One more thing. For those who might be wondering what the update was about, we moved this and a number of our other web sites from our own data center to the Amazon cloud.
And finally (for the moment, since I've started to feel a little scared, to say a minimum); if Parallax has a single forumista/user at least (for the sake of truth, I surely know that there are a lot of them) in each of the regions listed under On-Demand Pricing"; will Parallax have to pay at least the minimum fees, for each region and service types, depending on where accesses does come from, including web crawlers accesses?
For the first time since I've become a forum member, I hope I'm totally wrong here and now, but, only for me to access the forums, from South America, will be Parallax suposed to pay US$ 2,560.00/monthly?
Plus all the extras due to the type of upstream transaction I've do (posts, PMs, ...), during my time at the forums ?
Including my requests (clicks), for the contents to be refreshed, only to keep in touch with "perhaps" any new or updated contents?
And there are also different fees, for http and https access....
I got myself an AWS instance last year. It was free for a year or some such deal so I thought I'd try it out.
I put up a Debian instance and got a little node.js webserver on it. It worked nicely, then other things took my attention and I forgot about it.
Then, just recently 'er in doors started complaining to me that we had paid 70 Euro a month for three months for nothing. She had a point, I'd forgotten about that server and as far as I can make out it never got any hits from anywhere.
I deleted that instance. Amazon seems to be horribly expensive.
Consider yourself as a lucky man, since Finland resides at the cheaper routes column of the fares (USA, CA and EU).
Asia and Japan comes next, at a mere ~65% increase.
India, 100%.
But me and my latin neighbours, ~295%! Amazon (the river, the Rain Forest) is huge, so must be their destiny's fares too?
Unfair fares, so far. We don't live this far from Goofy Goof's home (many pun; intended but uncharged).
A roundtrip, San Diego to Rio de Janeiro and back home, will cost ~US$ 1,700.00. Expedia's best rates, American Airlines best services.
I got myself an AWS instance last year. It was free for a year or some such deal so I thought I'd try it out.
I put up a Debian instance and got a little node.js webserver on it. It worked nicely, then other things took my attention and I forgot about it.
Then, just recently 'er in doors started complaining to me that we had paid 70 Euro a month for three months for nothing. She had a point, I'd forgotten about that server and as far as I can make out it never got any hits from anywhere.
I deleted that instance. Amazon seems to be horribly expensive.
Hello!
That's strange to note, glowing valved one, I moved my site from an internal one, to an AWS image about the time the crowd started griping about not being able to see the internally hosted one. Currently it only costs me about 11 Dollars US for it. Oddly enough it does get some hits, mostly the dingbats who are trying to down it using the silly kids stuff routines. all of you know of those, the kind that would only work on IIS as it happens, and my setup is that of the one they spun up themselves basing it on (YUCK!!!) Fedora.
If you want to try again, they maintain a datacenter which is European based as it happens. (I think.)
The AWS CDN is not cheap but it would improve the customer experience for all of our public-facing web sites. The reason we are in AWS has everything to do with scaling - both staff and hardware. It's a lot less expensive to deploy and maintain systems in the cloud when you have a small IT staff. We also avoid those conversations around spending tens of thousands of dollars on hardware refreshes for capacity we will probably never use but have to have - just in case.
Thanks Phil. The issue is affecting this site and the Learn site. I have verified that both sites are taking traffic at reasonable levels. I am also not finding the usual error codes one would expect to see in the logs when this happens (502 or 503). Essentially, nothing appears to be wrong within the virtual private cloud. Time to reach out to Amazon support to see what they can tell me from their vantage.
Thanks Phil. The issue is affecting this site and the Learn site. I have verified that both sites are taking traffic at reasonable levels. I am also not finding the usual error codes one would expect to see in the logs when this happens (502 or 503). Essentially, nothing appears to be wrong within the virtual private cloud. Time to reach out to Amazon support to see what they can tell me from their vantage.
Could this be a classic case of the BIG print giveth, and the fine print taketh away ?
