Page 3 of 3
| SimSig down, what happened? 22/12/2020 at 00:53 #135045 | |
304033
57 posts |
GeoffM in post 135038 said:not a design flaw as has been suggested by somebody. Somebody was Me. Geoff. So you have ONE server, running the site and the connections from the loader, and you still believe this isn’t a design flaw?! Please do not take this the wrong way, I am not trying to undermine, belittle or be obnoxious... I am trying to point out that this 'phone home' feature to physically check the licences when Loader is launched is flawed and your user base suffers if that server is down. Agreed, this has only been minor, not happened before, blah blah etc. However, I am just concerned that despite multiple people pointing things out, you still believe this is not a design flaw. At the end of the day, SimSig has introduced this 'phone home' feature to check the licences that did not exist previously. Therefore, the backend infrastructure needs to be able to support these checks from loader. 99.6% is fabulous uptime by the way... Nevertheless, what happens next time? What happens if said server has a hardware failure or the host VM fails etc. or is hacked? - You can see where I’m going. Again, I appreciate what has been done over the years, however again it feels like user(s) (you’re paying customers!) are not being listened too when they have a genuine concern/comment. If I were the 'boss', I would have something like the following setup: # Server 1 - Website Server A > Location in Europe # Server 2 - Website Server B > Location in US - FQDN loadbalanced on SimSig.co.uk & both running on Active/Active basis. Server 3 - Licence Server A > Location in Europe Server 4 - Licence Server B > Location in US - FQDN loadbalanced on (eg) licence.SimSig.co.uk & both running on Active/Active basis. If either server then failed or restarted etc., then the other would pick up the slack. The 'issue' with the site and loader is then gone. GeoffM in post 135038 said: The SimSig model is not a rental model where you pay subscription fees and never "own" the product. If we want guaranteed 24x7, 99.99% uptime kind of reliability then we would have to change to that subscription kind of model.Rental Model Okay, but the loader 'check' physically stops the user using a paid for product if the service is down. Suggestions from others to disable internet access doesn’t cut it... There has to be another solution. Grace licence period from last check? Or see my suggestion above? Uptime But this is where the disconnect comes. You introduced this 'phone home' feature. You need to 'support' this feature... The existing model of licences works fine and doesn’t need to be amended. The buck stops with you ultimately. It’s your decision on how the software works. I would urge you to re-think how this Loader Licence lookup is handled. Finally, I would just like to point out that the 'comments' by your staff/moderators/whoever (I don’t know who those people are, they don’t show up as SimSig Staff/Admins/Moderators to me) didn’t do anything (to me) to alleviate the situation... I felt they fanned the flames even more by disagreeing with valid comments from others and myself. In addition, I don’t need to know about what you do for a living?! I don’t include in the post that I work for the number 1 Relational Database Software vendor in the world and that our CTO owns an Island in Hawaii, has been in Iron Man films and hates Jeff Bezos. It is just irrelevant. Once again, please take this as constructive criticism, not a personal attack. Geoff, your operating a business here and you are paying customers have a right to be heard if a feature does not work as intended. Thanks, N. Log in to reply The following user said thank you: Dick |
| SimSig down, what happened? 22/12/2020 at 09:17 #135047 | |
Dick
387 posts |
GeoffM in post 135038 said:The other 'somebody' was me, and I'm afraid I still believe it to be a design flaw for the reasons I posted in message https://www.SimSig.co.uk/Forum/PostView/134951 Last edited: 22/12/2020 at 09:18 by Dick Reason: None given Log in to reply |
| SimSig down, what happened? 22/12/2020 at 09:42 #135048 | |
|
Albert
1315 posts |
If I understand you correctly your point was mostly about locking licenses to a computer, and Geoff strongly suggested he would be fixing that. GeoffM in post 135038 said: The second thing is to better handle the situation where the server is running, but degraded (as happened the other day). The Loader interpreted the responses as invalid (like a hacking attempt) but it could have handled it more gracefully. This is what we're working on at the moment and hope to have a new Loader out in the next few days. AJP in games Log in to reply The following user said thank you: danners430 |
| SimSig down, what happened? 22/12/2020 at 13:35 #135051 | |
|
bill_gensheet
1413 posts |
304033 in post 135045 said:Do you think anyone would have wasted their time doing all the work on dynamic licenses if the v4 license method really was working fine ? No, they'd do more new sims, which is both more fun and more sales. 304033 in post 135045 said:
Reality check time ! There are no staff. Despite the outward professionality, SimSig is still a hobbyist business with 1 x part time Geoff, a handful of sim writers who all have normal day jobs, a few timetable writers who do it for free (includes me) and a number of volunteer sim / timetable testers and forum moderators many of whom are the also sim / timetable authors. Financially this is a closed system, so I'd question how much more would people be happy to pay to cover 3 extra servers just for a final 0.4% of uptime ? Indeed how worthwhile for the final <0.2% as SimSig has eliminated the added down time due to Geoff being asleep. Could a free page elsewhere be set up to show 'Sorry but you are seeing this page because the main server is unavailable' ? Or are the redirection controls you mention unavailable onto basic webspace ? Bill Log in to reply The following users said thank you: jc92, danners430, markt, Mikhail |
| SimSig down, what happened? 22/12/2020 at 22:08 #135062 | |
|
304033
57 posts |
[/quote][/quote]bill_gensheet in post 135051 said:304033 in post 135045 said:I was referring to the V5 Loader Licence lookup actually Bill, not the old v4 style.Do you think anyone would have wasted their time doing all the work on dynamic licenses if the v4 license method really was working fine ? What I meant was, the licence 'check' facility works, with its flaw, and doesnt need to be changed to a subscription model as Geoff suggested. ------------------- Moving on, I see Geoff has deleted his knee jerk, quote laden post back to me some time in the UK early hours, I did see and read it before he changed his mind and removed it, but wasnt in a position to respond. All I would say in response to that is: Geoff: ---------------- It would be helpful before you respond is to read the entire thread. You would then realise the context. Also, i've noticed a decline in the way your responses are worded over the last year (at least) to questions posted by your customers. Again, its your business, your rules. I suppose thats why your 'inner circle' behave the way that they do? ---------------- Finally, at least two people have given feedback on the issue, only to be jumped upon by the 'inner circle' of sycophants. This isnt the first time this has happened, and wont be the last. From memory, other users have left the SimSig community because of the toxic nature of the 'inner circle', and not just plain 'users' but people who have provided input into SimSig from Timetables, Forum Support and I believe, even a Sim!. I find that rather sad, but also worrying. Its now become very clear where I stand on this, not only from Geoff's outburst but also the responses from other 'users'. I for one shall have serious thought in the future about purchasing future sims. Happy Christmas. N. Last edited: 22/12/2020 at 22:10 by 304033 Reason: None given Log in to reply The following user said thank you: Dick |
| SimSig down, what happened? 22/12/2020 at 22:53 #135065 | |
|
Stephen Fulcher
2080 posts |
I don’t see what your issue actually is. The server had an issue which has been corrected and that issue caused something with licences which some users found frustrating and resorted to forum posting about. Geoff has stated that he will make a change to remove this problem, and it is in the Mantis bug tracker to do so. Fixes of this nature historically have never taken long to provide. Equally I’m sure you wouldn’t want him to release an updated Loader that made a change to this one feature that unless the server falls over nobody would ever notice, but not subject it to some testing to make sure nothing else that actually affects people’s ability to play is broken at the same time as a result. Therefore you should be satisfied as your concern is being addressed, yet you persist in raising the same issue repetitively. At work I use some software and networking systems that are far more critical than a computer simulation for railway enthusiasts and the failure rate is significantly higher than 0.4% I’m sure there are also many people on these forums who take offence at your repetitive sycophant accusations. They don’t add anything to the debate and aren’t true in any way. Ultimately all developers and testers work as a team towards a common goal, it’s hardly surprising that they have similar opinions, and that those opinions are broadly in line with the company owner. As for people who were previously involved with SimSig no longer being so, that’s not unusual with any company, and even less so with voluntary activities. Each has their own reason for no longer being involved, and it would be inappropriate for anyone to speculate as to why in the public domain. Ps a search of this forum from its earlier years will see lots of references to an inner circle. It was nonsense back then and remains so today, and nobody who has commented in defence of SimSig in this thread was considered part of the inner circle! Last edited: 22/12/2020 at 22:55 by Stephen Fulcher Reason: None given Log in to reply The following users said thank you: jc92, danners430, kbarber, geswedey, bri2808, Coco-Banana-Man |