Kevin Rose Load Tests Gmail 366
SishGupta writes "Load Testing Gmail - fillmybox@gmail.com
A few weeks ago, Kevin Rose of the The Screen Savers decided to load test Google's new email service, Gmail. He asked everyone to email him their favourite 5MB attachments to 'fillmybox@gmail.com.'
The test Gmail account is now 102% maxed out.
You can read about the test and the results at Kevin Rose.com (his weblog)."
Slashdot Load Tests Kevin Rose's Web Server (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Slashdot Load Tests Kevin Rose's Web Server (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Slashdot Load Tests Kevin Rose's Web Server (Score:3, Funny)
Goes to 102%.... (Score:5, Funny)
Why is Gmail the best free webmail?
ANSWER: Your inbox goes to 102%!!!
Re:Goes to 102%.... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Goes to 102%.... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Goes to 102%.... (Score:5, Informative)
Google offers 1 GB, or 1000 MB, of space. They do this as to not confuse non-tech folk. When you reach 1000 megs, it's 100% full. When you reach the actual limit of 1024 megs, it's 102% full.
Oh, and back when yahoo had a 4 meg limit, my throway's account would gather up spam and it would stop me at 5 megs, or 125% of the limit. No idea what happens now that it's 100 megs.
Re:Goes to 102%.... (Score:5, Funny)
One way to find out... post your address and we'll send you our favorite attachements. I have a video of Osama committing suicide that you might find interesting...
Re:Goes to 102%.... (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm so old-school my Yahoo account had (still has, actually) free POP3 and SMTP access.
And I'm not that old-school.
Re:Goes to 102%.... (Score:3, Insightful)
Old news (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Old news (Score:3, Interesting)
I know what you mean; I never even liked The Screen Savers! For a while, about 350 TotalFark members were running a Music Ring, where everyone was required to use a GMail account. We moved about 500-600 MB of mail into 350 mailboxes each day. I never saw a hiccup speed-wise when downloading attachments, that is, whatever connection I was on would max out. We did run against some GMail-imposed limitations that are intended to control load: First, outgoing messages are limited to 100 recipients, beyond th
Re:Old news (Score:3, Informative)
Not old news. Your friend simply filled his Gmail account. That's no big deal. Your friend even said "nothing unexpected happened". What makes Kevin Rose's news interesting is that continued traffic on an account can lock out the owner. That's a significant bug in that one can launch a denial of service attack on a Gmail user.
Video Clip Followup (Score:2, Informative)
If you have the clip e-mail me at admin (at) uneasysilence.com I would love to host it
_dan
http://www.uneasysilence.com [uneasysilence.com]
Wow... (Score:3, Funny)
Gmail annoys me (Score:3, Funny)
http://etrade.malformed.org/Screenshot.png [malformed.org]
Re:Gmail annoys me (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Gmail annoys me (Score:3, Funny)
You are.
HINT: joke
Fill your box with what? (Score:5, Funny)
KR (Score:2, Funny)
That's more then 100%!!!
~Eric
And now... (Score:3, Funny)
That's nothing. (Score:5, Funny)
Regards,
Arthur MyDoom, Jr.
If you have kids... (Score:5, Funny)
1GB = 1024MB so... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:1GB = 1024MB so... (Score:4, Informative)
Re:1GB = 1024MB so... (Score:2)
Re:1GB = 1024MB so... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:1GB = 1024MB so... (Score:4, Informative)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mebibyte
Unfortunately, this means the standard prefix actually changes for the more "engineering" of the two sizes, and I don't think it has a lot of acceptance.
1 KiB = 2^10 B
1 MiB = 2^20 B
1 GiB = 2^30 B
etc.
They are rather fun to say though.
Re:1GB = 1024MB so... (Score:2)
Re:1GB = 1024MB so... (Score:2)
*when the* google advertised 1gb limit... It's always struck *me* as...
I think the words.... I just forget to type them sometimes....
Re:1GB = 1024MB so... (Score:2, Insightful)
Do you think it's shady when people "round" a kilometer "down" to 1000 meters?
Or do SI prefixes mean something different to you?
[OT] Why SI rules (Score:3, Funny)
Re:[OT] Why SI rules (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:1GB = 1024MB so... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:1GB = 1024MB so... (Score:2)
What in the hell do the Men in Black have to do with anything on this thread?
Re:1GB = 1024MB so... (Score:3, Informative)
The hard drive manufacturers and the computer manufacturers have been doing this for years, and the average consumer has not noticed. Google is just going with the flow by saying 1 GB = 1000 MB.
Woops! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Woops! (Score:3, Interesting)
I can write a new notation on a napkin or a webpage, that doesn't make it correct. Only widespread acceptance can do that. And outside of a few engaging in debates regarding the subject on slashdot, nobody has accepted it.
