Adobe.com Performance

Hi all,
Since there has been some buzz about the performance of adobe.com, I wanted to post a statement on the matter from some folks on the team who have been working on the issue. See below:

Traffic to www.adobe.com has grown enormously during the last year, and at peak times site performance has suffered as a result. The www.adobe.com team places a very high priority on site performance. Additional monitors have been installed to track site performance, and there have been multiple initiatives under way that have been incrementally restoring the site to the expected high standard. These initiatives have included the addition of new servers, web server and load balancer tuning, JVM tuning, and content optimization.

North America traffic is served out of a facility in San Jose, California and the rest of the world is served from Dublin, Ireland. Many of the improvements were tested in the San Jose facility first, and these same improvements are being rolled out to the Dublin facility over the next couple of weeks. These hardware and software changes to Dublin will result in significant performance gains around the world.

7 Responses to Adobe.com Performance

  1. Don Hemminger says:

    http://WWW.ADOBE.COM has been consistently poor for me for the last 2 to 3 months. I’ve tried to make it known, but this is the first time I’ve been able to find the appropriate venue.I’m mainly a Flex Developer, so those are the pages I view most. The servers have been consistently slow, and almost every time I try to access a page, I get a “Cannot find server or DNS” error. If I do a Refresh I normally get the page OK. If I go to link on the page, I get the same thing. When I try to do something like Download the Flex 2.0.1 updates, I have to do many Refreshes. It’s frustrating. I hate to point clients to Adobe.com to look at Flex material and examples because it’s so slow.Here’s my “tracert”. If you need anything else, I’ll be glad to do what I can.———————————————-1 7 ms 7 ms 7 ms ###.###.###.###2 9 ms 9 ms 8 ms dist1-vlan50.dytnoh.ameritech.net [65.43.25.226]3 9 ms 7 ms 7 ms bb2-g1-0.dytnoh.ameritech.net [65.43.25.100]4 16 ms 16 ms 16 ms bb2-g5-1.sfldmi.sbcglobal.net [151.164.93.93]5 22 ms 22 ms 22 ms core2-p7-0.crchil.sbcglobal.net [151.164.43.195]6 22 ms 22 ms 22 ms bb1-p3-1.emhril.sbcglobal.net [151.164.43.254]7 22 ms 23 ms 22 ms bb2-p0-0.emhril.sbcglobal.net [151.164.43.253]8 25 ms 23 ms 23 ms ex2-p5-0.eqchil.sbcglobal.net [151.164.42.139]9 24 ms 23 ms 23 ms gar8-p390.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.79.89]10 68 ms 68 ms 68 ms tbr1033101.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.85.98]11 66 ms 66 ms 66 ms tbr1-cl1.sffca.ip.att.net [12.122.10.6]12 68 ms 68 ms 68 ms 12.123.12.5713 249 ms 260 ms 228 ms ge4-2.3.cr02.sjo01.pccwbtn.net [12.119.139.18]14 67 ms 66 ms 66 ms 192.150.18.1115 66 ms 66 ms 66 ms 192.150.18.60———————————————-RegardsDon Hemminger

  2. Jim Fitzgerald says:

    I don’t know if anyone reads this anymore, but adobe.com’s performance is so bad I often can’t even a single page to load; if something does load, it takes 15 minutes to produce malformed, incomplete, and borderline useless results.As frustrated as I am at this point, and after repeated denials from Adobe phone personnel that “there’s nothing wrong with the website” I can’t help but think that this goes beyond inexcusable and approaches incompetent, whatever the purported reason.If Adobe wants to provide software via the internet, then it needs to spend some money, buy a server or two, and insure bandwidth is available to provide access.

  3. Wil Harrison says:

    Just an update: performance is currently non-existant for me. The front page took 20 minutes to load and I am, as of this writing, waiting for the Feedback page to load, which it has been trying to do for over 25 minutes now.Tracert:Tracing route to http://www.wip3.adobe.com 192.150.18.60]over a maximum of 30 hops:1 1 ms 1 ms 1 ms 92.150.18.602 9 ms 8 ms 8 ms bas1-toronto02_lo0_SYMP.net.bell.ca [64.230.197.186]3 7 ms 6 ms 7 ms dis7-toronto01_Vlan141.net.bell.ca [64.230.158.193]4 7 ms 6 ms 7 ms core1-toronto01_GE11-2.net.bell.ca [64.230.204.137]5 8 ms 7 ms 7 ms core3-toronto63_pos3-0-0.net.bell.ca [64.230.140.226]6 7 ms 7 ms 7 ms bx1-toronto63_POS1-0.net.bell.ca [64.230.242.114]7 8 ms 7 ms 7 ms if-4-0.mcore3.TTT-Scarborough.teleglobe.net [216.6.98.17]8 23 ms 23 ms 22 ms if-6-0.core2.CT8-Chicago.teleglobe.net [66.110.14.9]9 22 ms 23 ms 22 ms if-5-0.core1.CT8-Chicago.teleglobe.net [66.110.14.178]10 23 ms 22 ms 22 ms ggr2-p3150.cgcil.ip.att.net [192.205.33.165]11 81 ms 80 ms 81 ms tbr1-p032501.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.123.6.30]12 80 ms 80 ms 81 ms tbr1-cl1.sffca.ip.att.net [12.122.10.6]13 79 ms 79 ms 80 ms gar17-p360.sffca.ip.att.net [12.123.12.33]14 81 ms 82 ms 81 ms ge4-2.3.cr02.sjo01.pccwbtn.net [12.119.139.18]15 79 ms 79 ms 80 ms 192.150.18.1116 79 ms 80 ms 80 ms 192.150.18.60Trace complete.The Adobe site is such a pain to access, even for such simple things as Acrobat Reader. A serious overhaul is required on Adobe’s part to make the site useable, which it currently is not.

