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

from vb 3.8 to xf 1.0b5 -- 140,000 users and 1.4 million post

#1
OMFG its taking forever.. thats about all I can say. It took 9 hours to import the users, 12 hours to import private messages and Im just starting on profile messages.. there has go to be a faster way to convert vb to xf for big boards... otherwise this is going to take a week!

But other than that, no errors or any problems yet.. Ill keep you posted.
 

Kaiser

Well-known member
#2
OMFG its taking forever.. thats about all I can say. It took 9 hours to import the users, 12 hours to import private messages and Im just starting on profile messages.. there has go to be a faster way to convert vb to xf for big boards... otherwise this is going to take a week!

But other than that, no errors or any problems yet.. Ill keep you posted.
Wow thats a long ass time. Hold in tight there because its all worth it. You will love xenforo :)
 

Jake Bunce

XenForo moderator
Staff member
#4
9 hours for 140,000 users is very slow. My forum has 1300 users and the user module takes about 10 seconds. So I would expect yours to complete in about 20 minutes if it runs the same speed as mine.

There may be server performance factors involved here.
 

Mike

XenForo developer
Staff member
#6
Yeah, those numbers are definitely off what I would expect. PMs can take a while, simply because people don't tend to realize how many they have. But the user import should be much faster. If you selected the Gravatar option, that will slow things down. If your vB MySQL server is separate from your XF server, that will definitely slow things down if the network connection isn't good. If you're importing to a spare server, restoring a backup to the server is usually a good idea.

For reference, I routinely do tests on my dev machine with a 250k post board (though only 1400 users or so), and the whole import finishes in less than 30 minutes.
 
#7
Our board is around 2300 users with 1.3m posts, the import for the users completed in about 2 minutes, with the total process (users, posts, attachments and all) took about 4 hours total.

I have one of our members to thank for that - his collection of attached photos accounted for 20% of our database.... ;)
 

a legacy reborn

Well-known member
#8
Our board is around 2300 users with 1.3m posts, the import for the users completed in about 2 minutes, with the total process (users, posts, attachments and all) took about 4 hours total.

I have one of our members to thank for that - his collection of attached photos accounted for 20% of our database.... ;)
Even with one member...who has way too many pics that is really quick! Mind sharing your server specs and host?
 

MGSteve

Well-known member
#10
OMFG its taking forever.. thats about all I can say. It took 9 hours to import the users, 12 hours to import private messages and Im just starting on profile messages.. there has go to be a faster way to convert vb to xf for big boards... otherwise this is going to take a week!

But other than that, no errors or any problems yet.. Ill keep you posted.
probably got something to do with the CPU being a Celeron @ 1.2ghz.

Seriously, which host in their right mind would use them. No wonder its taking ages.

Here's the info from my test run through...

I've done a test run through of mine,

371,568 threads,
4m posts,
55,000 users

I pruned off all the inactive users with no activity & no posts in the last 12 months, pruned off all the banned accounts over 12 months old and removed all the accounts awaiting activation over 12 months old.

So, we pruned off about 1200 posts & 30,000 user accounts (!!) The forum is 8 years old, so a fair amount of junk in there, to be quite honest.

Here's the import screen, so you can see the times. The server in this case was my desktop W7 machine (Core i7 @ 3.6Ghz, 12GB Ram, Raptor HDD), but as others have said, load is pretty minimal during transfer. It was markedly slower (posts alone took 8 hours) the first time through when the Web server was on one server and the DB was my desktop. It may well be worth doing the migration with the web server & DB on the same box and then move the web files off onto the normal server if you have them separate.

The only thing I can't do is rebuild the search indexes at the moment as there is a bug in b5.

The attachments speed was hampered by the files being on the file server, so there was some LAN overhead there. It should be quicker if they're on the same machine.

But note, the difference in power is the main thing - plus your server is pretty loaded anyway. (Load Avgs 1.5 1.6 1.6) when I looked.

I personally would recommend a better hosting company, one that actually uses proper CPUs.

Oddly it also looks like you're running a 64bit OS on there, bit strange considering its only got 2GB of ram. Its not a virtual host is it, that may explain the CPU being reported as a Celeron.
 
#11
probably got something to do with the CPU being a Celeron @ 1.2ghz.

Seriously, which host in their right mind would use them. No wonder its taking ages.

Here's the info from my test run through...




But note, the difference in power is the main thing - plus your server is pretty loaded anyway. (Load Avgs 1.5 1.6 1.6) when I looked.

I personally would recommend a better hosting company, one that actually uses proper CPUs.

Oddly it also looks like you're running a 64bit OS on there, bit strange considering its only got 2GB of ram. Its not a virtual host is it, that may explain the CPU being reported as a Celeron.
Steve - I think you're confusing the original poster with the stats for my box - we had no problems or slowdown getting our board migrated over :)

Processors are horses for courses - our last server was a twin-dual core, but it cost more than double the current server per month and was never fully loaded. As far as our site goes we have that server to ourselves, so a Celeron is adequate for our needs. The Celeron 220 is a 64-bit processor, so the kernel version is correct. I suspect my box is a blade server or part of a larger enclosure.

The 220 draws significantly less power than other processors (it only has a TDP of 19W) and can be passively cooled. In a datacentre where power and cooling is at a premium I can see the sense in offering these servers for people who don't require cutting edge power ;)

The loads are due to me carrying out a file and database archive - I've got a cron job carrying this out at scheduled intervals. Right now it's 0.09 (1 min) 0.13 (5 mins) 0.10 (15 mins), which is pretty much normal.
 

MGSteve

Well-known member
#12
Ah sorry - I got my wires crossed. d'oh.

As long as the box works for you - that's the main thing. I would dread to think what it would be like churning through an upgrade of a similar size though. hmm, that said, I doubt anyone would be running a vb site of that size on that platform anyway. I know with the server we've got (quad core Xeon), it copes well with it now, but its in no way 'idle'. (and that's with the DB on a separate box!)

The downtime associated with such an upgrade really should not be ignored though. It would be great if the XF importer could somehow do it in multiple passes, so it grabs a snapshot of the db (or at least of the main thread / post / user counts) and then does the first pass, imports most of the data & once that's done, you can then close the old VB forum, re-run the importer and it pulls over the changes made since the first pass and then you go-live on the XF install.

Downtime would then be in the minutes (well, perhaps an hour or so) as opposed to day(s).

I can see the migration of my forum easily taking 8-12 hours on the live server. That's a long time for the forum to be offline.