pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: JUNE 17th: Network Latency Issues and Broken Thumbnails (FIXED)  (Read 2722 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.



« Reply #1 on: June 17, 2014, 17:36 »
+2
Thanks Scott for the update.

« Reply #2 on: June 17, 2014, 17:45 »
0
this happened already last night about 3:00 am (germany)

« Reply #3 on: June 18, 2014, 05:54 »
0
Still broken here.  Uploaded 5 images.  After submitting, 3 had thumbs, 2 didn't.

A while later the 2 without vanished completely from all queues.  This morning the surviving 3 have also lost their thumbnails.

ethan

« Reply #4 on: June 18, 2014, 08:21 »
0
Frankly, it isn't the uploading problem that is the biggest issue, aside from that the biggest problem is the completely incompetent image reviewer problems. That problem is getting worse. I'd thought I try them out with just a few images having boycotted the entire process for eight weeks. All non-approved for an absolutely ludicrous reason and I mean ludicrous.

"Model release is required"

.......... for food images with nobody in them - just macros of food. No hand, no finger, no plate no utensils, just salad leaves and feta cheese  ;D

Unbelievable.

Just completely and totally incompetent.

EDIT - They can't even post the problem they admit to having properly, the whole place is falling apart.

« Last Edit: June 18, 2014, 08:28 by ethan »

« Reply #5 on: June 18, 2014, 08:36 »
+1
Frankly, it isn't the uploading problem that is the biggest issue, aside from that the biggest problem is the completely incompetent image reviewer problems. That problem is getting worse. I'd thought I try them out with just a few images having boycotted the entire process for eight weeks. All non-approved for an absolutely ludicrous reason and I mean ludicrous.

"Model release is required"

.......... for food images with nobody in them - just macros of food. No hand, no finger, no plate no utensils, just salad leaves and feta cheese  ;D

Unbelievable.

Just completely and totally incompetent.

I'm experiencing silly review issues as well with an entire batch being rejected. Good reason to send new material to better paying agencies first, at least until SS gets it sorted. I can't stand having my time and efforts wasted in this way!

« Reply #6 on: June 18, 2014, 08:44 »
0
Does this cause reporting delays?

Goofy

« Reply #7 on: June 18, 2014, 08:49 »
0
acceptance rate has nothing to do with network issues thus try to keep on topic here...

« Reply #8 on: June 18, 2014, 08:50 »
-4
Hi All,

We experienced some network latency issues today.  New uploads are currently working, but images uploaded earlier today may temporarily appear as broken thumbnails in your account.   Please **do not** delete those images; they should populate correctly into your account within the next 12-24 hours. 

Thank you for your patience and we sincerely apologize for any inconvenience!

Best,

Scott
VP of Content
Shutterstock

Really you are calling server sync issues "network latency issues"?

LOL

Snip

Lets multiply some actual network latency durations by a billion:

L1 cache reference                  0.5 s         One heart beat (0.5 s)
Branch mispredict                   5 s           Yawn
L2 cache reference                  7 s           Long yawn
Mutex lock/unlock                   25 s          Making a coffee
Main memory reference               100 s         Brushing your teeth
Compress 1K bytes with Zippy        50 min        One episode of a TV show (including ad breaks)
Send 2K bytes over 1 Gbps network   5.5 hr        From lunch to end of work day

Latency numbers every programmer should know

L1 cache reference ......................... 0.5 ns
Branch mispredict ............................ 5 ns
L2 cache reference ........................... 7 ns
Mutex lock/unlock ........................... 25 ns
Main memory reference ...................... 100 ns             
Compress 1K bytes with Zippy ............. 3,000 ns  =   3 s
Send 2K bytes over 1 Gbps network ....... 20,000 ns  =  20 s
SSD random read ........................ 150,000 ns  = 150 s
Read 1 MB sequentially from memory ..... 250,000 ns  = 250 s
Round trip within same datacenter ...... 500,000 ns  = 0.5 ms
Read 1 MB sequentially from SSD* ..... 1,000,000 ns  =   1 ms
Disk seek ........................... 10,000,000 ns  =  10 ms
Read 1 MB sequentially from disk .... 20,000,000 ns  =  20 ms
Send packet CA->Netherlands->CA .... 150,000,000 ns  = 150 ms

https://gist.github.com/hellerbarde/2843375

Batman

« Reply #9 on: June 18, 2014, 10:28 »
+1
acceptance rate has nothing to do with network issues thus try to keep on topic here...

