Site_Feedback

Topic   server move will be Wednesay 4/25 !!

bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
* 14-Apr-2018(#1)
There are some advantages to moving GameTZ to new/different computer/server hosting. I can move to a new major version of the operating system that has more advanced components. Also, I should be able to reduce the monthly costs.

It is a fair amount of work to do this. My first step is to upgrade the server I use at home for development and testing (which is like a clone of the live server). Then, I get the site and all its parts setup and working there. The new OS has some changes that may make this challenging. This can take a week or more, depending.

The next setup is setting up a new server for the site to move to. I'm currently thinking I'll use Amazon AWS which is "cloud computing" based. I think this will be cost effective and allow me to optimize the resources needed to keep GameTZ going as we continue a slow decline. The current server is basically just a PC co-located in a data center somewhere. Cloud services are more abstract or virtual. They are priced based on usage and can be adjusted over time.

Generally, I'm also looking for ways to simplify what the server does and reduce its overall footprint (e.g. use less CPU, disk space, network). This also works well with cloud-based hosting since doing this should also lower monthly costs.

When the new server is ready, I'll swap the IP address for the site and update the DNS records (which maps IP to hostname like gametz.com -> 50.97.242.9 as it is currently) to move the live site over to the new server. That can cause disruption, but with some luck it should be seamless for most users. I've done it at least twice in the past.

A concern with all this is that it's really hard to know how much resources GameTZ needs. The current server seems to easily cope with the load. So, I'm going to try to switch to a new server with less. If I go too low, the site may get slow, unresponsive, or not work consistently. So, that could get tricky. But, I think with cloud-based technology, I should be able to adjust this.

tl;dr - I'm going to mess around with some GameTZ internals and you may not even notice, but it's a good thing.
MrBean
GameTZ Gold Subscriber 300 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (7) Has Written 1 Review
14-Apr-2018(#2)
Boo AWS, go Azure! smile

bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
14-Apr-2018(#3)
But, Microsoft is eeevil.
bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
* 14-Apr-2018(#4)
To be fair, Amazon is evil too. And let's not forget Google has cloud and is also evil. I'm looking into comparing them now.
MrBean
GameTZ Gold Subscriber 300 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (7) Has Written 1 Review
14-Apr-2018(#5)
Microsoft is a completely new company. Generally speaking, Azure is cheaper too. I'm being biased, I only work in Azure. Have poked around with AWS but never really used it.
bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
14-Apr-2018(#6)
Given that I'm using Linux, Microsoft doesn't seem like a great choice. If I used Microsoft OS/software, then it would be the obvious choice. Azure offers the Linux flavor I use (CentOS), but it can't be a focus/priority for them. AWS dominates the market and has for over a decade. So, it's an easy choice to use them. CentOS has a presence in AWS (offers the OS free via their marketplace). Google may not be a bad option for me. I'm still looking at it. I haven't used any of them, so it's hard for me to feel confident. I'm just reading articles and using pricing calculators mostly so far.

GameTZ started on a PC at a friend's house, then eventually 3 PCs in my basement. Then, co-location (big step for me) into 1 stronger server, but that also is basically just another PC (maybe in a rack). The cloud is pretty different and hard for me to wrap my head around. I'm old school. Aspects of it are worrisome (e.g. separation of disk storage and the options there). Performance of the disk likely matters (big effect on database speed), but it's hard to know in advance how it will be, especially compared to what I'm using now. Also, the hardware I'm on is somewhat obsolete, so it could be that almost anything I move to will be better. And, the site is used less now too, so I'm sure I need less.

Initially, I was just going to move to a different dedicated server, but my current hosting service has been pushing cloud. So, I checked that out. But, they are limited in what the offer. So, I started looking at AWS and started to see how it might work and be even cheaper...

John
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 400 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (13) Secret Santa
14-Apr-2018(#7)
You'll be going to CentOS 7 then?
bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
14-Apr-2018(#8)
Yes.
MrBean
GameTZ Gold Subscriber 300 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (7) Has Written 1 Review
* 14-Apr-2018(#9)
Microsoft has a very large focus on Linux these days. Hell, SQL is now supported on Linux. They honestly are a new company. Both are amazing platforms in their own right. MSFT has the edge in regards to paying for compute vs storage separately. Both have a very large ecosystem of integration and capabilities. AWS definitely first but Azure now winning. Can't go wrong either way.

Embrace the cloud, makes life insanely easy, especially when you start adopting PaaS to further reduce complexities and save money.

Good luck, be curious to hear how your journey goes!
bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
* 14-Apr-2018(#10)
Using the respective price calculators, Google seems to be cheapest for what I need. AWS is $99/mo., Azure $90, Google $77. I'm currently paying $227, so these are all appealing prices and really not a huge difference between them. Though, I may also just be off in my estimates too.

I like Google's console UI and command line tool too. I'm currently leaning toward Google after reading more about them. I'm sure they would all work. I am biased against Microsoft, so it's hard to seriously consider them. It has felt to me that they worked against Linux for a long time, so it's hard to believe they are on board with it now or up-to-speed compared to other providers.

I'm likely to use snapshots for backups instead of what I've been doing as it would help me simplify some stuff. I'd probably have to test a restore to be sure it works. Maybe I should put the db and other key data files on a separate disk resource too, just to isolate it and snapshot it more easily.

I think GameTZ is just too weird to mold what I have into the structures they offer. For example, I could break off the database into a separate db instance, but I think it would make me redo some stuff to fit their schemes. Also, I suspect it would cost more. If I was starting over, I'm sure I'd just go cloud from the start.

