CA3LE

@japlah I'm sorry I didn't see this when you posted it. I may have been programming.
 
@charles leclair thank you for finding this topic.
 
I think a random interval is a great idea for an automatic speed test option. I'll get that implemented and hit you back on this topic. I'll try to get to it sometime today or tomorrow. I'm going to think about it a little bit first.
 
- D

would love to join

I have some new tools coming out!  And I mean NEW!
 
If you'd like to get an invite when a new Beta is available simply vote on this topic.
 
Currently no ETA but development is moving quickly.
 
I'd like people who are willing to provide feedback but it's not necessary.  Just running the program will give me a lot of useful information.

My beta gives anyone the ability to run TMN on any computer they'd like.  Run it locally on a Docker images I've prepared for you or install it on any web sever, with or without SSL.  It only takes 2 files, a total of 1800 bytes of code on your end.  What speed will you see between two wired 1 GbE?   Exactly what you'd expect to see, watch for yourself.
 
tmn-on-my-server.mp4
The Mac and Windows machines are fairly distant, non-direct routes.  The connection traverses 2 switches, then the router, then another switch also adding in about 100 ft of cable before it arrives.  Not lab conditions, I wanted all of those real world variables. 
 
If you inspect I think you'll agree, TMN's results are pretty exact. 
 
tl&dr

 
So average 916 Mbps | 904 Mbps.  Adding 6% network overhead you get to 971 Mbps | 958 Mbps.  Which is right in line with what we see coming across the interface in reality.  
 
I did the same LAN testing when developing the current version (v18) you're using now, always do.  But now I'm giving the ability to do it yourself, super quick.  ... I've also done that before but not like this.  This is very different.  Cut and paste a few commands into Terminal or PowerShell and you're running local tests on all your devices in a few seconds.  You can also audit all of the code and understand the entire container in just a few seconds.
 
Pretty excited to share that with you all.  Curious how people will use it.

Just confirming that I would love to try the BETA when it releases. 

I want in! 

Happy Thanksgiving everyone!

Happy Thanksgiving everyone!

CA3LE thanks for combining my posts the .GIF was an afterthought.
 
Since Thanksgiving is finished for this year I thought I would link an old topic,
I must have PMed water the complete instructions.
I though they were all in the topic but they were not.
Any way she followed them close enough &  said her turkey turned out well.
I've cooked about 36 more turkeys this way since the topic.
I wish I still had the complete instructions written.
I do not need them for myself but if anyone else wanted them.
https://testmy.net/ipb/topic/9268-turkey-time-and-a-huge-waste-of-money/#comment-96374
 

I hope everyone enjoyed Family, football and food. 
 
Peace

Happy Thanksgiving everyone!

Same from me .
God bless all of you.
Don't eat until you explode.
 
 
 

To you's & your family!  
 

If you export all it shows the identifier, it's just hard to understand right now.
 
examples from exported csv Fri Nov 17 2023 @ 2:34:06 pm,UP,37.6 MB,46.9,BDBaer,322903284682,merit_network,60-27---east_lansing-mi-us,OzsHxkMm6 Fri Nov 17 2023 @ 4:35:15 am,UP,18.8 MB,36.34,BDBaer,322913467067,merit_network,60-26---okemos-mi-us,V6ypcp5Gy Thu Nov 16 2023 @ 9:11:49 am,UP,37.3 MB,35.26,BDBaer,32280867746,merit_network,60-28---williamston-mi-us,_APwZLe8H Wed Nov 15 2023 @ 10:55:51 pm,UP,100 MB,286.2,BDBaer,19916357074867,metronet,60-7---east_lansing-mi-us,KbqnYJk5s  
You see the 60-26, 60-27, 60-28, etc? 
 
It's very confusing, I'm sorry.  In the beginning I promised my users I'd maintain their old results.  It's a remnant of me trying to work with small fields in the legacy database.  It's so large that altering its structure is very difficult so I've had to do tricks in the past to add more data using the same limited fields. 
 
