I really think something needs to be done about moviecodecs largest topic (Sony PS3 vs. Xbox 360 vs. Nintendo Wii). It’s the only topic that lags and I’m assuming the lag is due to its enormous amount of posts (which is somewhere around 83,000). The lag in there is soo bad, we can’t even post there sometimes which will eventually lead to a dead topic if no one is willing to wait 5 minutes for the last page to load anymore.
I say we either delete the first 80,000 posts or sticky up another 'continuation' topic such as “Sony PS3 vs. Xbox 360 vs. Nintendo Wii 2”.
Any input from or suggestions from anyone else would be appreciated. Thanks
o_O Wow, I have been gone awile. I wonder what it will be like when I actually come back to the states. Well, gotta go, I have some skiing in the Alps to do.
I like Xtrm’s idea of simply deleting a section of the thread rather than ending it completely...If it does come to that GR should lock it at 100,000 and leave it stickied as a testament to its greatness.
However, it should be easy anough for Bjarne or the mods ot delete a section (preferably somewhere in the middle) so that the thread may live on. That or boost the bandwith.
Bjarne, I have a suggestion for this problem. Not sure if it’d work, but here goes anyway...
Why not maybe archive the first 80% or 90% of the thread, so that it doesn’t actually load the whole 80,000 posts when you open the last page. Kind of like what Wikipedia does to “discussion” pages when they get too big.
IE...when you click on the actual name of the thread (where it normally opens up page 1) instead it opens up a page that has something like this on it...
So, when you click on one of those links, it will open up ONLY those posts as tho it is its own thread.
Meanwhile, when you see the thread name stickied at the top of the page, it will display as “first” page numbered in the brackets (2001, 2002, 2003....last)
In other words, the last 10% of the thread. If there are 2000 pages all up, or 10,000 posts per 10% percent, then the numbered section inside the brackets starts at the first page of the most current 10%.
So, as soon as that starts exceeding 10,000 posts or 200 pages, then it will need to be archived in the main page below the other archived links. Which is accessed whenever you click the actual name of the thread.
But whether you’re inside one of the “threads” archived or in the last 200 pages, there’s a link at the top allowing you to back-pedal at the browser to view those optional links again to jump to.
If, as I assume, it solves the problem, then the thread could conceivably continue forever, into the 200,000, or 1,000,000 posts.
Tell Bjarne to do that and if he does we can unsticky the part II of the thread. But until then I say lets us still have it until he does something about it.
__________________
<iframe src=“http://gamercard.xbox.com/REPLACE-THIS-WITH-YOUR-GAMERTAG.card” scrolling=“no” frameBorder=“0” height=“140” width=“204”>Put your gamertag here too.</iframe>
http://www.myspace.com/linkious
gg wrote:
Bjarne, I have a suggestion for this problem. Not sure if it’d work, but here goes anyway...
Why not maybe archive the first 80% or 90% of the thread, so that it doesn’t actually load the whole 80,000 posts when you open the last page. Kind of like what Wikipedia does to “discussion” pages when they get too big.
IE...when you click on the actual name of the thread (where it normally opens up page 1) instead it opens up a page that has something like this on it...
So, when you click on one of those links, it will open up ONLY those posts as tho it is its own thread.
Meanwhile, when you see the thread name stickied at the top of the page, it will display as “first” page numbered in the brackets (2001, 2002, 2003....last)
In other words, the last 10% of the thread. If there are 2000 pages all up, or 10,000 posts per 10% percent, then the numbered section inside the brackets starts at the first page of the most current 10%.
So, as soon as that starts exceeding 10,000 posts or 200 pages, then it will need to be archived in the main page below the other archived links. Which is accessed whenever you click the actual name of the thread.
But whether you’re inside one of the “threads” archived or in the last 200 pages, there’s a link at the top allowing you to back-pedal at the browser to view those optional links again to jump to.
If, as I assume, it solves the problem, then the thread could conceivably continue forever, into the 200,000, or 1,000,000 posts.
Hi,
I agree that could potentially be a fix. I also have a different fix in mind which involves some rather complex changes to the database and the way that posts are handled in the database (this fix is much better and would speed up the entire site, but also much harder to code and maintain (code-wise)) - basically, save each individual posts position within the topic (In this way the posts do not need to be ordered on every hit... and they can just be grabbed directly from the D.
I am working on finding the optimal solution for this. I know, today, exactly what the problem is.
.