Thanks for the advice.
tonymack21
GameTZ Subscriber 500 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (7) Has Written 3 Reviews
14-Apr-2018(#11)
sounds like with any of those server costs would be cut in half, so thats pretty nice

Boss
GameTZ Gold Subscriber 700 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (8)
16-Apr-2018(#12)


/me waits for angry users to complain site was down X time when they visited
bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
16-Apr-2018(#13)
I made some progress. My home/development server has been wiped and reinstalled with CentOS 7 now. I have the site working there for the most part now too. I'm still looking at the details.

I'm leaning toward moving the live site to Google Cloud Platform (over AWS or Azure). Google has the best price and they are offering $300 off for the first year as part of a trial deal they are doing too.

ryanflucas
GameTZ Subscriber 1000 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader
17-Apr-2018(#14)
Who has the most redundancies for the price?
bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
17-Apr-2018(#15)
Not sure what you mean by redundancies.
ryanflucas
GameTZ Subscriber 1000 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader
17-Apr-2018(#16)
Depending on overall size, cloud providers make redundant backups so if one cloud hosting node goes offline, another kicks in without the user seeing any interruption. I'd assume it would be a tie between Amazon and Google.

Most outages you see in cloud hosting are not the fault of the site but one of the hosting provider servers going dark for whatever reason (regional issues, weather, etc)
bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
18-Apr-2018(#17)
My impression is that it would be challenging to set this site up with redundancy like that. Also, it would cost more. Also, it hasn't been much of an issue in the past.

The site will be be backed-up, as usual. Possibly, in a better way than I currently do.

The hosting service I've been using has been good, with very few outages that affected me. I'm unsure what a new host may be like in that respect. But, I'd expect Google or AWS to be among the best.
MrBean
GameTZ Gold Subscriber 300 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (7) Has Written 1 Review
18-Apr-2018(#18)
I know Azure provides 3 9's and then offers local and geo HA/DR options (at a cost). Have to assume AWS/Google do the same.

In regards to challenges, from a consumer perspective, it's usually clicking of a button. Unless you need much more sophisticated levels of HA/DR (which I doubt you do) that require application modifications, so ease of implementation is simply a click a way and more money out of pocket (usually not crazy expensive).
bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
18-Apr-2018(#19)
Dude, go easy with the acronyms and marketing buzzwords, I'm still a newb. smile
John
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 400 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (13) Secret Santa
18-Apr-2018(#20)
MrBean
GameTZ Gold Subscriber 300 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (7) Has Written 1 Review
* 18-Apr-2018(#21)
hahaha @John

Sorry @Bill - HA = high availability, DR = disaster recovery. "9's" equates to the level of uptime guarantee via SLA's (service level agreements) ... as in "99.99" (which is 52 mins of downtime annually) vs "99.999" (which is 5 minutes of downtime annually). I think by default, you actually get 2 9's with Azure/AWS/Google.

They all have amazing SLA's with NO additional HA/DR. Should you want/need more, they're super easy to simply add on. Pending on the sophistication of your HA requirements, you'd need to recode your application, say something like Always-On (MSFT SQL Technology) - which I doubt you need. This would simply be some backend work + changing your application connection string to communicate with an AG (availability group) instead of a specific server\instance\database. BUT, what you can do, is enable (via a shopping option basically) is to make your entire (or pieces of it) tenant geo-redundant. Meaning, if data center X fails, within Y threshold, you'd be in data center Z - no involvement on your end.

The same old principal exists ... backup your crap. As long as you have backups for DR, you're more than likely good enough with that. We're not dealing with mission critical data here on GTZ. I know Azure offers a SUPER cheap backup option via Azure backups, not sure what Google has. You can obviously do your own, to cloud or on premises, really up to you. The out of the box stuff that clouds offer though, is usually good enough for the masses.
ryanflucas
GameTZ Subscriber 1000 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader
18-Apr-2018(#22)
What he said. smile
Boss
GameTZ Gold Subscriber 700 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (8)
18-Apr-2018(#23)
MrBean wrote:
> hahaha @John
>
> Sorry @Bill - HA = high availability, DR = disaster recovery. "9's" equates to the
> level of uptime guarantee via SLA's (service level agreements) ... as in "99.99"
> (which is 52 mins of downtime annually) vs "99.999" (which is 5 minutes of downtime
> annually). I think by default, you actually get 2 9's with Azure/AWS/Google.
>
> They all have amazing SLA's with NO additional HA/DR. Should you want/need more,
> they're super easy to simply add on. Pending on the sophistication of your HA requirements,
> you'd need to recode your application, say something like Always-On (MSFT SQL Technology)
> - which I doubt you need. This would simply be some backend work + changing your
> application connection string to communicate with an AG (availability group) instead
> of a specific server\instance\database. BUT, what you can do, is enable (via a shopping
> option basically) is to make your entire (or pieces of it) tenant geo-redundant.
> Meaning, if data center X fails, within Y threshold, you'd be in data center Z -
> no involvement on your end.
>
> The same old principal exists ... backup your crap. As long as you have backups for
> DR, you're more than likely good enough with that. We're not dealing with mission
> critical data here on GTZ. I know Azure offers a SUPER cheap backup option via Azure
> backups, not sure what Google has. You can obviously do your own, to cloud or on
> premises, really up to you. The out of the box stuff that clouds offer though, is
> usually good enough for the masses.


yes for lending your insight.

and

DarkFact
GameTZ Gold Subscriber 350 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Has Written 4 Reviews
18-Apr-2018(#24)
Sounds slick, Willie!
bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
18-Apr-2018(#25)
Well, I have a google cloud instance up and running now. It seems to work and seems about the same as the current server. I ran a quick performance test that also gave similar results.