It all 'looks ok' in overview, and maybe averages even meet some spec, but in order to hit the averages for everyone, someone has to take a slow link.... ?
The fine print says that this should flat-out work. It stopped working reliably on Sunday when we removed the public IP addresses from the back-end web servers. We are looking at how the web servers are redirecting traffic from HTTP to HTTPS. There is a possible endless loop condition between the load balancer and the web servers. It appears to be triggered by a new HTTP session that is then rerouted to HTTPS.
The certificate indicates that the page content was delivered in an encrypted format. Your browser should also warn you about insecure content, such as css or javascript files that are referenced with the HTTP protocol. Some browsers give you the option to override the warning for specific sites but it's not advisable to use that feature. If you're not sure, post a URL and I'll take a look.
Well in my case in Chrome recent on Linux Slackware64 14.2 I have this discussion up, and I see a blick where the page is trying to load unauthenticated scripts. That wasn't there this morning when I commented on the valve's post about his discovery concerning an ARM based neural network study. And this one regarding a problem with a page load.
Jim that's the one where he griped about responsiveness, and I mentioned that I had arranged it by having a rock move in front of the windows who powered the datacenter. And he confirmed what I know about the Arctic and the people from Scandinavia who live there, that's you glowing one, he said:
Heater said, "Ha! That's odd. My end of the link works fine in the dark. Which it is most of the time for four months of the year!"
Perhaps it is time for the datacenter to be given a good shaking? It implies that what we write our messages to and buy stuff from is on a very big Etch-a-Sketch.
The first link is to the jQuery javascript library. That should be loaded with HTTPS. Chrome complains about it with a warning icon on the right side of the address bar. Firefox appears to more forgiving of this issue.
The next three are hyperlinks that do not affect page security. The last one is a reference to a schema definition that works like XSD files - like a lookup table.
So it turns out the page does not need that at all. Because it's already loaded !
Wow, you are right, if I put my spectacles on I can see a teeny weeny little red flag about it on the right hand side of the URL bar. Seriously, it's tiny on a Surface Pro resolution machine. Who would notice that?
The next three are hyperlinks that do not affect page security.
Comments
Hi Jim Ewald
When you've stated that Parallax now uses Amazon servers to host the forums, among other of its web sites, was you talking about Amazon AWS?
If my above statement holds true (Amazon AWS), does the following link actualy applies to calculate Amazon's services bills?
https://aws.amazon.com/cloudfront/pricing/?nc1=h_ls
And finally (for the moment, since I've started to feel a little scared, to say a minimum); if Parallax has a single forumista/user at least (for the sake of truth, I surely know that there are a lot of them) in each of the regions listed under On-Demand Pricing"; will Parallax have to pay at least the minimum fees, for each region and service types, depending on where accesses does come from, including web crawlers accesses?
For the first time since I've become a forum member, I hope I'm totally wrong here and now, but, only for me to access the forums, from South America, will be Parallax suposed to pay US$ 2,560.00/monthly?
Plus all the extras due to the type of upstream transaction I've do (posts, PMs, ...), during my time at the forums ?
Including my requests (clicks), for the contents to be refreshed, only to keep in touch with "perhaps" any new or updated contents?
And there are also different fees, for http and https access....
Will all those fees be summed together? -_-
Gott in Himmel!!!
Henrique
I put up a Debian instance and got a little node.js webserver on it. It worked nicely, then other things took my attention and I forgot about it.
Then, just recently 'er in doors started complaining to me that we had paid 70 Euro a month for three months for nothing. She had a point, I'd forgotten about that server and as far as I can make out it never got any hits from anywhere.
I deleted that instance. Amazon seems to be horribly expensive.
Asia and Japan comes next, at a mere ~65% increase.
India, 100%.
But me and my latin neighbours, ~295%! Amazon (the river, the Rain Forest) is huge, so must be their destiny's fares too?