Latency, sync problems, explains why a message there might have the wrong ID on the header for a minute which a couple of people turned into some conspiracy that SS is accessing member accounts. Leap of reason that faile. Does the crying ever end?

Scott came to tell us do not delete images missing thumbnails and it turns into another complaint about reviews. Stupid.

ethan

« Reply #10 on: June 18, 2014, 10:54 »
+4
acceptance rate has nothing to do with network issues thus try to keep on topic here...

Latency, sync problems, explains why a message there might have the wrong ID on the header for a minute which a couple of people turned into some conspiracy that SS is accessing member accounts. Leap of reason that faile. Does the crying ever end?

Scott came to tell us do not delete images missing thumbnails and it turns into another complaint about reviews. Stupid.

I know what you mean, but......

I added the review debacle (as far as it concerned me today) specifically as this thread was initiated by Scott Braunt, and presumably, he will come back and check on it from time to time.

The reason I wanted him to see my specific comment was that he is completely ignoring the threads over at SS discussing the review conundrums at this time. To the point where direct pleas are being posted to him directly to respond.

He has continuously failed to do so.

That was why I posted 'the off-topic' comment here, I don't normally due that sort of thing, it was borne simply out of frustration.

I hope that explains why I did it.

I wasn't trying to be 'stupid' as you put it.

« Reply #11 on: June 18, 2014, 13:41 »
+1
I see your point ethan but agree that we should keep this on topic.  Obviously if Scott is here (or on the SS boards) and there is a review thread he can respond if he pleases.  I'm sure he is aware of them.  I'm also guessing Shutterstock has a notification set up so they see (and are alerted) when new threads are started in the Shutterstock area of MicrostockGroup.  Scott or others may not be responding to the review threads (just guessing here..) because they have already given their response many times in numerous threads already and don't have anything more to add.  ...

« Reply #12 on: June 18, 2014, 13:56 »
0
Error started for me also in the last couple of days. So I switched to the web uploader.

Upload over the web yields less broken thumbnails than ftp upload.

« Reply #13 on: June 18, 2014, 16:23 »
+1
Hi All,

As of the last few hours, this issue should be largely fixed.  If you're still having problems with uploads or existing images as of 5pm Eastern U.S. time, please let us know at
submit@shutterstock.com.

------------

Ethan - I want to keep this on-topic, but I'm happy to respond in the forums as much as possible when I've got something new to add.   We don't "officially" support the forums as a Support channel (for practical reasons in terms of tracking issues, ensuring every contributor gets a response, etc.), but our team tries to be present in the forums as much as possible.  Outside of general feedback -- which is very important -- it's often the case that contributors post a specific issue that needs to be tracked back to understand what happened in the first place, what specific account or image numbers were affected, etc....   That usually happens best or most in email.
 

Best,

Scott
VP of Content
Shutterstock
« Last Edit: June 18, 2014, 17:53 by scottbraut »

« Reply #14 on: June 18, 2014, 18:45 »
-4
This problem has been occurring since at least 2007 and shutterstock is fully aware of this fact.

The thread link below in the shutterstocks bug forum is filled with missing images and thumbs caused by essentially the same problem. And yet over the last 4 years shutterstock has done nothing to resolve these server/database issues. Server sync problems continue to pop up in one form or another year after year.

How many years do you expect contributors to deal with the issues and extra work your server/database problems are causing?

For example in just one thread you have 137 pages and thousands of instances of the same glitch causing contributors extra work and lost sales.

For Missing Images, PLEASE USE THIS THREAD
http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=114196

I would like and honest answer, when do you expect to be able to resolve this problem?  Are you willing to do what it takes to put a nail in it once and for all or do you just expect us to put up with the lost productivity and sales, these server sync/database issues cause for us indefinitely?


« Reply #16 on: June 20, 2014, 11:30 »
-3
Unfortunately most people do not have experience working with databases and online applications.

They would buy your above sidestep of ongoing issues that you fail to address year after year. I do expect you to address the issues because it is not fair to contributors to let them go on indefinitely and if you are honest with yourself you know it is not right to let these issues continue.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
4 Replies
2600 Views
Last post May 21, 2008, 13:57
by Bateleur
6 Replies
2791 Views
Last post January 18, 2011, 18:45
by elvinstar
2 Replies
1499 Views
Last post August 16, 2011, 00:58
by qwerty
5 Replies
1499 Views
Last post December 18, 2011, 07:03
by StockCube
0 Replies
616 Views
Last post August 13, 2013, 10:25
by stockphoto-images.com

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors