Attachments Announcement, Please Read

[Svedish_Chef]

Manu... manu ... manu

You know better than to post.

Hope you braced the server

 

[Natalie Nessus]

The attachment deletion idea is good - I am probably the worst offender? Sixty days is adequate

 

[tn_8tiv]

Great idea, all old things must be thrown out occasionally. I should know...

 

[Weird Harold]

Re: Me again!

harold - I think that's a great idea. The problem is that I don't think that data is stored on when each file was last accessed. I'll look at the table and see, but I don't think that data exists.

I presume the attachments get deleted from the database when the post they reference is deleted?

If that's the case, then it might be time to consider purging inactive threads from the BB.

I'm sure there's a way to purge old threads based on the last post instead of the first. Most BB software I've worked with had a way to delete posts older than a set time and would reconstruct threads beginning with the post that was within the time limit.

It's sometimes fun to dig up old posts but for the most part, any thread that hasn't had any activity for 90 days isn't going to get resurrected and can be deleted.

 

[Dillinger]

Actually WH - I don't quite agree with that - maybe 90% of the threads that don't have activity for 90 days don't get resurrected - but that doesn't apply to all of them. One example, off the top of my head, is my Literotica Etiquette thread which one person or another pulls up every now and then to show to new comers. There are others as well that every now and then are brought back.

Here's a couple of ideas - perhaps 180 days instead of 90 days? Even only deleting all threads that haven't had activity in a year would put a dent in things. And since the search function isn't working its very hard to find those threads anymore...

Another idea is to archive older threads. These archives can be stored on an older server or drive that isn't as fast as the current system and isn't part of the operating architecture. However it can be accessed and searched. This way the threads aren't lost forever but can be found again as needed.

 

[Weird Harold]

One example, off the top of my head, is my Literotica Etiquette thread which one person or another pulls up every now and then to show to new comers. There are others as well that every now and then are brought back.
...
Another idea is to archive older threads. These archives can be stored on an older server or drive that isn't as fast as the current system and isn't part of the operating architecture.

Archiving is a good solution as long as it prunes the inactive attachments out of the database.

I suspect that your ettiquette trhead doesn't have any posts that are more than 90 days from the preceding post.

The thread that KM dug up for thanksgiving is one that should be flagged as permanent because it only gets bumped once a year.

 

[Dillinger]

Thats the problem - how do you decide which threads should be permanent and who decides - and does that person have the time to go through all the threads and make those decisions? Thats why I think archiving might be a viable solution. And if someone goes through the archives and pulls up a thread it then becomes "active" again (till its dormant for 90 days, when its archived again).

 

[Cheyenne]

I like Dilly's idea of putting old threads on a different slower data base. If the search function is working, I'm willing to wait for it to pull up what I'm looking for. If the search function is never fixed though, then it doesn't much matter if the old threads are out there or not. It is way too time consuming to manually hunt for them!

 

[kwt]

good plan

60 days is more than reasonable. it might make sense to just doa backup of the SQL database (or however it is stored) so that time, money, energy allowing, archives of the threads like "Upload feature" .. where there are so many fun posts with pics, might be accessable to folks. Or maybe someone could do a gallery of them and access them as single, small jpg's instead of a database query?

anyway, thanks for asking for input. do what you gotta!
thanks for a greate site.

kwt

 

[The Whole Board]

Oh well.........I'm gonna go look at my old "Post a pic and add a caption" thread while I still can then.


Bummer.

This was my thought exactly. That is the thread I will miss the most when pictures are lost.

I have not read this entire thread yet, but if the following has already been suggested, ignore this please.

Is it possible to delete the pictures that are in threads that have not been viewed in over 60 days? This way, perhaps the ones that would be missed won't have to be. And the ones that no one cares about or remembers will be history as they should be.

 

[Dillinger]

Ignoring, per your request... (now go read the "whole" thread.... *lol*)

 

[The Whole Board]

I have also wondered about deleting single word posts " bump " or ones that contain only smileys.

