Record-Breaking: Most Users Online (75) on 09-18-2003 at 04:51 PM

[Monique]

Sunday was a good evening:

Most users ever online was 240 on 10-27-2003 at 02:49 AM.

 

[Integral]

Most users ever online was 275 on 10-27-2003 at 11:51 AM.

Another new record. This is getting to be a daily event. I have started a thread in general asking where people are coming from.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Originally posted by Integral
Another new record. This is getting to be a daily event. I have started a thread in general asking where people are coming from.

And another!
Most users ever online was 279 on 10-27-2003 at 08:47 PM

 

[Monique]

Greg, it seems that boom in guests is due to the indexing of the text archive in Google, right?

I just had a look at the text archive and there doesn't seem to be a link to the forum, Physics forums is not mentioned as a name for the place either.. I think this would be an important thing to consider for recruiting members rather than guests

 

[Guybrush Threepwood]

Originally posted by Greg Bernhardt
And another!
Most users ever online was 279 on 10-27-2003 at 08:47 PM

is it me or this number just keeps getting bigger

 

[Monique]

Breaking records again

Most users ever online was 326 on 11-17-2003 at 09:15 PM GMT+1

 

[Monique]

Holy cow! 50 members at a time, that is a record!

There are currently 50 members and 307 guests on the boards. | Most users ever online was 357 on 11-17-2003 at 09:52 PM GMT+1

 

[Mr. Robin Parsons]

Place is gettin "big an busy"..."how far can she go before she blows Captain ****?"



P.s.ssst for your (dirty) mind it's 'Kirk' = ****

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Most users ever online was 382 on 11-17-2003 at 09:16 PM.

 

[Shadow]

I kinda miss the old PF. Used to be more like acommunity. Now its kind of like one of those big time websites which is good but I must say I miss PF version 2 where traffic wasnt so high. It was homey-ish and people had friends there. Now its completely different . oh well i suppose all things change right?

 

[Monique]

Originally posted by Shadow
I kinda miss the old PF. Used to be more like acommunity. Now its kind of like one of those big time websites which is good but I must say I miss PF version 2 where traffic wasnt so high. It was homey-ish and people had friends there. Now its completely different . oh well i suppose all things change right?

I don't feel the spirit has changed Shadow, and you are always welcome to stop by at the Biology niche :)

To report the most members I have ever seen online at the same time:
There are currently 60 members and 242 guests on the boards. | Most users ever online was 385 on 12-02-2003 at 11:09 PM.

60 members!

now just wait until we break the 400 barrier :)

 

[Nereid]

whatever happened to the Friday webchats (or whatever they were called)?

BTW, I followed a link re lifegazer, and got a page which looks quite different in the tone of the discussion from what I see here in PF3. Of course that may just be an artifact of the selection, but how was it different back in PF2? in PF??

 

[The_Professional]

I actually learned about this site through M Kaku which I first heard watching Tech Tv. He discussed his book Visions and he mentioned this site. I visited every once in a while till I finally decided to sign up.

Part of the reason I signed up is there's a lot of very knowledgeable and intelligent people here, than any other forum I've encountered. The atmosphere seems pretty laidback and there's no extremely egotistical moderators.

Now, wait till you break the 100,000 member barrier..

 

[Monique]

Originally posted by The_Professional
I actually learned about this site through M Kaku which I first heard watching Tech Tv. He discussed his book Visions and he mentioned this site. I visited every once in a while till I finally decided to sign up.

You are saying he specifically mentioned this site on Tech Tv? Thats cool :)

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Most users ever online was 428 on 12-08-2003 at 03:34 PM

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

There are currently 28 members and 664 guests on the boards. | Most users ever online was 885 on 01-22-2004 at 09:13 AM.


Good lord!

 

[Monique]

That is 04:13 PM at GMT +1 european time, where did these people come from?!

 

[FZ+]

Hmm... that is big. Are you sure this isn't a bug?

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I necro'd this post because I think how funny the first post is. Today we hit over 4700 people on PF at a time and we are poised to break the all time number of posts a day. The record is 1834 and we are at 1698.

 

[lisab]

I necro'd this post because I think how funny the first post is. Today we hit over 4700 people on PF at a time and we are poised to break the all time number of posts a day. The record is 1834 and we are at 1698.

Wow, fantastic !

