Follow up

• +100

  by donpedicinijr
  on 2024-06-17 02:00

• +300

  by developertboyd
  on 2024-06-12 01:50

  I concur. Often takes 5-10 minutes to load a single page. I dont close the BB code reference pages out of fear that they wont load again when I need them.

• -300

  by HunterChristmas1247
  on 2024-06-11 17:48

• -1

  by deleyna
  on 2024-06-11 03:36

• +300

  by SnowKT
  on 2024-06-10 15:45

• -300

  by Those2Nerds
  on 2024-06-06 14:20

  As others said, this should be a bug report. This slowness some have reported seems to affect only some people and only sometimes. I've seen the devs responding to slowness reports when the servers were barely at 30% capacity and nobody else was having issues.   It's generally inadvisable to diagnose a problem you don't have personal ability to assess, or tell others how to do their jobs. You don't know the kind of hardware and infrastructure the site is running off of, nor what the capacity and usage are. It's much better to report the issue and let the staff figure out the cause and solution.

• +300

  by RyleiDreemurr
  on 2024-06-05 14:29

• -300

  by Nubs
  on 2024-06-05 05:05

• -1

  by DMFW
  on 2024-06-01 00:11

  It'd be interesting to know a bit more about any specific pages that show these symptoms. Speaking purely personally WA has (almost) always been pretty responsive even for my biggest pages with the most pictures, and although I do try and be careful not to go completely mad with images on a single timeline or page (in both their size and number), these are still rich pages with a lot of visual content. The couple of times I did have issues, I am prepared to attribute that (without much evidence) to some specific temporary server condition (backups maybe?) since subsequent performance has been fine. Certainly I have never had to wait anything like "minutes" for a page to load. Even in the worst cases I have experienced, it was low double digit seconds at the most. I have a world with more than half a million words spread over more than a thousand articles but they all behave "reasonably".   Performance can be complex topic and impossible to analyse from the outside. I'd suggest that if you a specific and repeatable issue it would be worth reaching out for help via a bug report.

• +300

  by Ricowitz
  on 2024-05-31 19:28

• -100

  by Amancham
  on 2024-05-31 13:24

  World Anvil runs fine for me. Maybe it's an issue with the size of the world or the amount of pictures used or whatnot. Either way, it feels like this should go in bug reports more than feature requests.
  
  Also, while better, bigger, more servers surely would be amazing, that would come with increased costs. Since that has to be paid somehow, it would likely come down to higher subscription costs for everyone.
  
  If it's not a bug and something that the majority of users are struggling with, then upgrading servers certainly is necessary.

• -1

  by WeStanNikolai
  on 2024-05-31 13:10

  I feel like this is not the kind of suggestion this feature is meant for...

• +1

  by bphilippe
  on 2024-05-31 05:51

  It runs perfectly fine for me too. But it sounds a complex question. On the internet side of it, there are many things to consider between the server and the home connection. On the server side, size of the worlds can also have an influence.

• -100

  by A Sneaky Devil
  on 2024-05-30 21:13

  It runs perfectly fine for me?

• +1

  by Scalenex
  on 2024-05-30 19:11

  This is not a bad idea, but the World Anvil team will almost certainly certainly reject this. They want suggestions for very specific things they can change. A broad "You should be better" will not be well-received.

• +100

  by Gaëlle S.
  on 2024-05-30 12:22

• +100

  by norselyqueer
  on 2024-05-30 11:00

• +1

  by Exarx
  on 2024-05-30 06:19

• +300

  by SeeleyOne
  on 2024-05-29 23:07