I'm setting the software up on it now...
ryanflucas
GameTZ Subscriber 1000 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader
18-Apr-2018(#26)
yes
bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
22-Apr-2018(#27)
I'm thinking I may be able to move us to the cloud on Thursday.

I got fairly far setting up a new server, made some mistakes along the way, learned a few things, etc. So, I'm starting over to do it right for the server I hope we'll be able to move to. It takes a while to install and setup and configure all the software it uses. Some of it is hard to test without going live. There will likely be some issues on the day I do the move, so I'll try to leave extra time to keep an eye on things.

Google Cloud is fairly stingy with IP addresses, but I think I can get away with just using 1 IP address for everything. I'm also going to keep disk space to 64gb or less and use snapshots for backups. Generally, I'm looking for ways to simplify things and use less resources (save money).

Playing around with it the last few days, I'm feeling more confident about using cloud-based hosting. A lot of stuff that is harder to do with my current setup is abstracted out and possible to do myself in most cases. So, swapping IPs and messing with disks (add/remove/backup/clone/etc) and even the server hardware itself all feels doable to me now. Though, I'm not planning to change it much once I get it the way I want it. If I need to I should be able to fairly easily. For example, there's some chance the new server will be too slow and I may need to scramble to upgrade components, but that should be doable.

The new server I was working on mysteriously went off the network last week and I'm still unsure why. But, I was messing with some odd network settings that day (maybe that caused it somehow). I was able to stop and restart it to get it back. Hopefully, that won't be an issue in the future. It hasn't happened since and I'm not planning to mess with those settings again.
ryanflucas
GameTZ Subscriber 1000 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader
22-Apr-2018(#28)
Is there anything you can totally expunge from the database to save on resources? Old listings with zero pictures, zero people want it, zero people have it. Worst case scenario someone requests we add it as a new item later.
bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
22-Apr-2018(#29)
I've been thinking about that sort of thing. The most obvious target is the forum archive which is huge and rarely used.

But, it is often useful for identifying the return of an unwanted user. So, I'm hesitant to just dump it. Maybe just trim it down (like you're saying). The most useful stuff I have for tracking people like that are private moderator posts (e.g. when a new account is made it gets posted and thus helpful for tracking later). I could remove all but the moderator topics perhaps.

Another target might be archive offer/trade messages...
ryanflucas
GameTZ Subscriber 1000 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader
22-Apr-2018(#30)
Whatever makes things leaner/faster/easier to manage. A lot of things can go without anyone needing them, I'm sure someone that's a site statistics hound will request some obscure information just because they can, but it's not mission critical to keep it around forever.
DarkFact
GameTZ Gold Subscriber 350 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Has Written 4 Reviews
* 23-Apr-2018(#31)
Or maybe some way to keep the archive locally for reference whereas we don't necessarily need it live on the site? I personally don't foresee a real need to reference it but if you use it to track down new old users, obviously there's some merit in keeping it around, maybe stashed on a passport or something you can tuck up in a shelf space and not really think about unless you have to.
bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
23-Apr-2018(#32)
Yeah, I could keep it on my test server. We'll see.
ryanflucas
GameTZ Subscriber 1000 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader
23-Apr-2018(#33)
Or take any unneeded data, put it on a external drive, take it outside for a round of stress release skeet shooting. Whichever works.
MrBean
GameTZ Gold Subscriber 300 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (7) Has Written 1 Review
23-Apr-2018(#34)
Cold storage is so silly cheap. Never get rid of data!
bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
23-Apr-2018(#35)
I was just looking at the size of the forum archive. It's 3.2gb or 43% of the GameTZ's total database size (7.5gb on disk). The offer/trade messages archive is about 1GB for another 13%.

Database size can impact a few things. Performance, depending (hard to measure, but if that table gets used and it's huge, so likely strains memory and slows other db usage down). Also, I'm planning daily snapshots, so anything on the disk has some small impact on cost that adds up over time. If I move the data off the server, there's network bandwidth costs (also small, but would add up).

It's definitely something to think about. Since I'm now paying for every little thing and I'm cheap, I suspect I will experiment and optimize and do whatever costs the least.

I put a full backup on dvd every 3 months, so that's kind of like cold storage. I may stop doing that though as it's also extra work and I've almost never used it.

I'm not sure I agree about saving data. In the age of FB's recent reputation, I could see making a case for just deleting stuff for the sake of user privacy. I'm not sure who that old/saved data is for. It could be used for evil. More than one person has asked me to delete their old posts (which they made when they were 14 or whatever). Also, simplicity says just delete it unless there's a good reason to keep it.
bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
23-Apr-2018(#36)
I may do the server move on Wednesday. I have a turtle thing to go to Thursday pm. I suspect I'll be ready Wednesday, but I'm not sure.
MrBean
GameTZ Gold Subscriber 300 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (7) Has Written 1 Review
* 23-Apr-2018(#37)
7.5gb, holy hell that's it? That's pretty badass. Everything is pretty well normalized I'm assuming? Although I guess you're not storing any blob or unstructured data... Just varchars, bits, ints and datetime yeah? Configuration data and post data... Yeah that makes sense, small database. Do you use any type of date/time dimensions are store for every entry? If the latter, that can be optimized to dramatically cut down size.

Dunno about AWS or Google but Azure is like 5 cents per gig/month for hdd storage. Obviously multiple tiers based on performance needs but doubt that the database is all that I/O intensive. Meaning that I wouldn't sweat it.