Personally I might be more inclined it they reversed the standard *B's and *iB's. Since the correct value for *B's was always powers of 2, the
Re:1GB = 1024MB so... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:1GB = 1024MB so... (Score:2)
Re:1GB = 1024MB so... (Score:2)
*Zap*
Re:1GB = 1024MB so... (Score:3, Interesting)
Why is it so hard for people to admit when they are doing something stupid and correct it? The idea that we should continue doing something simply because it is entrenched is folly at best and is better described as arrogant. I find the idea that we should do something simpl
Re:1GB = 1024MB so... (Score:3, Insightful)
There's no point in changing them to satisfy a few uptight "purists" who can't understand that there's no point in changing something that works.
Re:1GB = 1024MB so... (Score:4, Insightful)
The standard prefixes kilo, mega, giga, tera, etc. mean the exact same thing when applied to ANY measure. That's the entire point of a standard, and the standard says 10^3, 10^6, 10^9, and 10^12, respectively.
The standard prefixes kibi, mebi, gibi, tebi, etc. mean the exact same thing when applied to ANY measure. That's the entire point of a standard, and the standard says 2^10, 2^20, 2^30, and 2^40, respectively.
To be clear - the value of the SI prefixes do NOT change, no matter what you happen to be measuring. Thats the entire point of the SI system, for crying out loud! People may misuse the units (for example, I've heard people expressing their weight in kilograms, which is obviously absurd), and if you want to communicate with them, you may want to misuse the units in the same fashion, but it doesn't make them RIGHT.
<gratuitous flamage>
Let's see - you're arguing that a unit system which is bizarre, contradictory, outdated, and confusing even to its adherents is good, because it sort of mostly works, despite the fact that there is a better and clearer alternative.
Tell me, what's the weather like in your part of the US? Managed to blow up any launch vehicles recently?
</gratuitous flamage>
Re:1GB = 1024MB so... (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, they're actually SI prefixes and can't really be applied to any unit of measurement.
It's a IEC standard, but not a universal standard. If you're an electrical engineer then you might have reason to use them, it's likely to confuse most other people (not that the situation isn't already confusing).
That's right, whenever you apply them to *SI units*. Bytes are *NOT* SI units and kilo, mega, giga, etc are *NOT* SI prefixes when used to measure kilobytes, etc. Sure, they share the same names (the source of all the confusion), but they are not SI units and do not follow SI prefix rules.
By the way, I actually wouldn't mind kibi/mibi/etc prefixes myself but it would've been a lot nicer if they thought of that *before* using the same prefixes as SI. I think eventually the new naming will takeover, but saying that the current system is bizarre, contradictory and outdated is simply incorrect. However, to say it is confusing hits the nail on the head.
Re:1GB = 1024MB so... (Score:4, Informative)
Further, the IEEE (a very relevent body for this topic) has decided that kilo, mega, etc. always and everywhere refer to their base-10 meanings - even if you're talking about bits and bytes, if you are referring to the base-2 meaning, you must explicitly state this on a case by case basis.
Further, the IEC standard has recently been submitted to the IEEE (and also to the ISO, although it's not really their area), and is currently being tested as a "trial-use standard" by the IEEE, and is expected to be officially adopted by it sometime next year.
There is no standard anywhere which defines kilo as 2^10. Kilo, as an SI prefix, is defined to be 10^3. The only prefix defined as 2^10 is Kibi. Well, as far as I'm aware, anyhow. But since the ISO, IEEE, and IEC (which in turn in an umbrella group for the various national standards bodies like ANSI, etc.) all agree on what kilo does and does not mean (and the only groups with an opinion agree on Kibi, I think we're running out of standards groups. If you know of a standard that defines kilo as 2^10, please cite.
None of which, of course, changes the fact that Joe User uses "megabyte" all the time to refer to 1,048,576 bytes, but since hard disk makers have already switched to calling 10^9 bytes a terabyte, I don't see how using the base-2 prefixes can increase the anger and frustration.
Re:Holy Shit (Score:3, Insightful)
What's so abhorrent about clarity? (Score:3, Informative)
Except when they don't. Binary is dominant, but not universal.
Sure, as long as we're dealing with binary systems, sometimes binary multiples will be more convenient. They're even more convenient when they're unambiguous.
Re:1GB = 1024MB so... (Score:2)
Re:1GB = 1024MB so... (Score:3)
To continue the argument: you don't have to make a fool of yourself by saying 'kibibytes', which sounds like you have a speech impediment. But is (writing) KiB really that bad? It's being exact, and isn't precise language part of geek culture? And it's got mixed case, which geeks love almost as much as LotR.
