Am I using an old script for rollover code?, Urgent, I am getting my account suspended!!! Options

[nWo Sting]

My web server suspended my account and would not tell me the specific reason. All they said was that I am using too much CPU and MEM on their shared server. They said I should upgrade to a dedicated server. The problem is the amount it costs for one month on a dedicated plan is much more that it currently costs me to host my site for an entire year. I am still well within my max storage space and max bandwidth, but I have no idea how to tell my max CPU. However they did hint that I may be using bad script by saying

"If the issue persist, you may want to upgrade all third party scripts to the latest versions and remove any script that are no longer in use."

They are really not giving me any clues as to what set it off, but the only non basic script I currently use are include codes and rollover codes. They did reactivate me but I need to fix this or they will suspend me again. I am wondering if using a different rollover code would help. Here is part of my current rollover code, you will notice the copyright 1999....

Or you can also just go to a page on my site to view the code:

http://www.realmofdarkness.net/pranks/celebpranks.htm

or

http://www.realmofdarkness.net/games/home.php


<!--
// copyright 1999 Idocs, Inc. http://www.idocs.com/tags/
// Distribute this script freely, but please keep this
// notice with the code.

var rollOverArr=new Array();
function setrollover(OverImgSrc,pageImageName)
{
if (! document.images)return;
if (pageImageName == null)
pageImageName = document.images[document.images.length-1].name;
rollOverArr[pageImageName]=new Object;
rollOverArr[pageImageName].overImg = new Image;
rollOverArr[pageImageName].overImg.src=OverImgSrc;
}

function rollover(pageImageName)
{
if (! document.images)return;
if (! rollOverArr[pageImageName])return;
if (! rollOverArr[pageImageName].outImg)
{
rollOverArr[pageImageName].outImg = new Image;
rollOverArr[pageImageName].outImg.src = document.images[pageImageName].src;
}
document.images[pageImageName].src=rollOverArr[pageImageName].overImg.src;
}

function rollout(pageImageName)
{
if (! document.images)return;
if (! rollOverArr[pageImageName])return;
document.images[pageImageName].src=rollOverArr[pageImageName].outImg.src;
}
//-->

This is just the header, then there is more stuff that goes after the rollover images....

onMouseOver = "rollover('home')"
onMouseOut = "rollout('home')"><img border="0" src="www.removed link.jpg" width="216" name="home" height="108"></a><script TYPE="text/javascript">
<!--
setrollover("http://www.removed link.gif");
//-->
</SCRIPT>

Would using a simple and shorter rollover code even matter with the whole CPU/MEM issue? I am currently with Lunarpages and have already found a better deal with Host Monster, but I don't want to transfer to them and just get suspended again. I want to hold off on upgrading to a much higher web hosting plan as long as possible. Thanks for all your help.

This post has been edited by nWo Sting: Dec 9 2007, 01:53 AM

[pandy]

No. JavaScript is client-side. It runs on the user's machine and doesn't put any load on the server. Of course, if you run, say, a webcam and let JS reload an image every second it puts strain on the server, but it isn't JS itself that does it, it's the frequent image requests. Simple rollovers are nothing like that. You don't run a forum or something like that? Do you have very high traffic?

I must say your host gives a bad impression. It's in their own interest to tell you which script that taxes the server.

[nWo Sting]

No. JavaScript is client-side. It runs on the user's machine and doesn't put any load on the server. Of course, if you run, say, a webcam and let JS reload an image every second it puts strain on the server, but it isn't JS itself that does it, it's the frequent image requests. Simple rollovers are nothing like that. You don't run a forum or something like that? Do you have very high traffic?

I must say your host gives a bad impression. It's in their own interest to tell you which script that taxes the server.

I don't have a forum, but according to my weblog stats I get over a million hits a day. But I am wondering what is considered a hit. If a page that has 10 images loads, is that considered 1 hit, or 11 hits (counting the images)??

Here is their latest response:

"Your account is still using excessive amount of memory. Hotlink protection wouldn't work out, because, I am not seeing a lot of referrers to your domain, HTTP logs.

You can upgrade to Linux Dedicated or VPS Linux Machine and it would have a bit more memory of 512 MB, dedicated to your account only.
You domain has a lot of traffic and VPS or Dedicated machine, would really be helpful."


So it looks like now they are saying that its just my site's traffic that is the problem, they did not mention any script this time. With a dedicated server do I have to do anything extra in terms of running the site? Or am I basically just paying more? Their Linux VP server is cheap (39.95/mo) http://www.lunarpages.com/virtual-private-server/ compared to the dedicated server. However 1000GB of bandwidth is not enough for me, I need at least 1500GB, and eventually 2000GB. I am wondering if 512 MB is even enough memory, but also Host Monster, the other company I was looking into said they don't look at MEM, just CPU. By reading their email about me using excessive memory, do you think that is also CPU% related as well? They did not mention it this time, and it takes them 24 hours to respond every time.

Thanks

[pandy]

I don't have a forum, but according to my weblog stats I get over a million hits a day.

That could explain it.

But I am wondering what is considered a hit. If a page that has 10 images loads, is that considered 1 hit, or 11 hits (counting the images)??

11. A hit is any request for a file. The HTML page itself, images, linked js and css, downloads, whatever you have. The term Page Views is often used meaning a page as we know it, i.e. only counting the HTML pages.

So it looks like now they are saying that its just my site's traffic that is the problem,

Which plan do you have? Are you close to or over your transfer limit?

With a dedicated server do I have to do anything extra in terms of running the site? Or am I basically just paying more?

Probably. It depends on what the plan includes though. If it says "unmanaged" you are probably expected to do it all yourself, including installing software,

However 1000GB of bandwidth is not enough for me, I need at least 1500GB, and eventually 2000GB.