Now I'm curious, need to look at Google cloud storage costs, has to be cheap...
MrBean
GameTZ Gold Subscriber 300 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (7) Has Written 1 Review
* 23-Apr-2018(#38)
So in my 8 seconds of reading, Google is a bit more confusing because it's based not just on storage but access... So kinda hard to predict (unless you have historical metrics?) pricing - https://cloud.google.com/storage/pricing

Still, in theory, it should be stupid cheap, like less than $10 for 10gb. Would need to dig deeper, currently engaged in a random Lyft conversation in Silicon Valley about all the dbags around here.
MrBean
GameTZ Gold Subscriber 300 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (7) Has Written 1 Review
23-Apr-2018(#39)
What's your database back end? Can you simply do some partitioning? Have you revisited your indexing strategy as the site has grown? Assuming you're maintaining them via daily maintenance?
ryanflucas
GameTZ Subscriber 1000 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader
23-Apr-2018(#40)
All data should have a expiration date. Anything held longer then it needs to adds bloat and liability. Unless of course there's mining value to that data and those who produced that data have consented. Most of that doesn't apply here though. You're not holding sensitive data of financial nature.
ryanflucas
GameTZ Subscriber 1000 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader
23-Apr-2018(#41)
How many users does GameTZ have in the UK? GDPR Act starts next month in the UK. Even though you're a US business, there may be some legalese you need to show new/current UK users to be compliant.

https://www.compliancejunction.com/gdpr-for-us-com...
bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
24-Apr-2018(#42)
MrBean wrote:
> Everything is pretty well normalized I'm assuming?

Not especially. I'm not big on normalizing. I'm mostly self-taught with respect to databases. I do have good indexing (as far as I know). That was something I learned early on is absolutely essential (the site was super slow when I first started using a db).

> Although I guess you're not storing any blob or unstructured data...
> Just varchars, bits, ints and datetime yeah?

And TEXT (e.g. for forum posts) which is the same size as a blob for the database I use (64k).

> Do you use any type of date/time dimensions are store for every entry?

Most records have a datetime column in some form.

> If the latter, that can be optimized to dramatically cut down size.

I'm not sure if I follow what you're saying, but if you just mean I can archive (put into another table that used less) older posts then yeah, that's what the forum archive is. It's a little more complicated because there are post records, topic records and a few other related records being used that are interconnected.

> 5 cents per gig/month for hdd storage.

That seems different from what I've seen. I've been using each cloud services "calculator" tool to estimate costs: https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/pricing/calculat... https://calculator.s3.amazonaws.com/index.html and https://cloud.google.com/products/calculator/

There seems to be other costs associated with disk space, especially snapshots. It's hard to know in advance how much space I'd need for snapshots, though. But, roughly, I've been thinking I'd keep 60 days of snaps and It may be 2+gb/day from that (maybe 120 to 200gb in snapshot storage, guessing). Also, disk performance (iops) seems to often be tied to size. So, going too small on disk could cause issues with performance (but that's not likely and issue from what I can tell).

> stupid cheap, like less than $10 for 10gb.

That sounds closer to the numbers I was seeing. Multiply that by 12 months and it's $120. That's a good week for amazon commissions. I'm trying to scale this to actual revenue for the site. I'm sure for a real business these numbers are tiny and a joke. Like I said, I'm being cheap here. The issue is somewhat emotional or philosophical. If I feel like the site is costing me, it makes it harder for me to keep doing it. So, the cheaper it is, the easier it is for me to keep it going (not really about money exactly, more the impression of that... Personally, I agree $10 is a joke for most stuff I spend money on).

Also, I don't think I really need the disk space and using less is simpler too (less to potentially backup, etc.) Part of simpler is reducing my workload which is another factor (also kind of emotional/philosophical). If GTZ is cheap/easy to keep going, I'm more likely to do it. It has been 20+ years, I'm fairly burned out and it's easy for me to question why I keep doing it (especially when I get some belligerent user to deal with or whatever). I can't do much about that, but I can optimize the hosting.

> What's your database back end?

MariaDB (mysql). MyISAM tables (which are older-style and not especially relational) Is that what you mean? It runs on the same machine as everything else (web server, helper servers, mail, cron jobs, backups, etc.)

> Can you simply do some partitioning? Have you revisited
> your indexing strategy as the site has grown? Assuming you're maintaining them via
> daily maintenance?

I'm not following you here. Partition what exactly? the database? Generally, I find that breaking what my server does up into separate parts/instances adds to cost (given my small scale overall). I looked into it a little, but I couldn't find a way to make it cheaper. And 1 server, 1 disk is simpler to manage too. Maybe you meant something else, though.

I certainly use indexes on my database tables and I think most queries are fairly fast (e.g. pages load quick enough here). I don't do daily maintenance of indexes (if that's what you mean). I'm not even sure what that might be. I sometimes (like once a year) use "optimize table" on them, but it doesn't make a huge difference from what I've noticed. Come to think of it, there is something I do for item searches daily which helps build a better index for that. Matching also does some daily work on the site too (though that rarely gets used by people from what I can tell). ...
bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
24-Apr-2018(#43)
SirConnery wrote:
> All data should have a expiration date. Anything held longer then it needs to adds
> bloat and liability. Unless of course there's mining value to that data and those
> who produced that data have consented. Most of that doesn't apply here though. You're
> not holding sensitive data of financial nature.

I don't think it's especially sensitive. It's mostly just old forum posts or stuff the user had done publicly (e.g. bios). I have done things to keep some of that stuff out of search engine indexes. But, in most cases, I do still have the data.