Use 'kilobytes' when you want to be quick, and use 'KiB' when you want to be precise.
Re:1GB = 1024MB so... (Score:4, Informative)
Correction to Story:
"K" is the unit of temperature, the Kelvin. [nist.gov]
"k" is the abbreviation for "kilo", 1,000. [nist.gov]
And your point is ? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:And your point is ? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:And your point is ? (Score:2)
For more lame videos, also go to pure pwnage [purepwnage.com] if you're into zero hour.
I need a life.
~Will
Re:And your point is ? (Score:3, Interesting)
Sure he's not that "1337" but you're probably just jealous - he has a girlfriend and you don't, he actually gets email from nonspammers, etc etc.
It's a US TV show, what are you expecting d'oh? As is it's already too "1337" for the TV bosses that they're dumbing down TechTV into another channel.
Re:And your point is ? (Score:2)
I'm missing Leo Laporte. (Score:3)
(Yeah, I know he's on KFI Radio here in LA. Whatever, I miss him on TSS.)
Re:And your point is ? (Score:2)
1) It actually goes up to 1023MB, not 1000MB.
2) Inbound email bandwidth per account is probably more than 20Mbps.
3) You can't login for a few days if people fill it up rapidly with 5MB attachments.
At least some nerds would be interested.
Re:And your point is ? (Score:3, Insightful)
2. gmail is in beta; one of the points of using gmail at the moment is to report any problems you have.
Re:And your point is ? (Score:2)
The best way to load test... (Score:5, Funny)
greatest moment ever on TSS (Score:5, Funny)
Sarah: "Fill my box"
Kevin: "I will later"
Co-host of the day turns red.
Any words Kevin?
Re:greatest moment ever on TSS (Score:3, Informative)
Kev, Sarah, you guys need to be a little less obvious about your love life on air, either that or rig the playboy contest so sarah wins. that thing still going on?
Our favorite 5 MB files...? (Score:2, Funny)
porn2.mog
porn3.mpg
Ahh.. gotta love when they put the offer out there for you.
Re:Our favorite 5 MB files...? (Score:4, Funny)
I'm a
Re:Our favorite 5 MB files...? (Score:2)
I'm a
Actually, porn1.mpg and porn2.mpg let you be your own best friend too.
Fill My Box? (Score:5, Funny)
Thanks, folks, I'll be here all week! Tip your waitresses!
Re:Fill My Box? (Score:5, Funny)
Next step, try the spam filters (Score:5, Interesting)
I received over 2,000 complaints from people who actually took the time to dig around and find my personal email address, I'm thinking we hit Gmail with around 50-75,000+, 5MB+ emails in a 10-15min window.
Think of all the spam that one of these accounts could hold. I propose testing Gmail's spam filters next: disseminate your Gmail addy to porn sites, and everywhere else it will likely be harvested by a spam bot. Sit back, and let the spam roll in. It should be interesting to see just how fast this sucker fills up with ads for penis enlargers.
Re:Next step, try the spam filters (Score:2)
Re:Next step, try the spam filters (Score:3, Interesting)
Not surprisingly, Pratt's account maxed out at 102% or 1023 MB. Unlike Kevin Rose, Pratt's account filled up two months ago. Rose's test, however, was not about filling his account:
Re:Next step, try the spam filters (Score:2)
Problem solved. Mod me up folks, we'll turn google against itself!
Re:Next step, try the spam filters (Score:5, Interesting)
Gmail has gotten better at catching spam on its own, but it's not great yet. I use SpamAssassin and score anything over 6.1 as spam. Gmail sends stuff with scores as high as 8 straight to my inbox. Granted, it's easy to set up a system that works for me; it's hard to set up a system that works for everyone.
One thing I've found really interesting is the ability to instantly search through 67,000+ spams! It's amazing how prolific the "random words to defeat Bayesian filters" spam tactic has gone. Just about every word I've tried appears somewhere within the contents of 67,000 spams...
Search results for: in:anywhere anthropomorphic 1 - 20 of about 80
Search results for: in:anywhere antagonistic 1 - 20 of about 150
Search results for: in:anywhere necromancy 1 - 20 of 61
Search results for: in:anywhere juxtaposition 1 - 20 of 58
Search results for: in:anywhere loquacious 1 - 20 of 51
It's crazy. I wasted a few minutes last week searching through my Gmail spam archive trying to find a word that didn't appear anywhere, and came up with very few successes. If nothing else, Gmail is probably the world's biggest and most accurate archive of spam.
Re:Next step, try the spam filters (Score:3, Funny)
Wow, you just came up with a new form of Googlewhacking! I'm impressed!
Whoah (Score:2)
Hopefully google didn't take that personally.