Even their smallest shared plan has more, 3500 GB. Do you have an older plan with lower transfer maybe?

[Christian J]

The OP also mentioned "include codes". How are these done? Could we see a sample?

according to my weblog stats I get over a million hits a day.

Maybe your web host tries to get rid of you, even if you don't exceed their bandwidth limit? It seems odd that their server can handle the bandwidth of your files, but not the web requests (hits) for them.

I don't know what happens if your visitors have your images in their browser caches from previous visits. In that case they might cause a hit without your server actually serving any files? Sounds unlikely, but I don't know much about this.

Here is their latest response:

"...Hotlink protection wouldn't work out, because, I am not seeing a lot of referrers to your domain, HTTP logs."

I assume he means a lot of referrers from other domains. But absense of such referrers doesn't necessarily mean nobody's hotlinking to you, since the referrer header isn't mandatory and can be left out:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inline_linking
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTTP_referer

In any case I guess hotlinking should primarily increase bandwidth usage.

[pandy]

I assume he means a lot of referrers from other domains. But absense of such referrers doesn't necessarily mean nobody's hotlinking to you, since the referrer header isn't mandatory and can be left out:

But it seldome is. If there were major image hotlinking it would show.

Video and music files are tricky though. The player itelf requests the file, not the browser. Often there is no referrer header.

[nWo Sting]

So it looks like now they are saying that its just my site's traffic that is the problem,

Which plan do you have? Are you close to or over your transfer limit?

However 1000GB of bandwidth is not enough for me, I need at least 1500GB, and eventually 2000GB.

Even their smallest shared plan has more, 3500 GB. Do you have an older plan with lower transfer maybe?

I am on their 3500GB bandwidth plan. Right now I use a little over 1000GB bandwidth a month, which is why I feel that I am in no way needing to upgrade to a dedicated server. I still don't think I have enough traffic yet to crash their server like they claim I almost did. I checked into another company called Host Monster http://www.hostmonster.com/ and it looks like they have a better deal anyway. 6000GB bandwidth and 600GB storage for only $4.95/mo (2 years) or $7.95/mo (1 year). I am thinking that my current host (Lunarpages) just doesn't want to deal with high traffic websites, but I still don't see what the problem is because I use one third of the max bandwidth. I really have no idea how to tell what my CPU and MEM stats are, they do not provide any tracker for this. I wish I would have recorded the phone call I made to them on Friday. The guy basically said "It is up to you to figure out why your site is using so much CPU and MEM, and it is up to you to fix it". I have asked them several times which pages/files are the problem and that question is always ignored.

[nWo Sting]

The OP also mentioned "include codes". How are these done? Could we see a sample?

I use basic include codes for the html and php sections

<!--#include virtual="/header-3.htm" -->

and

<?php include("inc/header.php") ?>

I think you are right, they probably just don't want high traffic websites. If that is the case then I wonder why they bother providing a 3500GB bandwidth plan to start off with.

This post has been edited by nWo Sting: Dec 9 2007, 05:04 PM

[pandy]

Yeah, that could be the case. It does happen that hosts offer cheap plans with very generous transfer allotment, but they figure mosts sites won't use more than a fraction of it. Then they oversell and when some sites start to actually use what they've paid for the whole building starts to rock.

Note, I don't know anything about Lunarpages nowadays, so I don't mean to say this is true in their case. I'm just saying it is a scenario that sadly enough still happens. I do think it's odd they can't be more specific about what you are doing that makes their server wobbly though.

[Christian J]

I use basic include codes for the html and php sections

<!--#include virtual="/header-3.htm" -->

and

<?php include("inc/header.php") ?>

Seems innocent. Do the included files contain any PHP or SHTML scripts, more inclusion directives, or just static content? Do you use any other server-side scripts (for email forms, guestbooks etc)? Do you use any .htaccess files?

Does increased CPU workload affect the whole server computer? If so I wonder how the host determined that your account (virtual host?) is responsible for the increased CPU workload.

[nWo Sting]

I use basic include codes for the html and php sections

<!--#include virtual="/header-3.htm" -->

and

<?php include("inc/header.php") ?>

Seems innocent. Do the included files contain any PHP or SHTML scripts, more inclusion directives, or just static content? Do you use any other server-side scripts (for email forms, guestbooks etc)? Do you use any .htaccess files?

Does increased CPU workload affect the whole server computer? If so I wonder how the host determined that your account (virtual host?) is responsible for the increased CPU workload.

No I don't do any of that stuff you mentioned. I do use one code on my .htacess file which was given to me by Pandy.

AddHandler server-parsed shtml html htm

I needed that to get my htm include codes to work

[pandy]

How goes it? Have you heard something new from your host?

[nWo Sting]

How goes it? Have you heard something new from your host?

Thanks for asking. I was getting a million hits a day when they suspended me, but I moved images around and split up pages, etc to get it down to about 500,000 hits a day with the same exact amount of visitors. So far I have not heard from them but I it would not surprise me if they contacted me again to say that I am still over CPU and MEM quotas. I told them next time to email me first before suspending me or I will cancel the account. I didn't think they would care since they claim to have so many customers but they actually apologized and agreed they will comply. I have Hostmonster as a backup plan to transfer to because they actually tell you which pages/files are causing the high CPU problems. I just don't think I have enough traffic yet to force me into a Dedicated Server plan, but maybe I am wrong. My Alexa ranking is 110,000 if that gives you any idea of my traffic. I know someday I will probably have to upgrade, but with me only using a little over 1000GB of bandwidth a month, I think it's still too early. I like the way things are now where I create & upload content, and the hosting company does everything else. I read that a lot of these dedicated server plans make you do everything, including installing the software and I don't have much knowledge of that yet.