It is interesting to think about. I could do more to remove it. Abandoned accounts get their listings removed after a couple years. I could remove bios too, maybe other stuff. Trades/rating are connected to other active accounts, though. So, deleting those would impact others reputations and generally I never remove those. But, I do have a "purge" thing I can do which removes name/email/bio and I can change the username if that helps too.

Deleting stuff can impact security of active users too, though. e.g. If I deleted some famously evil 10 BTRs user data, they can much more easily come back and rip more people off. It happens even if I don't delete the data, but keeping the data has helped me stop them in many cases. Generally, if they make a new account, my system can detect it by comparing the info they provided to past accounts. But, if I delete the past banned accounts, I'll miss it. Actually, more commonly, the same system finds someone making a new account that had a past account without trouble and I just merge the old account into the new one and it helps them.
bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
24-Apr-2018(#44)
SirConnery wrote:
> How many users does GameTZ have in the UK? GDPR Act starts next month in the UK.
> Even though you're a US business, there may be some legalese you need to show new/current
> UK users to be compliant.
>

*sigh* That article seemed to be asking more questions than it answered. If there was some simple list of what I'd need to do to comply, it would help. I can certainly delete anyone's data that asks. Is that enough, I wonder. I have to do it by hand to some degree though. I don't have a way for users to do it themselves.

And, it's worrisome for the same reason I gave before. If a user can delete all their data here, then scammers would always do that and we'd all be more at risk...
bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
25-Apr-2018(#45)
OK, the server move is mostly done now. The site is back up. It's going to be a little slow for a bit while I run some database optimizers/checks. And, I need to get the helper servers going (chat may not work, also dynamic page updates). But, things seems to be going well, so far (most of the hard stuff happened within 20 minutes, yay)
tonymack21
GameTZ Subscriber 500 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (7) Has Written 3 Reviews
* 25-Apr-2018(#46)
nice that was fast., its acting a lot different on my computer at work but functions fine, just a lot of things I cant see, the menu bars at the top and bottom, icons and avatars, pos and neg buttons, and other things, but it could just be temporary, will see if it continues, but likely nothing on your end our company uses this horrible invincea freespace browser that blocks a lot of content. like I always couldn't see most pictures on it and stuff, like signatures never displayed before and the like.

bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
25-Apr-2018(#47)
optimize is done, helper servers are all good, named seems good

email may not to be working ... probably I have to stand on my head to convince the internet I'm not a spammer (again)
bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
25-Apr-2018(#48)
tonymack21 wrote:
> just a lot of things I cant see, the menu bars at the top and bottom, icons
> and avatars, pos and neg buttons, and other things,

that is strange. it may be the image server ( https://images.kenyonhill.com ) -- does that work for you? It should say "Nothing to see here, move along."

Your computer may still be looking at the old server for that. It just needs to update its mapping of the name ( images.kenyonhill.com ) to the new ip address ( 35.231.16.188 ).

Rebooting may help.
tonymack21
GameTZ Subscriber 500 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (7) Has Written 3 Reviews
25-Apr-2018(#49)
tonymack21
GameTZ Subscriber 500 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (7) Has Written 3 Reviews
* 25-Apr-2018(#50)
bill wrote:
> tonymack21 wrote:
>> just a lot of things I cant see, the menu bars at the top and bottom, icons
>> and avatars, pos and neg buttons, and other things,
>
> that is strange. it may be the image server ( https://images.kenyonhill.com ) --
> does that work for you? It should say "Nothing to see here, move along."

It doesn't seem to want to connect. I'll try a reboot later after I finish a couple projects I'm working on.

Works fine on my phone so it's local to my end. Probably this freaky browser they force on us


John
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 400 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (13) Secret Santa
25-Apr-2018(#51)
Yeah, images.kenyonhill.com is coming up as "unable to connect" for me because it is being cached on a DNS server somewhere (still comes up as 50.97.242.11).

Forcing things to get flushed seemed to fix it for me.

So, like Bill said -- you may need to reboot. Or, it could be cached by your ISP -- in which case, you may need to wait it out.
bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
25-Apr-2018(#52)
I can also put the old images server up (... done), so it will work to cover the gap. Though, it can be out-of-date as time goes by and won't stay up for more than a few days as I'll cancel that server soon.
tonymack21
GameTZ Subscriber 500 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (7) Has Written 3 Reviews
* 25-Apr-2018(#53)
whether it was waiting it out or what you did with the old server its working now. i'll do the reboot as well.

bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
25-Apr-2018(#54)
Looks like I may have hit a serious snag. The email problem may be more of a policy of Google Cloud. Because of trouble with spammers, they block all the normal mail ports for their servers. They seem to be saying I'd have to sign up with a 3rd party to provide email. I'll look into costs for that, but I'm worried now. I hate email, it's such a mess because of spammers.
tonymack21
GameTZ Subscriber 500 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (7) Has Written 3 Reviews
* 25-Apr-2018(#55)
i thought you were doing away with the email forwarding? also the reboot has helped immensely


bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
25-Apr-2018(#56)
That's just one small piece. The site sends a lot of email (e.g. when you get a new offer, etc.). That's currently blocked, so nothing is going out. I also get emails coming in. I'm less certain if that will work or not, probably not. Google blocks the ports that are used for email. It's understandable, since a spammer could so easily use one of their cloud servers to spam easily otherwise. For me, I'd have to get a 3rd party to relay my mail (I send it to them and they send it out for me). I looks like I could use G Suite (Google's suite of services that includes email handling) for as low as $5/mo (not sure if I could get away with that, but I am 1 person). I had already considered it as offloading email to them is appeal in general (gmail is nice and is part of G Suite). Basically, they'd take over @kenyonhill.com emails... I'll have to check on other 3rd party providers and other options. I wonder if other cloud hosting services block email ports like this...
tonymack21
GameTZ Subscriber 500 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (7) Has Written 3 Reviews
25-Apr-2018(#57)
ooooohhhhh... I see

