 33.022 ms 44.545 ms
19 vlan3.fmt6509-1.fmt.peer1.
20 * * *
21 * * *
22 * * *
23 * * *
24 * * *
25 * * *
26 * * *
27 * * *
28 * * *
29 * * *
30 * * *^C
---------------------
---------------------
This from Omaha, where I am:
traceroute to facialsurgery.com (216.65.63.184), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets
1 router.belkin (192.168.2.1) 1.452 ms 1.292 ms 1.195 ms
2 10.108.128.1 (10.108.128.1) 9.741 ms 10.326 ms 8.639 ms
3 68.13.10.197 (68.13.10.197) 10.648 ms 9.812 ms 12.028 ms
4 68.13.9.245 (68.13.9.245) 10.998 ms 23.045 ms 10.879 ms
5 mtc1dsrj02-ae3.0.rd.om.cox
6 68.1.2.109 (68.1.2.109) 29.788 ms * *
7 10ge.ten1-3.dal-eqx-cor-1.
8 10ge.ten1-2.la-600w-cor-2.
9 10ge-ten1-1.la-600w-cor-1.
10 * * *
11 * * *
12 vlan3.fmt6509-1.fmt.peer1.
13 * * *
14 * * *
15 * * *
16 * * *
17 * * *
18 * * *
19 * * *
20 * * *
21 * * *
22 * * *
23 * * *
24 * * *^C
---------------------
---------------------
If anyone is familiar with WinMTR, here is the output of that program from here in Omaha. WinMTR runs many traces and compiles the results:
|-------------------------
| WinMTR statistics |
| Host - % | Sent | Recv | Best | Avrg | Wrst | Last |
|-------------------------
| 192.168.1.1 - 0 | 785 | 785 | 1 | 7 | 202 | 9 |
| 10.102.128.1 - 76 | 179 | 43 | 9 | 21 | 74 | 11 |
| 68.13.10.125 - 79 | 174 | 37 | 9 | 102 | 476 | 202 |
| 68.13.9.93 - 76 | 179 | 43 | 9 | 20 | 77 | 15 |
| mtc1dsrj02-ae3.0.rd.om.cox
| 68.1.2.109 - 89 | 159 | 18 | 26 | 38 | 66 | 66 |
| 10ge.ten1-3.dal-eqx-cor-1.
| 10ge.ten1-2.la-600w-cor-2.
| 10ge-ten1-1.la-600w-cor-1.
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| vlan3.fmt6509-1.fmt.peer1.
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|_________________________
My server farm people interpreted the above and said that my ISP, cox.net, is the problem. I guess I don't see it, but I'm not that savvy about this stuff. I'm about to send them all of the other traceroutes.
---------------------
---------------------
For comparison, I did a traceroute to a friend's server. He put my images on a page on his server, and everything loaded instantaneously:
MacbookPro:PaiGow stevendenenberg$ traceroute jjd.com
traceroute to jjd.com (24.234.165.109), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets
1 router.belkin (192.168.2.1) 1.951 ms 1.006 ms 2.681 ms
2 10.108.128.1 (10.108.128.1) 10.584 ms 9.230 ms 9.570 ms
3 68.13.10.193 (68.13.10.193) 10.102 ms * 13.581 ms
4 68.13.8.221 (68.13.8.221) 14.968 ms 12.499 ms 11.471 ms
5 mtc1dsrj01-ae4.0.rd.om.cox
6 sestdsrj01-ae1.0.rd.lv.cox
7 24-234-6-253.ptp.lvcm.net (24.234.6.253) 40.559 ms 48.540 ms 46.360 ms
8 24-234-6-246.ptp.lvcm.net (24.234.6.246) 45.552 ms
24-234-6-238.ptp.lvcm.net (24.234.6.238) 41.562 ms 42.978 ms
9 24-234-16-246.ptp.lvcm.net
24-234-16-242.ptp.lvcm.net
24-234-16-246.ptp.lvcm.net
10 jjd.com (24.234.165.109) 49.173 ms 69.560 ms 49.904 ms
---------------------
So. Question: do these traceroutes seem to indicate that the problem is at peer1, or before, or do they not indicate anything in particular?