I'd like to know if his theory about the compressed storage leading to a timeout condition is realistic.
Re:Whoah (Score:5, Interesting)
I hammered my own gmail account by forwarding up all my old messages using an Eudora filter. I was sending as many as 2,000 messages in a 15 minute period at one stage. While Gmail didn't lock me out, some messages took a particularly long time to appear. These messages were typically old automated receipts, such as eBay messages, that all look very similar but are in fact separate conversations. I'm guessing that there's a lot of overhead when a message arrives to determine if it's related to existing messages.
conspiracy theories (Score:3, Interesting)
here's what he thinks:
Google knows that 80% of mail messages are text, and we all know that text is highly compressible. That said, they probably only have around 2-300MB of storage allocated for each 1GB account (obviously this will fluctuate up to 1GB depending on the user's mail content). My take on this, is that they have a huge series of RAID arrays at their server farm. Every time an email comes in, it is compressed and stored in that users account on the RAID.
this should be closer to the truth: Venti: a new approach to archival storage [bell-labs.com]
Re:conspiracy theories (Score:5, Informative)
Decompress a gig on the fly when you login. Please... Do me a lemon.
The real trick is in the routing for this type of application. When mail is delivered it is switched to a bank of servers which deal with your account (and many others obviously). The messages are indexed and stored.
When you login there will be a range of load balanced servers routing your read requests back to that same bank of storage from the frontline web servers.
Limit management is either done in the application logic, or in the database engine. Under load, with simultaneous receipts it's easy to see why you could go over 100% of storage. It's either that or you have to serialize the delivery per user which would suck and be harder.
It's not a hard concept, but it is tricky to get right in implementation. This is what Google does best though.
huh huh uh huh huh (Score:5, Funny)
uh huh huh
uh huh huh
"fill my box"
uh huh huh
[/beavisandbutthead]
Re:heh heh eh heh heh (Score:3, Funny)
eh heh heh
eh heh heh
"fill my box"
eh heh heh
eh heh heh
"diarrhea"
eh heh heh
[/Peter Griffin]
What a pointless load of tosh! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:What a pointless load of tosh! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:What a pointless load of tosh! (Score:2, Insightful)
I've been doing my own load testing. (Score:2, Interesting)
That great sigh of disappointment you hear... (Score:3, Funny)
-S
Say what? (Score:2)
what has this acheived you ask? (Score:2)
That's fantastic.
i would have put that account to
how much does this guy get paid?
Kevin might enjoy the /.ing (Score:2)
Verification testing (Score:2)
The "fill my box" recording: Download (Score:5, Informative)
Fill my Box? (Score:2)
stress testing conversations (Score:5, Interesting)
Anyway, here is my Gmail stress test [andrewhitchcock.org].
Also, you'll notice I have a few mailing lists on the side. I only read the Freenet one, but I subscribed to the Linux Kernel list and some others because I know them to be high traffic. Gmail is pretty impressive and they seem to be optimizing it even more.
Re:false advertising, and email wars (Score:5, Insightful)
It is if you have 10MB or 100MB,
but not when you have 1000 megabytes.
100K of memory was alot when all you had was 640K, but 100k is nothing to most users nowadays.
Re:false advertising, and email wars (Score:5, Interesting)
For instance people getting MPEGs in the mail won't notice the difference between 1000MB and 1024MB. Similarly, people subscribed to a dozen mailinglists, hoping to use google to quickly find any message, won't notice the difference since a few days email will fill up the difference.
To make it really clear... say you can read 100 text emails a day. Now, if those emails are text they'll be about 5k, or around half a meg a day. So you're talking about six _years_ worth of email before you fill your box, with the extra 24MB getting you an extra month on your six years. For people getting ten text emails a day worth keeping, 1GB will probably hold enough email for life.
Re:false advertising, and email wars (Score:5, Insightful)
No, the real deal is archiving all of your old email and the ability to search through it all, as well as targeted advertising... I detest picture-advertising... most kinds, that is. pr0n's another story.
One of the other factors that makes the service so appealing to me is I trust Google, unlike Microsoft or Yahoo, to not sell my email address. When the company who gave you the email address is handing it out to the spammers (or spamming the box themselves), something is wrong.
- Yolegoman
Re:Roger, you should change your password (Score:2)
Kind of poetic to see the complete definition of dookie on slashdot.
Re:Real Results (Score:2)
Re:I want an invitation... (Score:2)
enjoy.
rob.
Re:gmail invite? (Score:2, Interesting)
good point, i've just done the research :)
In that case, you can send it to my obscure isp address at hungyao@telus.net. Hopefully, they haven't done any funny business with blocking invites.
Thanks :)
Re:"fill my box" segment (Score:3, Informative)