Sebelius: "The Website Has Never Crashed."

demongoat
yeah but when was the last time MSN was hammered by millions of people all at once? msn is more than one site, i wouldn't expect a huge corp like microsoft to design crappy server clusters.
also ATS has never been hammered by millions of people either.
load might be an issue too, but apache is one of the most robust webservers out there it's why a lot of websites use it and it has the most market share.

No apache is the common because it is free. The server that is, i.e the executable called "apache.exe", it is a part of Unix and Linux; Linux is a free operating system. And, all those people are paying to use free software.

The last time MSN was hammered by millions: prolly already today...several times. And I expect nothing less than what Microsoft does (in this regard) from the government.

IIS is okay but you need to lock it down, it has so much stuff open in comparison to apache. you really need to go look apache up, you really don't seem to know much about it anymore.
when did you use it? 1997?

No actually around 2000, but that's not the point. Point is I determined then that Apache was inadequate, left it in the dust and never looked back. Lock down IIS??? what do you think you are talking about? IIS is plenty secure, as secure as Apache. Or maybe you are just blowing smoke.

Tell me...does Apache support [I]any[/I] high level languages yet?

The point I was trying to make was that the issues were not caused by the traffic, but rather by the basic architecture of the web-application. The system obviously was not set up to handle the kind of traffic it saw, causing the load to become unbalanced, and thus the so-called "crash". And that, IS on the Engineers that built it; Good work guys!

reply to post by ShadeWolf


Google can do it, but so can many of the video game developers that make massively popular video games. They have bugs and glitches but the software for video games is much more complex than an average website. The ACA is an average website but is stifled by government red tape and the usual unproductive inefficiencies.

you act like the internet has never had a massively popular piece of software hit the internet before..... America leads the world in this field.

ShadeWolf

VoidHawk
Look at the absolutely HUMUNGUS bandwidth of youtube!!!!
Tens of millions of people all downloading HUGE video files, and all at the same time!
Compare that to the few bytes of text each person downloads from the webpages of the gov site!

Kinda makes them look stoopid if they cant cope with that.

Youtube is owned by Google, who have the most massive server farms in the world. The government may have some powerful computers, but they don't have a network as vast as Google, and they're likely not tapping directly into ISP backbones to do it. For a more understandable analogy...bandwidth is easily comparable to water flow. Until last year, I was on a 7MBpS connection, let's equate that to a garden hose. Then I upgraded to 80MBpS over fibre, call that a firehose. The average speed of fibre backbones in the US is more like one of these, running 2400MBpS or so. And that's not even close to the max speed you can pull from fibre optics, last year a NEX/Corning team produced a 12-core line capable of carrying 1.05 petabytes per second. That's 1,050,000,000MBpS.

But those on the gov site are not downloading MASSIVE video files, they are simply exchanging a few bytes of text. What about Amazon etc ? They have enormous databases handling millions of customers per day, spewing up pictures and ads per every page!
Youre analogies are not realy relevant with such a small exchange of info as they'd see on the gov site.