Thanks again,
--Steve
Sorry for the delay. Still having no luck. The server farm doesn't see a problem, maybe because they are there!
Here are a couple of traceroutes to the site in question. Can anyone help me interpret them? "peer1" is the name of the server farm company. They are in Fremont, CA. (by the way, I have always been verrrry happy with their tech support)
---------------------
This from Des Moines, IA:
s-s-computer:~ paul$ traceroute facialsurgery.com
traceroute to facialsurgery.com (216.65.63.184), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets
1 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 1.159 ms 0.525 ms 0.526 ms
2 * 172.30.71.81 (172.30.71.81) 6.437 ms 8.064 ms
3 172.30.1.145 (172.30.1.145) 8.188 ms 7.409 ms 7.792 ms
4 12.249.52.13 (12.249.52.13) 7.695 ms 8.517 ms 6.515 ms
5 cr2.kc9mo.ip.att.net (12.122.150.206) 24.985 ms 26.253 ms 23.747 ms
6 cr1.dlstx.ip.att.net (12.122.28.85) 71.548 ms 54.260 ms 45.439 ms
7 12.122.212.9 (12.122.212.9) 23.925 ms 23.748 ms 23.857 ms
8 * * *
9 if-2-2.tcore2.dt8-dallas.a
10 if-8-2.tcore1.lvw-losangel
11 if-2-2.tcore2.lvw-losangel
12 if-3-2.tcore1.sqn-sanjose.
13 66.110.8.50 (66.110.8.50) 88.993 ms 88.037 ms 90.889 ms
14 * * *
15 * * *
16 vlan3.fmt6509-1.fmt.peer1.
17 * * *
18 * * *
19 * * *
20 * * *
21 * * *
22 * * *
23 * * *
24 * * *
25 * * *^C
---------------------
---------------------
This from Northern California:
1 192.168.168.1 (192.168.168.1) 0.583 ms 0.420 ms 0.362 ms
2 10.22.7.1 (10.22.7.1) 2.228 ms 2.239 ms 2.723 ms
3 10.254.6.254 (10.254.6.254) 9.395 ms 7.633 ms 6.955 ms
4 10.252.70.1 (10.252.70.1) 12.120 ms 9.502 ms 6.159 ms
5 172.20.7.153 (172.20.7.153) 11.607 ms 8.417 ms 7.274 ms
6 172.20.8.225 (172.20.8.225) 21.584 ms 24.140 ms 18.152 ms
7 172.20.8.217 (172.20.8.217) 23.514 ms 18.353 ms 16.420 ms
8 172.20.105.1 (172.20.105.1) 18.346 ms 16.329 ms 20.980 ms
9 172.20.200.254 (172.20.200.254) 18.262 ms 22.326 ms 24.385 ms
10 172.24.0.4 (172.24.0.4) 32.965 ms 19.416 ms 26.196 ms
11 xo-edge.calwisp.com (64.55.111.65) 20.028 ms 25.480 ms 25.022 ms
12 216.55.44.129 (216.55.44.129) 46.137 ms 29.933 ms 50.207 ms
13 vb1510.rar3.sanjose-ca.us.
14 * * 207.88.14.226.ptr.us.xo.ne
15 xe-1-1-0.sjc12.ip4.tinet.n
16 peer1-gw.ip4.tinet.net (77.67.70.202) 41.664 ms 36.517 ms 37.546 ms
17 10ge.ten1-1.sj-mkp2-dis-1.
18 216.187.88.174 (216.187.88.174) 32.243 ms 33.022 ms 44.545 ms
19 vlan3.fmt6509-1.fmt.peer1.
20 * * *
21 * * *
22 * * *
23 * * *
24 * * *
25 * * *
26 * * *
27 * * *
28 * * *
29 * * *
30 * * *^C
---------------------
---------------------
This from Omaha, where I am:
traceroute to facialsurgery.com (216.65.63.184), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets
1 router.belkin (192.168.2.1) 1.452 ms 1.292 ms 1.195 ms
2 10.108.128.1 (10.108.128.1) 9.741 ms 10.326 ms 8.639 ms
3 68.13.10.197 (68.13.10.197) 10.648 ms 9.812 ms 12.028 ms
4 68.13.9.245 (68.13.9.245) 10.998 ms 23.045 ms 10.879 ms
5 mtc1dsrj02-ae3.0.rd.om.cox
6 68.1.2.109 (68.1.2.109) 29.788 ms * *
7 10ge.ten1-3.dal-eqx-cor-1.
