By posting a link to it. I cant cope with 300,000 people all looking at it at once.
See item and link at 13:49.
I haven't yet gone through the logs to see how many people actually did access it, but the bandwidth logs tell the story. Not bad for 384Mbyte of RAM eh?
I knew I should have put a donate page up...
Probably a DDOS attack...
Nothing for 13:49 on that page. Has the item been removed or superseded?
Ah! Link is at 13:59. According to the news this morning, yesterday
*was* the first day without any contribution from coal.
Maybe I should have read your post before I made my post:-)
The BBC announced that yesterday was a no coal day and I presume they posted a link to GridWatch. I was suspicious about their announcement and went to have a look and coal was indeed flatlining at 0!
First time since the industrial revolution that no electricity was generated by coal! I had my doubts but gridwatch confirmed it.
Yes. You should put a tasteful donate button on there somewhere.
It may not make a difference to your site, but IIRC the Flight Radar site has a time-out feature that cuts you off if you've been on the site for more than x minutes without activity.
Why not?
They actually do not represent a problem.
Due to the magic of a well crafted protocol (HTML), and browsers that are not totally obscene, refreshing a page that has many images is very very efficient if none of the images have changed, or if you already have the images cached (these are not the same thing always).
Basically when you ask for an image, you hand a tokenb to the website. If the token matches the image, the response is 'you have that already' and thats all.
e.g a tyupical reponse is
"GET /bitmaps/dial-PUMPED-POWER-125.png HTTP/1.1" 304 266
The 304 is a code for 'you have it alreday' and 266 bytes is all that goes back to the requester.
So its new users who cause the problem, because they all have empty caches.
All it needs is more RAM. It was showing itself totally disk- bound as it went into swap meltdown
If I had enough RAM to cache every image...on the server...
Divorce.
I don't want the witch claiming half of it.
IMHO it was a bit cheeky of them to snip the picture of 3 dials from your site and then add "BBC" to it at bottom right; c/f the way they show other sources as Reuters or Getty Images.
Deserves a stern email to them from Messrs Sue, Grabbit and Run ;)
It can be to your favourite charity if you don't need the pin money.
The bulletin I saw said the first day without fossil fuel. Do they include gas and oil in that?
Of course not. I was impressed that the BBC news item I heard was careful to be explicit that they were talking about coal fired electricity generation.
I think we still have a couple of blast furnaces, not to mention a few blacksmiths with coke forges. Perhaps we import coke now, though.
I trust you pointed out the reliability of nuclear and CCGT, and that the variability of renewables, all the way down to zero, was a major weakness and their Achilles heel.
They did mention coal specifically, but then fossil fuel.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required