It stores the test location and your location in the same field, using a dash as a separator.
 
e.g. 60 is Dallas, 26 is Location 1.  This is resolved for you when you query your results on TestMy.net.
 

 
I'll add resolution of the locations in the export process for you soon.  
 
I also have a new program called My Projects in the beta.  With this you can give your locations your own name, which then is easily identifiable within your exported results.
 
If you'd like to try the beta let me know and I'll give you early access.

CA3LE,
 
I thought the same.
Since I do power all equipment off whenever I go to bed.
 
I worked with this some more & found the cause & a solution.
The cause was my OOMA Telo.
When starting my modem , router , & the OOMA Telo they are on their own separate Power strip.
This is so I can start them first & power cycle them without shutting down my computer if I want to.
 
Then I turn on a different power strip for my computer.
 
What was happening is the OOMA Telo started first and received 192.168.1.2 .
My computer Network Card wanted 192.168.1.2 but had to accept 192.168.1.3.
As far as I can tell my network card was denied 192.168.1.3 at first then received it.
So my computer & network card worked & showed 192.168.1.3 using ipconfig /all .
 
The solution was going into my router.
Then using Address Reservation for a higher IP Address 192.168.1.25 for example.
I also set the same in the OOMA Telo as a 'Static IP Address".
 
Now no more error shows up even after several reboots.
 

I'm checking out the Beta! It's interesting to toggle back and forth from the two versions. When I check it out more I'll write back.
 
Thanks!

That makes sense! I do see myself on the list now.
 
Thank you!

My beta gives anyone the ability to run TMN on any computer they'd like.  Run it locally on a Docker images I've prepared for you or install it on any web sever, with or without SSL.  It only takes 2 files, a total of 1800 bytes of code on your end.  What speed will you see between two wired 1 GbE?   Exactly what you'd expect to see, watch for yourself.
 
tmn-on-my-server.mp4
The Mac and Windows machines are fairly distant, non-direct routes.  The connection traverses 2 switches, then the router, then another switch also adding in about 100 ft of cable before it arrives.  Not lab conditions, I wanted all of those real world variables. 
 
If you inspect I think you'll agree, TMN's results are pretty exact. 
 
tl&dr

 
So average 916 Mbps | 904 Mbps.  Adding 6% network overhead you get to 971 Mbps | 958 Mbps.  Which is right in line with what we see coming across the interface in reality.  
 
I did the same LAN testing when developing the current version (v18) you're using now, always do.  But now I'm giving the ability to do it yourself, super quick.  ... I've also done that before but not like this.  This is very different.  Cut and paste a few commands into Terminal or PowerShell and you're running local tests on all your devices in a few seconds.  You can also audit all of the code and understand the entire container in just a few seconds.
 
Pretty excited to share that with you all.  Curious how people will use it.

Looks like they're in Pakistan.
 
blackcobracatcher's Speed Test Results
 
If your only seeing 2-8 Mbps here at TestMy.net then chances are you don't really have 500 Mbps.  You may see great speed nearby but the internet tends to be everywhere. 🤔
 
Imagine this, I'm in Pakistan and I setup a 10 Gbps network in my neighborhood and get all of my 200+ neighbors to sign up.  They're all super excited because after I get them connected I show them they're getting 10 Gbps using my speed test (testing against servers hosted over at my house... shhh, don't tell them that).  Imagine I have 4 connections out, a few 10 Gbps connections that connect me to other local/regional ISPs but I only have 1x10 Gbps that peers well internationally.  Depending on the routing, time of day and what the other neighbors are doing a customer might get 10 Gbps but may also hit the bottleneck of those connections out of the network.
 
This is the same thing ISPs do all over the world.  They oversell network capacity. 
 
You're always going to lose speed at distance but higher quality hosts/connections will take better, more direct routes and have higher capacity.  You definitely shouldn't drop to 2% of the connection speed.  And if that's what TestMy.net is showing you, that's what you're really getting.  At least to and from the location you have selected (Florida).
 
