script showdown; TTT vs. UCJ

[Pharrell]

which one is better to grow a site really quickly?

[JamesK]

what about TM3?

[Juicy D. Links]

its not the script thats grows the sites it the guy running the site

[JamesK]

Originally posted by juicylinks
its not the script thats grows the sites it the guy running the site

yes

[Pharrell]

Originally posted by juicylinks
its not the script thats grows the sites it the guy running the site

so you could grow a site with no trade scipt?

[FlyingIguana]

Originally posted by Pharrell





so you could grow a site with no trade scipt?

sure you could, but it would eat more of your time.

[DarkJedi]

Originally posted by Pharrell

so you could grow a site with no trade scipt?

thats how SleazyDream does it

[blazin]

I have tried TTT and found that it ground the mysql server to a halt on a virtual account. My host sorted it out but I lost half my traffic.

I now use arrowtrader instead on that site, which is written in C.

[strobi]

Originally posted by blazin
I have tried TTT and found that it ground the mysql server to a halt on a virtual account. My host sorted it out but I lost half my traffic.

I now use arrowtrader instead on that site, which is written in C.

TTT is more than fast enough if you are under 100K.

but to answer your question ->UCJ is FAR better... you get what you pay for!

[Pharrell]

Originally posted by strobi


TTT is more than fast enough if you are under 100K.

but to answer your question ->UCJ is FAR better... you get what you pay for!

they can both be had for free...

[candyflip]

CJOverkill whips the pants off of TTT.

http://cjoverkill.icefire.org

[KMR Stitch]

bump

[strobi]

Originally posted by Pharrell




they can both be had for free...

Well if you make 1000+ posts or you steal the code yeah but otherwise it's 600$

[Pharrell]

Originally posted by strobi


Well if you make 1000+ posts or you steal the code yeah but otherwise it's 600$

only need 100 posts

[Pharrell]

Originally posted by candyflip
CJOverkill whips the pants off of TTT.

http://cjoverkill.icefire.org

LOL and then choker will come cut my balls off..

[candyflip]

Originally posted by Pharrell






LOL and then choker will come cut my balls off..

Hasn't happened yet so far. He's full of hot air.

He'll just offer you free traffic if you stop using it...might be a nice way to get your site off the ground

[roly]

Originally posted by Pharrell







only need 100 posts

yes but you have to have the banner to angelteen so it's not free really, although you can make money from that banner. good deal though.

[Choker]

Originally posted by candyflip


Hasn't happened yet so far. He's full of hot air.

He'll just offer you free traffic if you stop using it...might be a nice way to get your site off the ground

Anyone using this stolen script gets put in findtrades blacklist database. Free traffic to stop using it? Wrong answer. Show me a site you are using it on Candyfuck and watch how much hot air is in my lungs. Fuckwad

[lil2rich4u2]

Originally posted by Choker

Anyone using this stolen script gets put in findtrades blacklist database. Free traffic to stop using it? Wrong answer. Show me a site you are using it on Candyfuck and watch how much hot air is in my lungs. Fuckwad

ouch

[sandman!]

Originally posted by Pharrell
which one is better to grow a site really quickly?

Newbie

[JamesK]

Originally posted by sandman!


Newbie

[OzKaNoz]

I use Arrowtrader on a few sites.
Don't get me wrong! TTT is a great scpipt also and worked very well.

The thing about arrowtrader is it is writen in C and is super fast.
It uses a flatfile which is much faster then MySql.

I just got tired of the MySql lag with other scripts.

As far as UJC goes I really don't know much about it.

Good luck.
Oz

[Steve]

Originally posted by strobi
TTT is more than fast enough if you are under 100K

When I start a site, I want it to be bigger than 100k within a few days time. UCJ and TM3 get the job done.

[candyflip]

Originally posted by Choker

Anyone using this stolen script gets put in findtrades blacklist database. Free traffic to stop using it? Wrong answer. Show me a site you are using it on Candyfuck and watch how much hot air is in my lungs. Fuckwad

Choker's home from day care. Let the name calling begin.

There are plenty of sites using it and trading with the FindTrades database. You want to know which ones, find them for yourself.