Scott
GameTZ Gold Subscriber Quadruple Gold Good Trader Global Trader - willing to trade internationally Has Written 1 Review
* 4-May-2018(#58)
bill wrote:
> I was just looking at the size of the forum archive. It's 3.2gb or 43% of the GameTZ's
> total database size (7.5gb on disk). The offer/trade messages archive is about 1GB
> for another 13%.
>
> Database size can impact a few things. Performance, depending (hard to measure,
> but if that table gets used and it's huge, so likely strains memory and slows other
> db usage down). Also, I'm planning daily snapshots, so anything on the disk has some
> small impact on cost that adds up over time. If I move the data off the server,
> there's network bandwidth costs (also small, but would add up).
>
> It's definitely something to think about. Since I'm now paying for every little
> thing and I'm cheap, I suspect I will experiment and optimize and do whatever costs
> the least.
>
> I put a full backup on dvd every 3 months, so that's kind of like cold storage. I
> may stop doing that though as it's also extra work and I've almost never used it.
>
> I'm not sure I agree about saving data. In the age of FB's recent reputation, I
> could see making a case for just deleting stuff for the sake of user privacy. I'm
> not sure who that old/saved data is for. It could be used for evil. More than one
> person has asked me to delete their old posts (which they made when they were 14
> or whatever). Also, simplicity says just delete it unless there's a good reason
> to keep it.

If you ever decide to get rid of the archive, do you think you could give us somewhat of an advance notice? I actually search archived posts pretty regularly. Sometimes it's just fun to read through old threads with posts from past users. Sometimes I remember something being discussed on here and I want to find it. But, the biggest thing I would miss is being able to access all of my own old posts. Over the years, GameTZ has inadvertently turned into an archive of my video game thoughts/opinions/reviews/etc. I've participated in so many discussions like "Favorite games of all time", "Top NES games", "Favorite RPGs", etc etc. I actually refer to these pretty often. Any time a new/similar discussion pops up here I refer to what I posted the last time as a starting point. Or, sometimes it's a non-GTZ discussion so I just come here to grab my answer that I already spent the time putting a lot of thought into. If you decide to remove the archive, I would love to have some advance notice so that I can scour my old posts and try to salvage anything I can think of, to save in OneNote or something.

bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
* 4-May-2018(#59)
@Scott -- Consider this your advance notice. I'm seriously considering removing the forum archive.

The email trouble has slowed me down, but once that is resolved, I'll likely move on to other ways to optimize the site. Removing the forum archive seems like the easiest thing to do that might also have the biggest impact.

It's likely that I'll still have the archive offline somewhere, so it probably won't be deleted. But, only I would have direct access to it at that point.

I was just thinking I may try removing it for a week as a kind of experiment to see how that goes.

I also may do something similar with archived offer/trade messages.
John
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 400 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (13) Secret Santa
4-May-2018(#60)
Do you really see a big gain from pulling the archive? You already have it as a separate table, right? So I don't think it would be much of a speed impact.

And is it really that much data to keep around? Just seems data is so cheap these days. I guess I also hate to see it go away. Once in a while I need to search for something older and really like being able to pull it up. frown
bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
4-May-2018(#61)
bill wrote:
> ...t the size of the forum archive. It's 3.2gb or 43% of the GameTZ's
> total database size (7.5gb on disk). The offer/trade messages archive is about 1GB
> for another 13%.

So, roughly 56% of the database's size (on disk) is for rarely-used archive tables.

The daily snapshots I'm doing use about 1.5gb of space. On top of about the first snap used 20gb. I'm keeping 60 days of snapshots (may lower that). So, 20 + (60*1.5) or 110gb of snapshots per month. That costs: $2.86/mo. OK, not much, I'll admit. But, um, $34.32/year. I suspect if I could get rid of the archives, it would save like $10/year at least, maybe $20/year.

The other "cost" is harder to measure. Querying the archives tends to be slow and memory-intensive (not sure, but I assume). That impacts other people using the site, but it's hard to measure. Also, it means gtz needs a beefier server to handle such things. Potentially, we could save more like $25/mo if we downgrade from the current 2CPU 7.5gb server to a 1CPU/4gb server. I'm not sure if that would just be too slow for other stuff, but given that we don't seem to be stressing the current server, it may be worth trying at some point (especially later as usage continues to go down, like in a year).

I use the archive too, so I understand. It just seems crazy that more than half the database is being used for archives that are rarely used by a few people. Maybe we can live without it? Do other websites keep everything around like that? Do we trust the websites that do keep stuff (fb *ahem*)?

There's a vague privacy or security issue related to keeping every forum post ever made by every user for 20+ years. That can be used against people in some way, maybe stuff that got said when they were young and foolish and not looking for a job, etc. I already hide the archive a fair bit to help protect against that, why not get rid of it entirely?


Other thoughts: we could consider "unarchiving" certain key topics if they are worthy of saving somehow. I don't actually love this idea and likely there's a needle in a haystack aspect to this. But, it's a possibility.

Potentially, the archive could be made into a static html tree (not database, just linked static files), even put on a CD or something (though it may be bigger than a DVD-R already). It would be some work to generate that and it could be buggy and not especially searchable, but I'm just brainstorming here. I think mostly it's just not that valuable and kind of waste to keep all that noise around.