Here's my connection speed nearby, I'm in Colorado Springs - testing Colorado Springs
TestMy.net Test ID : 2h874_xfA.hbMDDdqXt
 
And here's to my hardest to reach locale, India.
TestMy.net Test ID : L5axksd8f.xOMgtA8Sl
 
So I'm running at 28% Download and 47% Upload
 
I usually get my worst connection speeds to India.  Testing against UK, still international and about 5000 miles I get better results. 
TestMy.net Test ID : ZwxVufpxD.lJx2Jf4FV
 
50% Download and 69% Upload.
 
And I usually see better results than that.
?t=u&l=50&z=65&q=CA3LE's Speed Test Results
 
This is my consumer home connection, using commercial connections gives much better results at distance.
 
You're hitting a bottleneck somewhere.
 
Other speed tests may paint a different picture.  You should probably stop using them.  Those other tests are often made by entities who have an interest in showing you a better result.  I don't.  I really don't care how you score.  I only care to show you the truth in the best way I know.  When you test at TestMy.net the servers are hosted under the most popular VPS hosts, currently Vultr is carrying the majority of my bandwidth (unbiased hosting).  Where other speed tests are reported to remove certain portions of the result and highlight others; which often makes things appear faster, TestMy.net always calculates your result simply and transparently using size/time = speed.
 
Let me put it this way, I wish everyone could see and understand the code behind TestMy.net.  If you did you'd know that it's actually impossible for it to show you 8 Mbps unless you actually have 8 Mbps.  The test wants to run full throttle, unless it's being restricted in some way.  So it HAS to be restricted to get the results you're seeing.  My guess is a bottleneck coming out of your ISP and Pakistan but it could be a number of issues that other tests for some reason never seem to notice.  But if it's slowing down TestMy.net, you're being slowed down.  Other speed tests obviously have different goals than TestMy.net.
 
As @xs1 said, try selecting different mirrors.  You may get better results on a server closer to you but you still shouldn't be getting such a poor result to Florida.  Run some tests against IN, UK and DE to see what your results look like.  Let me know when you're done and I'll post your results here in the forum for you.

I just recently snagged 2gb symmetrical fiber from the local ISP (Fidium - Illinois Consolidated)
 
Here's my result from speedtest.net to the local server.
 

 
https://testmy.net/7QGWrbaRI.png
 
I run 10gb SFP+ locally so nothing is slow for me. Feel free to ask me about my equipment if you want to know.
 
Thanks!

I love this! I know I am using iPerf3 for testing local network throughput but this is much prettier and appears fairly easy to use.

try the following command: iperf3 -c iperf.astra.in.ua -P 10
 
Let us know if it's any better

CA3LE I decided to install a fresh Firefox portable also.
Something must have corrupted this browser also.
The fresh copy seems to work for the tests.
I ran my antivirus & it did not find anything.
So I do not know why the portable browsers got corrupted.
For right now the problem is gone.
I also tried the corrupt version again & it has the lag problem.
So it has to be a corrupt file in it.

@xs1 @cholla
 
Very trippy but not a virus.  It's a bug with the newer version of chart.js.  I can't find the topic now but this was reported before. 
 
The beta version is using a newer version of chart.js but there's an odd issue with it.  Only seems to happen on older browsers.
 
A newer version has been released now so I'll recompile and see if it's resolved.
 
It's really weird.  Has to do with dynamic div sizing... it's like it can't figure out the size so it gets stuck in that loop.  Newer browsers don't do this... I think it actually may have been a bug in the browser itself.. which was later corrected.  But it doesn't change the fact that it remains on those old browsers... so I need to program for it.
 
This bug is only present in the beta, the production version is using an older version of chart.js not affected by this.

Thanks CA3LE,
I pinged dallas.testmy.net the results in latency were about the same as in the image I posted.
So close enough for me.
 
I finally checked out the location under your avatar.
 
I don't know exactly where the problem was but I suspect a corrupt file  in the Opera Portable folder.
It seems to be doing the tests now without the pause & incorrect very fast speed.