Asshat

[Juicy D. Links]

i think this thread need this

[candyflip]

Originally posted by juicylinks
i think this thread need this

Just in the nick of time!

[Choker]

Originally posted by candyflip


Choker's home from day care. Let the name calling begin.

There are plenty of sites using it and trading with the FindTrades database. You want to know which ones, find them for yourself.

Asshat

Isn't http://www.killerpeach.com/ your site? Post some of your other sites here punk. Thought so.

[Choker]

hahahahahahaa

Your own site Candyfuck
http://bbw.killerpeach.com/
Error:
Chould not connect to database
Please check your settings cj-conf.inc.php

Yeah your stolen script works great, dumbass

[Choker]

http://www.directnic.com/whois/?query=killerpeach.com

Lick My Ass Choker is the register

hahahahahaha

Punks like you amuse me, enjoy the $20 bucks a day worth of traffic you are skimming from your stolen script fuckwad. What A joke you are.

[stocktrader23]

Is there any way this could be settled like adults?

[m4tt]

Originally posted by OzKaNoz
It uses a flatfile which is much faster then MySql.

With a traffic trading script, I highly doubt that flat file is faster than mysql. Someone prove me wrong.

Originally posted by OzKaNoz
I just got tired of the MySql lag with other scripts.

Upgrade hardware, optimize indexes. simple.

[candyflip]

Originally posted by stocktrader23
Is there any way this could be settled like adults?

Dude...come on. Choker, act like an adult? Look at how low he's having to go.

[hvidlogspusher]

Originally posted by juicylinks
its not the script thats grows the sites it the guy running the site

[Aheib]

Originally posted by m4tt

With a traffic trading script, I highly doubt that flat file is faster than mysql. Someone prove me wrong.

Sure. The first version of arrow trader used mysql as it's main database system instead of flatfiles.

During a speedtest, I loaded about 25 urls from a mysql database, and some rows with numbers.
Running this 2500 times, took 2.406 seconds.
That are 89,775,561 (89 million) queries per day.

In the second part of the speedtest, I loaded the exact same data from a flatfile.
Running this 2500 times, took 0.020 seconds.
That are 10.800.000.000 (10.8 billion) queries per day.

Quite a difference not?

[Mike-BP]

Originally posted by Choker
http://www.directnic.com/whois/?query=killerpeach.com

Lick My Ass Choker is the register

hahahahahaha

Punks like you amuse me, enjoy the $20 bucks a day worth of traffic you are skimming from your stolen script fuckwad. What A joke you are.

Report his site for false WHOIS info. GoDaddy suspends his domain if he doesn't change it soon enough

[hvidlogspusher]

Originally posted by Aheib

Sure. The first version of arrow trader used mysql as it's main database system instead of flatfiles.

During a speedtest, I loaded about 25 urls from a mysql database, and some rows with numbers.
Running this 2500 times, took 2.406 seconds.
That are 89,775,561 (89 million) queries per day.

In the second part of the speedtest, I loaded the exact same data from a flatfile.
Running this 2500 times, took 0.020 seconds.
That are 10.800.000.000 (10.8 billion) queries per day.

Quite a difference not?

either you are lying or the mysql config on your sux more then the default config

[Aheib]

I'm not lying. (why would I, as it was a test for myself to see if switching to flatfiles would be worth the trouble). The mysql config is optimized, since this was on a virtual account of a host, not a default installation on my box.
You must remember that I opened, initialized, queried, stored and closed that mysql connection 2500 times.
It wasn't open once, request 2500 times the same data, and then close. I think that caused the difference for a considerable part.

[Libertine]

Originally posted by Aheib
I'm not lying. (why would I, as it was a test for myself to see if switching to flatfiles would be worth the trouble). The mysql config is optimized, since this was on a virtual account of a host, not a default installation on my box.
You must remember that I opened, initialized, queried, stored and closed that mysql connection 2500 times.
It wasn't open once, request 2500 times the same data, and then close. I think that caused the difference for a considerable part.

How many entries were there in the table you queried?