I could just leave it as is, I know. But, I feel like on some level, I should make some effort here to smooth the decline of the site out, take on looming issues before they become problems. Money does matter, but it's complicated (related to how much I get paid for keeping this place going [never been much, but how low am I willing to go... and I'm feeling fairly burned out these days and not that into this place or the Internet in general, so it seems to make sense to get costs way down so that's not something that bothers me]). Moving the hosting will save a lot, other stuff will be smaller in comparison. Part of me just loves to over-optimize too, so maybe I'm just nuts and need to be stopped.

I think it's fair to say it's better just to keep everything as-is. But, I think it's always worth considering stripping the site down to the most important stuff that matters to most users (trading/community features). The is a lot of stuff we have been doing that is superfluous (off the top of my head: reviews, mentors, archives, top traders lists, etc.) that may not seem like much but would make things easier to just drop, especially if we nix most of it. We'd have a leaner website that's easy to keep going, has very low costs and low maintenance, etc. That's where I'm coming from on this more or less. I can understand if people don't love this idea, but I've been carrying this burden for a while (with help, surely) and things really are in decline (have been for years and seem to be continuing slowly to go down). Something has to give. We can just let it happen or we can try to work with it, focus what we have left, etc.

Scott
GameTZ Gold Subscriber Quadruple Gold Good Trader Global Trader - willing to trade internationally Has Written 1 Review
4-May-2018(#62)
bill wrote:
> @Scott -- Consider this your advance notice. I'm seriously considering removing
> the forum archive.

image

lol thanks for the notice.

JD
400 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Global Trader - willing to trade internationally This user is on the site NOW (40 seconds ago)
4-May-2018(#63)
Maybe delete sale/trade threads? It'd free up alot of space
John
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 400 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (13) Secret Santa
5-May-2018(#64)
bill wrote:
> The daily snapshots I'm doing use about 1.5gb of space. On top of about the first
> snap used 20gb. I'm keeping 60 days of snapshots (may lower that). So, 20 + (60*1.5)
> or 110gb of snapshots per month.

It seems like this is excessive. Do you really need that many daily snapshots? I'd usually keep maybe a weeks worth -- then go to just once a week or something. Seems like you'd save a ton by just keeping less daily snapshots that you are very unlikely to need, right?

> That costs: $2.86/mo. OK, not much, I'll admit.
> But, um, $34.32/year. I suspect if I could get rid of the archives, it would save
> like $10/year at least, maybe $20/year.

Yeah, so, I'd just donate $20/year to be able to keep the older forum archives if that is what we're really talking about here?

> The other "cost" is harder to measure. Querying the archives tends to be slow and
> memory-intensive (not sure, but I assume). That impacts other people using the site,
> but it's hard to measure.

But we admit that they are rarely queried, right? I mean, only one of these two are probably true:

1. We query the archives very rarely -- so the impact when it comes to slowness or memory intensiveness on the site seems minimal.

2. We query the archives fairly often -- which means to me that they are certainly more useful than when we discussed it above -- so it seems worth keeping around maybe?

> I use the archive too, so I understand. It just seems crazy that more than half the
> database is being used for archives that are rarely used by a few people.

I guess, to me, the percentage comparison of the archive to the current doesn't mean anything. I mean, who cares the percentage of the DB that is archive versus current? It doesn't make a big difference in my eyes. The site has been around a long time. If the archive was 90% of the total DB size, I still wouldn't think that was a big deal.

I feel like we're still not talking about a ton of actual storage space -- regardless of the percentage of the overall DB it happens to be.

> Maybe we can live without it? Do other websites keep everything around like that?

I think most do. Reddit does. Facebook does. Most of the forums that I use do.

> Do we trust the websites that do keep stuff (fb *ahem*)?

I think there is a difference between trusting them with personal data -- regardless of how old -- and trusting them with things that I posted publicly. I don't worry about trusting sites too much with a public post I made 10 years ago.

> Part of me just loves to over-optimize too, so maybe I'm just nuts and need to be stopped.

smile yes

> I can understand if people don't love this idea,
> but I've been carrying this burden for a while (with help, surely) and things really
> are in decline (have been for years and seem to be continuing slowly to go down).
> Something has to give. We can just let it happen or we can try to work with it,
> focus what we have left, etc.

I get that. So, you can do whatever you want to do, of course. I just think that the forum archive might make more sense as a "it works, so let's leave it as it is" thing. But, if you go otherwise with it, I'll live. smile

- John...
bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
5-May-2018(#65)
Thanks for the feedback.


re: how many snapshots to keep -- yeah, hard to say. I certainly have used backups to restore stuff for people many times in the past, even going back months. But, it doesn't happen that often and part of my new plan is just to say "no, sorry the data is lost." I think daily backups are essential to restore the site in case of some catastrophic problem where the disk is lost. But, I agree it's debatable how many days to keep. Keeping more days is generally helpful with partial restores of some kind, but there can be insidious cases where something is deleted and not noticed for a week. I am no longer copying the disk offsite at all since the network costs tend to pile up for doing that. So, I don't want to skimp on the snapshots too much as it's the only backup now. 60 days was a safe number. I could easily drop that to 45 or 30, maybe less. We'll see.


re: archive usage/effect -- I'd have to put some code in to be sure, but I think the archive isn't used much. I'm not sure it follows that this means there's little or no impact. Databases do a lot of stuff to try to make things faster (e.g. in memory caching, etc) and those resources might linger even with minimal usage. I know I've run into a query cache that causes the same query to be faster the next time you run it, for example. Databases are complicated and can be optimized in a lot of different ways (I can only speculate based on limited experience). It's certainly true that querying the forum archive is notably slower than the regular forum. And, I have gotten the impression it "warms up" (gets faster as subsequent searches are done).


re: privacy -- The privacy issue may actually be the biggest concern for me. When GameTZ was just starting out and the Internet was young, I and others were naive in many ways. Privacy was barely a concern back then. GameTZ used to put all kinds of stuff out in public like real name, email address and mailing address. Things changed in the last decade or so. I have since taken much more care to hide info like that, but mostly in places where the data type was know (e.g. we had an address field, so I just stopped showing the field, done).