8 10ge.ten1-2.la-600w-cor-2.
9 10ge-ten1-1.la-600w-cor-1.
10 * * *
11 * * *
12 vlan3.fmt6509-1.fmt.peer1.
13 * * *
14 * * *
15 * * *
16 * * *
17 * * *
18 * * *
19 * * *
20 * * *
21 * * *
22 * * *
23 * * *
24 * * *^C
---------------------
---------------------
If anyone is familiar with WinMTR, here is the output of that program from here in Omaha. WinMTR runs many traces and compiles the results:
|-------------------------
| WinMTR statistics |
| Host - % | Sent | Recv | Best | Avrg | Wrst | Last |
|-------------------------
| 192.168.1.1 - 0 | 785 | 785 | 1 | 7 | 202 | 9 |
| 10.102.128.1 - 76 | 179 | 43 | 9 | 21 | 74 | 11 |
| 68.13.10.125 - 79 | 174 | 37 | 9 | 102 | 476 | 202 |
| 68.13.9.93 - 76 | 179 | 43 | 9 | 20 | 77 | 15 |
| mtc1dsrj02-ae3.0.rd.om.cox
| 68.1.2.109 - 89 | 159 | 18 | 26 | 38 | 66 | 66 |
| 10ge.ten1-3.dal-eqx-cor-1.
| 10ge.ten1-2.la-600w-cor-2.
| 10ge-ten1-1.la-600w-cor-1.
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| vlan3.fmt6509-1.fmt.peer1.
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| No response from host - 100 | 144 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|_________________________
My server farm people interpreted the above and said that my ISP, cox.net, is the problem. I guess I don't see it, but I'm not that savvy about this stuff. I'm about to send them all of the other traceroutes.
---------------------
---------------------
For comparison, I did a traceroute to a friend's server. He put my images on a page on his server, and everything loaded instantaneously:
MacbookPro:PaiGow stevendenenberg$ traceroute jjd.com
traceroute to jjd.com (24.234.165.109), 64 hops max, 52 byte packets
1 router.belkin (192.168.2.1) 1.951 ms 1.006 ms 2.681 ms
2 10.108.128.1 (10.108.128.1) 10.584 ms 9.230 ms 9.570 ms
3 68.13.10.193 (68.13.10.193) 10.102 ms * 13.581 ms
4 68.13.8.221 (68.13.8.221) 14.968 ms 12.499 ms 11.471 ms
5 mtc1dsrj01-ae4.0.rd.om.cox
6 sestdsrj01-ae1.0.rd.lv.cox
7 24-234-6-253.ptp.lvcm.net (24.234.6.253) 40.559 ms 48.540 ms 46.360 ms
8 24-234-6-246.ptp.lvcm.net (24.234.6.246) 45.552 ms
24-234-6-238.ptp.lvcm.net (24.234.6.238) 41.562 ms 42.978 ms
9 24-234-16-246.ptp.lvcm.net
24-234-16-242.ptp.lvcm.net
24-234-16-246.ptp.lvcm.net
10 jjd.com (24.234.165.109) 49.173 ms 69.560 ms 49.904 ms
---------------------
So. Question: do these traceroutes seem to indicate that the problem is at peer1, or before, or do they not indicate anything in particular?
Thanks again,
--Steve
EARN REWARDS FOR ASKING, ANSWERING, AND MORE.
Earn free swag for participating on the platform.
ASKER CERTIFIED SOLUTION
membership
Log in or create a free account to see answer.
Signing up is free and takes 30 seconds. No credit card required.
I'm delivering points for the attempt. My own comment is the solution because the solution was actually found by a tech support team unrelated to posters here at experts-exchange.
HTML
--
Questions
--
Followers
Top Experts
HTML (HyperText Markup Language) is the main markup language for creating web pages and other information to be displayed in a web browser, providing both the structure and content for what is sent from a web server through the use of tags. The current implementation of the HTML specification is HTML5.