![[United Ostomy Associations of America, Inc.]](https://www.uoaa.org/forum/uoaaxt/images/uoaa_header_board7.png)
fixing board
Moderators: Bob Webtech, Jimbob
Forum rules
Before posting, please read our Discussion Board Terms and Conditions and our Code of Conduct. This particular area of our board is only for issues on how to use the board, not for ostomy-related questions!
Before posting, please read our Discussion Board Terms and Conditions and our Code of Conduct. This particular area of our board is only for issues on how to use the board, not for ostomy-related questions!
fixing board
Good luck to you...it must be frustrating to deal with all of this. While you are at it, could you make the search option more usable. Every item that I listed as a query under "search" on the new board received no reply (and these were simple items that used to be handled quite well on the old board...such as "bleeding from stoma", "underwear", etc. ) Admittedly, the old board gave you too many responses to your search and many were not applicable. The new one gave me none. thanks for all your work on our behalf.
-
wasthisreallynecessary?
- Posts: 547
- Joined: 2008-01-06 13:26:18
-
Bob Webtech
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1009
- Joined: 2005-09-29 11:17:09
EBGel,
You probably missed my post on the new board on April 2, when I intentionally deleted its "Search index" because I thought it probably contained errors following the phpBB2 to phpBB3 upgrade process, and may have been responsible for the crashes on March 26 and March 31. Deletion of that index meant that search queries couldn't possibly return any posts made before April 2. Following that deletion, the software automatically started building a new Search index, but it contained only information from new posts beginning on April 2.
To explain more of my reasoning: Examination of our server logs shows that although precise details of our three major outages vary, all three started essentially the same way: when an "Internal Server Error" (basically a crash of the software) happened while somebody was trying to post a message. This left the database in an open and locked condition, so other users couldn't access it. Also, because the posting process failed to complete normally, inconsistent data may have been written to the database.
How is this related to searching? The server logs show that Internal Server Errors also occurred while people were searching, although those errors didn't bring down the board (the fatal events were Errors on posting). But the Search index is intimately related to posting because every time a new message is posted, the Search index must be updated to include information from the new post, and the work required in doing this depends on both the size of the new post and the size of the existing Search index.
Therefore, I was hopeful that deleting the large (and presumably buggy) Search index on April 2 would greatly reduce errors on posting, resulting in more stable board operation. I also considered the possibility that I might eventually be able to restore searchability of the old posts by rebuilding the Search index using a technique that might avoid the errors that occurred the first time. But first, I wanted to see if the board would operate stably after deleting the index. So, I was very disappointed when the same kind of crash happened again last night, even though the board included only a tiny Search index containing only information posted from April 2 to April 10.
At this point, my only idea that might get phpBB3 running stably on our server would be to extend further the kind of change I made on April 2: In addition to deleting the existing Search index, also disable updating of the Search index when new messages are posted. Of course, that would eliminate searchability of not only the old posts, but also all posts made in the future as well. Thus, making phpBB3 run stably on this server might require eliminating the very searchability that you were asking me to improve.
You probably missed my post on the new board on April 2, when I intentionally deleted its "Search index" because I thought it probably contained errors following the phpBB2 to phpBB3 upgrade process, and may have been responsible for the crashes on March 26 and March 31. Deletion of that index meant that search queries couldn't possibly return any posts made before April 2. Following that deletion, the software automatically started building a new Search index, but it contained only information from new posts beginning on April 2.
To explain more of my reasoning: Examination of our server logs shows that although precise details of our three major outages vary, all three started essentially the same way: when an "Internal Server Error" (basically a crash of the software) happened while somebody was trying to post a message. This left the database in an open and locked condition, so other users couldn't access it. Also, because the posting process failed to complete normally, inconsistent data may have been written to the database.
How is this related to searching? The server logs show that Internal Server Errors also occurred while people were searching, although those errors didn't bring down the board (the fatal events were Errors on posting). But the Search index is intimately related to posting because every time a new message is posted, the Search index must be updated to include information from the new post, and the work required in doing this depends on both the size of the new post and the size of the existing Search index.
Therefore, I was hopeful that deleting the large (and presumably buggy) Search index on April 2 would greatly reduce errors on posting, resulting in more stable board operation. I also considered the possibility that I might eventually be able to restore searchability of the old posts by rebuilding the Search index using a technique that might avoid the errors that occurred the first time. But first, I wanted to see if the board would operate stably after deleting the index. So, I was very disappointed when the same kind of crash happened again last night, even though the board included only a tiny Search index containing only information posted from April 2 to April 10.
At this point, my only idea that might get phpBB3 running stably on our server would be to extend further the kind of change I made on April 2: In addition to deleting the existing Search index, also disable updating of the Search index when new messages are posted. Of course, that would eliminate searchability of not only the old posts, but also all posts made in the future as well. Thus, making phpBB3 run stably on this server might require eliminating the very searchability that you were asking me to improve.
Bob Baumel, UOAA discussion board administrator
-
ChicagoDan
- Posts: 123
- Joined: 2006-07-01 01:22:09
Agree with EBGel that either I would receive too much info from a Search or I wouldn't find specifically what I had recalled reading in the past. ( i.e. "sleeping positions" would give me threads regarding anything that included "sleep" and "position" but not the necessarily the phrase "sleeping positions").
That's why I liked the new "Favorite" function that was with the New Board. I could have marked a post as a Favorite and then gone to my profile in the future and just reviewed my specific concerns.
It's your call Bob. You know the technical and support aspects of this upgrade much more than the majority of Members. It reminds me of the Internet Explorer SP2 upgrade. People that installed it in its infancy ran into all kinds of problems, but eventually many months later when the bugs were worked out and the installation became mandatory, things went fairly well.
So..............Good Luck.
Dan
That's why I liked the new "Favorite" function that was with the New Board. I could have marked a post as a Favorite and then gone to my profile in the future and just reviewed my specific concerns.
It's your call Bob. You know the technical and support aspects of this upgrade much more than the majority of Members. It reminds me of the Internet Explorer SP2 upgrade. People that installed it in its infancy ran into all kinds of problems, but eventually many months later when the bugs were worked out and the installation became mandatory, things went fairly well.
So..............Good Luck.
Dan