Would allowing us to fully delete posts again be helpful in a small way? Over time, the ones we dump ourselves could certainly add up.

I know, I know. When someone deletes the first post in the thread, the entire thread gets deleted. Is this such a loss? Or can you set it so only later posts can be dumped?

 

[Angel]

I know, I know. When someone deletes the first post in the thread, the entire thread gets deleted. Is this such a loss?

It's not a HUGE loss, but it does delete the posts of other people, reducing their post counts. I think most of us don't really give a damn about our post counts anymore - they novelty has worn off.

However, I am extremely against anyone else having the power to remove my posts from the board because they deleted theirs.

 

[cymbidia]

While i just want SEARCH to work again.

 

[Unclebill]

Re: Re: Re: Attachments Announcement, Please Read

Originally posted by Laurel
Hi Dilly!
Here's our logic, flawed as it may or may not be: the attachments are stored directly in the database, and the table where they are stored has become huge (hundreds of Meg). When a thread with an attachment is viewed, it bogs down the SQL server while retrieving the attachment. Manu said that the majority of "slow queries" showing up in the logs are queries done on this attachments table. In theory, stifling the runaway growth of this table should give us some performance boost, at least when viewing threads where an attachment is involved. As I said previously, and as you of all people know, we're both morons, and there's a good chance we're totally wrong.

My solution has been to turn off the automatic disply of images in threads by setting the option setting shown below to 'No'. It's under the Thread View Option of the Edit options page under the Control Panel. Threads download faster and if I want to view an image, I can click on the link. So your user population can help by doing something this simple thing.

Show image attachments and code in Posts?[/B] Selecting no will show a hyperlink instead[/QUOTE]

 

[Harbinger]

I think most of us don't really give a damn about our post counts anymore - they novelty has worn off.

I know I don't. Once I hit 365 it was pretty much over for me. I don't even look at my post count anymore.

Just wondering, could certain threads be awarded a protected status that would keep them from being purged of pictures? There is some Lit history that should be preserved for future generations.

 

[PeterBilt]

I support the concept

Of cleaning house, but I agree with others, that if it could be based on thread last access, it might be better than details on the attachment itself. I assume you're doing the traditional database activities of re-organizing, etc. - with this dynamic activity, indices can be split, etc. If an archive strategy is pursued, I would think 30 days since last access should be more than adequate; if no archival, one would probably want that protection scheme. Sorry, I am more familiar with mainframe and UNIX databases, not so much SQL*Server, etc.

 

[registered "^^"]

yes

down

 

[Guest]

Sounds like a great idea. Do it!

 

[Dragonette]

Some yes, some no

Words from writers about correct writing.
Avatars that have been placed within threads

Could these be placed elsewhere so they are not completly lost?
A link to where they could all be stored

 

[registered "^^"]

to much memory is taken up now by storage. If we want something from a post we need to download or print it out. I for one will like the increased speed here. ty M & L

 

[Manu]

Testing Now!

I have just changed the settings so that images have to be clicked on to be viewed, rather than displaying them every time a thread is loaded. We are going to see if this makes a difference or not. Nothing has been deleted, nor will it be, until we do some more testing.

Thanks for all the feedback on this!

 

[registered "^^"]

seems to have speeded things a bit.....ty

 

[Guest]

much better

 

[Dragonette]

Hmmft

I have just changed the settings so that images have to be clicked on to be viewed, rather than displaying them every time a thread is loaded. We are going to see if this makes a difference or not. Nothing has been deleted, nor will it be, until we do some more testing.

It does not seem to change my speed and I am on a modem
It rather destroys the thread really, especially when the images are small, to have to click on each one to see it!

Therefore, more time!

Also I have found that my links via email now ask me to log in, then I get taken to the first origional thread or to my Control Panel, and I don't seem to be getting the emails telling me of a reply, either to threads or personal messages.
I just got the personal message pop up, after I had to log in!

As it is the festive season, many people add a Xmas pic, as a way of saying hello, merry etc.....
Wrong time to change things, I think
IMHO
Oh my the way, Merry Happy Season to all!