[Aheib]

There were 25 rows.
Every row had a url, domain, icq #, email, site title, nickname and 10 extra cells with integers for hourly force and such.

[blazin]

Originally posted by Aheib
You must remember that I opened, initialized, queried, stored and closed that mysql connection 2500 times.
It wasn't open once, request 2500 times the same data, and then close. I think that caused the difference for a considerable part.

Have to agree on this one. Opening a connection to mysql does take a good proportion of the query time, as does building an execution plan for the sql. Thought these can be overcome.

When used with mod_perl and Apache DBI (for persistent connections) it simply rocks. You can also cache your queries for further significant speed improvements..

Unfortunately I don't think many PHP trade scripts make use of these features

[Aheib]

Originally posted by blazin


Have to agree on this one. Opening a connection to mysql does take a good proportion of the query time, as does building an execution plan for the sql. Thought these can be overcome.

When used with mod_perl and Apache DBI (for persistent connections) it simply rocks. You can also cache your queries for further significant speed improvements..

Unfortunately I don't think many PHP trade scripts make use of these features

Correct. And when you compare creating connections to mysql with opening a file with C++, it's no wonder why the latter is so much faster.

Mysql itself can also cache queries - and usually does so by default with often recurring queries - but this doesn't take away the time it takes to build a connection.
And not by far does every server support persistent database connections, so it would be foolish to write a (free) trade script in php that supports that.

[goBigtime]

Originally posted by m4tt



quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by OzKaNoz
It uses a flatfile which is much faster then MySql.

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


With a traffic trading script, I highly doubt that flat file is faster than mysql. Someone prove me wrong.

That's sort of what I was thinking.


Maybe in a virtual environment... but on your own dedicated machine, serving hundreds of thousands to millions of clicks coming in from hundreds of different people going out to hundreds/thousands of different links, all the while parsing and analyzing the data....

Flatfile faster than MySQL? Err I don't think so.

[goBigtime]

Originally posted by blazin


When used with mod_perl and Apache DBI (for persistent connections) it simply rocks. You can also cache your queries for further significant speed improvements..

Unfortunately I don't think many PHP trade scripts make use of these features

CAN php take advanatage of those features? Cached queries & persistent conections like you can do with mod_perl?

[SomeCreep]

TTT Vs UCJ?

UCJ all the way

Btw, like everyone else said, dont rely on a script to grow your site. Its up to you to grow your site.

[4Pics]

Originally posted by Aheib

Sure. The first version of arrow trader used mysql as it's main database system instead of flatfiles.

During a speedtest, I loaded about 25 urls from a mysql database, and some rows with numbers.
Running this 2500 times, took 2.406 seconds.
That are 89,775,561 (89 million) queries per day.

In the second part of the speedtest, I loaded the exact same data from a flatfile.
Running this 2500 times, took 0.020 seconds.
That are 10.800.000.000 (10.8 billion) queries per day.

Quite a difference not?

Well I can't see any site needing 89million hits worth, so really what your test shows is either will work just fine and if tuned properly you could speed up the mysql version.

[vapewiz]

Originally posted by juicylinks
its not the script thats grows the sites it the guy running the site

Amen
I like TM3 better. Sends out better uniques imho.

[Aheib]

true, both can be used, but mysql only to a certain level.
It's not for no reason I keep hearing from more people every day that they switched to AT because php/mysql scripts started to slow down @ 50k.

Also, I used a C++ program to test mysql. And only used one query (select *). Now go through the source of a php script, and count the amount of queries that are used to handle incoming and outgoing scripts....

And last, this program was a stress test, meaning it used all resources that were free; especially with the mysql test it boosted the cpu load to very high levels.
That's okay for a test, but in real life you don't want a server load of 50+

[blazin]

Originally posted by goBigtime



CAN php take advanatage of those features? Cached queries & persistent conections like you can do with mod_perl?

Don't know enough about php to answer this one since I am a perl programmer. Sorry

[blazin]

Originally posted by cutetwink


Amen
I like TM3 better. Sends out better uniques imho.

Same here - I have it installed on one of my sites.

Although if I had to choose a free script it would be arrowtrader hands down

[media]

49 fool! Whut!

Media