 

[Born2bwire]

I necro'd this post because I think how funny the first post is. Today we hit over 4700 people on PF at a time and we are poised to break the all time number of posts a day. The record is 1834 and we are at 1698.

Haha. I remember joining a few forums back within a month or two of their creation. For a while I could read every single post that was made between visits. Boy, is that impossible now.

 

[Moonbear]

I necro'd this post because I think how funny the first post is. Today we hit over 4700 people on PF at a time and we are poised to break the all time number of posts a day. The record is 1834 and we are at 1698.

:rofl: Yeah, that's pretty hilarious getting excited about 73 members. My, how this place has grown. (And I'm giving my contribution toward the post per day record before the day is over.)

 

[Danger]

Yeah, just for Moonie's sake I'll chirp up and post here. Oh... wait... are posts here in Feedback acknowledged, as opposed to the 3 or 4 thousand that I had in GD that don't count?

 

[dE_logics]

This will all result in a server overload...nothing else.

 

[DaveC426913]

That dE_logics chap has a rather odd sense of humour, doesn't he?

At least, I assume it's a sense of humour. Maybe he just likes to post spurious comments.

 

[dE_logics]

I said that in relation to the last post of this thread -

http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-16846-postdays-0-postorder-asc-start-1675.htmlBTW physics forums does have very bad servers.

Once there came a message that the site has reached the limit of it's bandwidth usage...and at times it's very slow...close to unusable.

 

[Kurdt]

I said that in relation to the last post of this thread -

http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-16846-postdays-0-postorder-asc-start-1675.html


BTW physics forums does have very bad servers.

Once there came a message that the site has reached the limit of it's bandwidth usage...and at times it's very slow...close to unusable.

Was that cited somewhere in this thread? If not I don't really see the relevance.

 

[fluidistic]

If I'm not wrong (feel free to correct me), there's a "flaw" in the count of people connected.
For example I see "(70 members and 904 guests) ".
It means that there's 70 humans and probably a lot more among the 904 guests. But I think that there are a lot of bots in the guests. The number of people connected is thus less than 974, but there's no way to figure out the exact number or a good approximation.

 

[DaveC426913]

I said that in relation to the last post of this thread -

http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-16846-postdays-0-postorder-asc-start-1675.html

In the dictrionary next to non sequitur, there's a picture of you.

 

[Evo]

If I'm not wrong (feel free to correct me), there's a "flaw" in the count of people connected.
For example I see "(70 members and 904 guests) ".
It means that there's 70 humans and probably a lot more among the 904 guests. But I think that there are a lot of bots in the guests. The number of people connected is thus less than 974, but there's no way to figure out the exact number or a good approximation.

Greg knows. Even at times that we've hit over 3,000 online, he said there were no more than 500 bots. IIRC.

 

[fluidistic]

Greg knows. Even at times that we've hit over 3,000 online, he said there were no more than 500 bots. IIRC.

Glad to know this. Glad to know also that there was so few bots.
By the way, what does IIRC means?

 

[Evo]

Glad to know this. Glad to know also that there was so few bots.
By the way, what does IIRC means?

If I Recall Correctly

 

[fluidistic]

If I Recall Correctly

Thanks. :)

 

[dE_logics]

In the dictrionary next to non sequitur, there's a picture of you.

Ok, let's just get things straight here, if there are a million people online at a single instance, then assuming physicsforums server have enough bandwidth available, following will the consequences -

1) If physicsforums have their own servers
1.1) and its windowsed, it will result in a crash with complete data loss (property of the classic windows file systems) if PF has not taken backups.
1.2) If it's running Linux, the browsing speed will slow down terribly giving the end user a miserable experience for the day.
2) If physicsforums is hosted by a data center organization (very likely) -
2.1) Their servers crashing, but here it's completely safe, since they most probably have good baking up mechanism, being an organization.
2.2) The servers slowing down terribly resulting in consequence similar to point 1.2.
2.3) The allocated bandwidth usage expiring before hand, like it has happen before under my experience, rendering physicsforums completely useless for the time being.

Thus a lots of people online simply for setting up a record is not a good idea.

Verdict -- Before making a sequitur ensure that you understand the context.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Thus a lots of people online simply for setting up a record is not a good idea.

We certainly could not support a million people online at once! Not even close lol. But as we scale up in visitors we can scale up in power. So it's not a problem. The more the merrier.