The forum is different, all the posts are untyped and I have no idea what's in them from a programmatic standpoint. There have certainly been many cases of personal info being posted both by the person themselves, their friends or their enemies. I've deleted many posts after being asked by people wanting privacy. I think going through that with various folks has shifted my thinking more and more. I take it very seriously and will make a big effort to do all I can to remove info like that. But, it's hard to be sure I got it all. All I can really do is search for their name or whatever, but a slight spelling difference or wording can cause me to miss it.

I've had some experience with bad people online. My naivete has been burned out of me. There are people out there who want to do others harm. All those old posts are a gold mine for them, potentially. Stuff that may seem innocent like talking about your family, dog, hobbies, sex life, etc can be used against you. We've had it happen here (Sheesh got crank calls, someone else maybe got fired after someone called their boss) There has been someone over the years targeting various gtz users (with anonymous harassment) that clearly used what was written in the forums.

I don't mean to over make the case here. But, I think there are good reasons to just delete old stuff as it makes that sort of thing impossible. And, given that there is real risk/exposure, I have to question what the benefit of keeping old posts is exactly.

I think not keeping data is becoming more common now and even a feature in some cases. For example, Snapchat deletes their posts very soon after they are sent. Gmail is adding a self destruct email feature soon. I think this is part of a trend where people are becoming more concerned over privacy. There's also the new European GDPR law that is about the same kind of issues, e.g. "the right to be forgotten".
DarkFact
GameTZ Gold Subscriber 350 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Has Written 4 Reviews
5-May-2018(#66)
yes keep it simple yo, less is more
bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
* 5-May-2018(#67)
I should eliminate user icons too, they are non-essential and use up valuable resources. evil
DarkFact
GameTZ Gold Subscriber 350 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Has Written 4 Reviews
5-May-2018(#68)
Dude, don't delete my Dragon Ball Super Goku, they worked so hard on that animation cell, at least ten minutes by someone who's never watched nor read Dragon Ball before.
tonymack21
GameTZ Subscriber 500 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (7) Has Written 3 Reviews
5-May-2018(#69)
thats evil!

Sid_Ceaser
GameTZ Subscriber 500 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Has Written 6 Reviews
* 6-May-2018(#70)
If you do eliminate archive, would we get a post count on our bio pages? >smile




DarkFact
GameTZ Gold Subscriber 350 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Has Written 4 Reviews
6-May-2018(#71)
You could call it "Nerd Points".
Boss
GameTZ Gold Subscriber 700 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (8)
7-May-2018(#72)
Sid_Ceaser wrote:
> If you do eliminate archive, would we get a post count on our bio pages? >smile
>
>
>
>
>

> If you do eliminate archive, would we get a post count on our bio pages? >smile
>
>

Any of the still active participants of this thread may have an advantage. evil
http://gametz.com/?S=4690866&A=Forum&area=General&...
tonymack21
GameTZ Subscriber 500 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (7) Has Written 3 Reviews
7-May-2018(#73)
Boss wrote:
> Sid_Ceaser wrote:
>> If you do eliminate archive, would we get a post count on our bio pages? >smile
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>> If you do eliminate archive, would we get a post count on our bio pages? >smile
>>
>>
>
> Any of the still active participants of this thread may have an advantage. evil

a LOT of abandoned and frozen accounts there :/ see a few names that are still around


Boss
GameTZ Gold Subscriber 700 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (8)
* 7-May-2018(#74)
Let's count to 10,000 in the early 2000s turned into lets use up all of bill's server space in 2018.

Jokes aside, I'm for removing the archive if it improves site performance. I use it from time to time to find old images.

image
tonymack21
GameTZ Subscriber 500 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (7) Has Written 3 Reviews
7-May-2018(#75)
Boss repping that UGTZ hardcore

bill
GameTZ Subscriber GameTZ Full Moderator 600 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (15) Has Written 26 Reviews
7-May-2018(#76)
In related news, anyone want to buy ugtz.com (the domain)?
tonymack21
GameTZ Subscriber 500 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Gold Global Trader (7) Has Written 3 Reviews
* 7-May-2018(#77)
I feel like the community needs to buy that and make it a museum page about the history of gtz. could feature memorials for PiemJi and others who have gone on before us, a run down of the history and story of how ugtz began (as a usenet group iirc?) and became gtz. etc

ryanflucas
GameTZ Subscriber 1000 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader
7-May-2018(#78)
Buy the domain, redirect it to a Facebook memorial page.
JD
400 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Global Trader - willing to trade internationally This user is on the site NOW (40 seconds ago)
7-May-2018(#79)
We should chip in to help
DarkFact
GameTZ Gold Subscriber 350 Trade Quintuple Gold Good Trader Has Written 4 Reviews
7-May-2018(#80)
Well, I'm assuming this would be a fully-fan funded and operated project, else I don't think Bill would be offering to sell the domain. raspberry

Topic   server move will be Wednesay 4/25 !!