Unfair fares, so far. We don't live this far from Goofy Goof's home (many pun; intended but uncharged).
A roundtrip, San Diego to Rio de Janeiro and back home, will cost ~US$ 1,700.00. Expedia's best rates, American Airlines best services.
Hello!
That's strange to note, glowing valved one, I moved my site from an internal one, to an AWS image about the time the crowd started griping about not being able to see the internally hosted one. Currently it only costs me about 11 Dollars US for it. Oddly enough it does get some hits, mostly the dingbats who are trying to down it using the silly kids stuff routines. all of you know of those, the kind that would only work on IIS as it happens, and my setup is that of the one they spun up themselves basing it on (YUCK!!!) Fedora.
If you want to try again, they maintain a datacenter which is European based as it happens. (I think.)
I did not want to spend the time looking into it. I just killed it off.
As for the data center in Europe vs anywhere else. That makes no sense to me. A "cloud" thing should be the same anywhere. Else it ain't the cloud.
Thing is, I can host exactly that same "mostly do nothing" server on my PC right here at home. For free!
Meanwhile, for real business things we have Google cloud instances, in the US and Europe, that are much cheaper to run.
That? I arranged that. A rock was moved in front of the windows that the datacenter uses for its power.
-Phil
Once a connection is established, response is fine. But if the connection gets dropped due to inactivity, it takes a long time to reestablish.
-Phil
Yes, sometimes 'connecting...' is there for a long time..., but sometimes it is faster..
Could this be a classic case of the BIG print giveth, and the fine print taketh away ?
It all 'looks ok' in overview, and maybe averages even meet some spec, but in order to hit the averages for everyone, someone has to take a slow link.... ?
-Phil
Yep, still links to HTTP resources in there. No security at all.
And still a link to Facebook. Why does Facebook need to know I'm visiting here?
That is a betrayal of trust.
Tom
If I look at the source code of this page I see:
<script type="text/javascript" src="http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.7.2/jquery.min.js"></script>
...
<li><a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.parallax.com">Store</a></li>
<li><a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://learn.parallax.com">Learn</a></li>
<li><a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://obex.parallax.com">OBEX</a></li>
...
<span class="Breadcrumbs" itemscope itemtype="http://data-vocabulary.org/Breadcrumb">
My chrome is not warning about any of those.
Neither is Firefox or Edge.
All on Win 10.
I have never overridden any such warnings in any browser.
I have no idea who data-vocabulary.org is but they don't need to know I'm visiting here either. Another betrayal of trust.
Jim that's the one where he griped about responsiveness, and I mentioned that I had arranged it by having a rock move in front of the windows who powered the datacenter. And he confirmed what I know about the Arctic and the people from Scandinavia who live there, that's you glowing one, he said:
Heater said, "Ha! That's odd. My end of the link works fine in the dark. Which it is most of the time for four months of the year!"
Perhaps it is time for the datacenter to be given a good shaking? It implies that what we write our messages to and buy stuff from is on a very big Etch-a-Sketch.
The next three are hyperlinks that do not affect page security. The last one is a reference to a schema definition that works like XSD files - like a lookup table.
You are rambling. We are far from the Arctic here and Finland is not in Scandinavia.
Anyway, I wonder if something bigger is going on with the net. Other sites I frequent have been troublesome this past few days. Now I read about the biggest DDOS attack in history: https://mybroadband.co.za/news/security/251127-biggest-ddos-attack-in-history-hits-github.html
This is chaos.
Turns out that if I load the page with chrome's developer open I see that http://ajax.googleapis.com/ajax/libs/jquery/1.7.2/jquery.min.js is highlighted in red and blocked: (blocked:mixed-content)
So it turns out the page does not need that at all. Because it's already loaded !
Wow, you are right, if I put my spectacles on I can see a teeny weeny little red flag about it on the right hand side of the URL bar. Seriously, it's tiny on a Surface Pro resolution machine. Who would notice that? There are those who would dispute that.
All Parallax property should be secured.