  4. Jim says:

    Oh well, I still can’t seem to do anything on the adobe site (from multiple PCs) except I can get into some, but NOT all, of the user forums. I’ve reinstalled some Adobe software after a HD upgrade and now I’m unable to register it. What this means is that having my software time out is going to start causing some real financial problems……..Here’s my contribution on the path to nowhere….C:\>tracert http://www.adobe.comTracing route to http://www.wip3.adobe.com [192.150.18.60]over a maximum of 30 hops:1 2 ms 1 ms 1 ms pool-151-203-39-187.bos.east.verizon.net [151.203.39.187]2 26 ms 26 ms 25 ms 10.9.11.13 27 ms 27 ms 27 ms at-1-2-1-1721.CORE-RTR2.BOS.verizon-gni.net [130.81.11.193]4 26 ms 27 ms 28 ms so-0-2-0-0.BB-RTR2.BOS.verizon-gni.net [130.81.20.86]5 27 ms 27 ms 27 ms 0.so-2-2-0.XL2.BOS4.ALTER.NET [152.63.16.13]6 34 ms 34 ms 33 ms 0.so-7-0-0.XL4.NYC4.ALTER.NET [152.63.17.97]7 34 ms 37 ms 35 ms 0.ge-4-1-0.BR2.NYC4.ALTER.NET [152.63.3.118]8 34 ms 33 ms 34 ms 192.205.34.499 104 ms 106 ms 103 ms 12.122.105.1810 103 ms 103 ms 103 ms tbr1-cl14.cgcil.ip.att.net [12.122.10.2]11 104 ms 102 ms 103 ms tbr1-cl1.sffca.ip.att.net [12.122.10.6]12 103 ms 102 ms 102 ms 12.122.81.10113 100 ms 104 ms 101 ms 12.126.40.1414 110 ms 106 ms 101 ms 192.150.18.1115 106 ms 102 ms 103 ms 192.150.18.60Trace complete.C:\>This was a rather speedy one too! Usually it’s up around 130+ ms after I hit 192.205.34.49.Still no official response from Adobe, the only place on the internet I can’t go. I think it would be nice for Adobe to bump this up the priority list as this is a real problem for some of us.Somebody, somewhere, please help….Jim

  5. Jim says:

    Thought this might be of some use too. The problem appears to be in the att (cox) servers or possibly the Adobe host server (not sure). Look at the traces above, everyone starts to die when it gets near Adobe’s providers..This trace originates in Boston, using Verizon.net DSL ( 3MBs speed), Win XP SP2 Media Center on this box, but XP Pro and Home boxes perform the same.C:\>tracert labs.adobe.comTracing route to labs.adobe.com [216.104.212.161]over a maximum of 30 hops:1 2 ms 1 ms 1 ms pool-151-203-39-187.bos.east.verizon.net [151.203.39.187]2 26 ms 27 ms 25 ms 10.9.11.13 26 ms 26 ms 26 ms at-1-2-1-1721.CORE-RTR2.BOS.verizon-gni.net [130.81.11.193]4 27 ms 27 ms 29 ms so-0-2-0-0.BB-RTR2.BOS.verizon-gni.net [130.81.20.86]5 28 ms 28 ms 29 ms 0.so-5-2-0.XL2.BOS4.ALTER.NET [152.63.19.137]6 * 33 ms 33 ms 0.so-6-0-2.XT2.NYC9.ALTER.NET [152.63.21.74]7 35 ms 45 ms 34 ms 0.ge-4-1-0.BR2.NYC4.ALTER.NET [152.63.3.118]8 34 ms 35 ms 33 ms 204.255.169.1509 109 ms 117 ms 107 ms so2-1-0-2488M.ar1.SJC2.gblx.net [67.17.74.158]10 114 ms 108 ms 113 ms snjs-rtr1-borsw01.macromedia.com [206.223.117.45]11 114 ms 111 ms 112 ms labs.macromedia.com [216.104.212.161]12 111 ms 108 ms 125 ms labs.macromedia.com [216.104.212.161]Trace complete.C:\>

  6. Jim says:

    Not sure what has happened, but starting yesterday something has changed. I can get to Adobe again! :)David, if you fixed it, or if Cox fixed it, either way the improvement is significant. I’m keeping my fingers crossed that it doesn’t degrade again because I can live with it now.Thanks!!!!!Jim

  7. David Hatch says:

    I’m glad you noticed an improvement! Hopefully others have as well.If anyone on this thread has noticed an improvement I would love to hear from them.-dh