1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Why more threads is not always better.

Discussion in 'Black Hat SEO' started by keith, Feb 19, 2010.

  1. keith

    keith Junior Member

    Jan 26, 2010
    Likes Received:
    Web Development & SEO
    Outside of Chicago
    Home Page:
    Hey Everyone,
    Wanted to share some info here that I've stumbled into with Scrapebox's new update, it supports 500 threads for the fast poster now and I wanted to try it out.

    And....it worked dreadfully slow, getting me a posted success rate of about 5%. I've spent quite a few hours today working out the kinks as I have XRumer arriving on Monday to setup on my server here.

    Now, my setup is basically a shared T1 line rigged up with comcast. (It's strange and no one there knows wth to do with me), and an old gaming PC that is vast overkill for just about any type of Blackhat server duty that my internet can handle.

    So, as I was trying to track down the issue, I found out my router (a WRT52G2/S2) can't handle that many connections, and will simply toss the new ones, leaving them to timeout in scrapebox.

    To prove my theory, I lowered the threads to 10, and low and behold, a 80-90% success rate using the same list.

    The good news here is that you have two options, either lower the threads running, or look into upgrading router firmware, I set up DD-WRT and it's running great, but my router still cannot handle that many connections (around 1800 seems to be it's dead spot), the other key here is LOW TCP/UDP timeouts.

    In addition to this, I have also setup a cacheing proxy server locally, and I'm setting up a caching proxy (that can then use proxy firewall to choose a proxy), this should further cut down on connections.

    Feel free to ask questions, I'm not a pro with this, but DD-WRT has solved many of my issues and I like helping :)