When browsing members , how come i'm not actually on there? Sorry if I sound so big headed bu i've been here over 9 months now and i'm not in the list.

Does it need updating or something?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gopher:
I think I just figured out exactly what's happening with the PEEL glitches that make posts not appear. It seems PEEL posts are handled in three steps: First, the post time is set in the thread list and thread is bumped to the top of the list. Second, the post is added to the thread. Finally the poster's name is set on the thread list. If someone loads the page after step 1 but before step 2 is finished, it goes on to step 3 and step 2 never may not be completed properly.

Speculation: I suspect it may be related to page caching; presumably, during step 2 the page is cleared from the cache so the next request will generate the updated page. This must happen before the data is fully updated, so that if someone loads the page after the cache is cleared but before the data is updated, the server mistakenly things the page is already updated, and the post does not appear until the cache is cleared again, either by an edit or a new post. The rare occassions when multiple posts in a row vanish are probably the result of a lot of people frequently refreshing the page, waiting for the missing posts to appear.

If this theory is correct, fixing this problem could be as simple as moving a single line of code down a few lines.

---

I don't want to spend too much time on this problem as it is not too crucial. What I will do is increase the cache size (actually did that a few days ago anyway) to decrease the likelihood of the scenario above. I will also try to change the caching so that a cached page that was created during the same second that the respective thread was updated isn't going to be shown on any further requests.

Only problem is that debugging the whole thing is far from easy. We'll just see what happens.

There is also a problem with client-side caching if someone requests a page that is then changed the same second. If that person comes back, the server only sees the seconds and figures that everything is fine (HTTP only has a second-resolution for caching). Since this can be avoided by reloading the page (F5), I won't look into this one for now.

Update: erm, looks like that wasn't it...
Now I'm getting client side caching problems... I'll look into it another time...

I'm not clear on your explanation, though; if you're not clearing the cache until the end, why do you ever get partially-updated pages? I'd think you should never see the bumped thread without the new poster name in that case. Are the thread lists not cached at all? On the one hand, they change the most, so caching is most expensive and least beneficial, but on the other, they're the most viewed pages.

I diddled around for hours that night, and I found even when there was almost no activity on PEEL, I was able to cause the glitch on three consecutive posts in different threads, all in off-topic. As long as I refreshed when the new date was present but the correct name was not, following the link always caused the glitch. Well, I only did it three times, because deliberately glitching every new post seemed a bit superdickish. I then tried the anti-glitch method 10+ times, without getting a glitch at all. Regardless of what the problem is, knowing how to cause glitches on demand should help with debugging.

quote:

---

By ... the guy aboce me:
Just wondering - where did the tradition of 'disscussion'

---

A simple typo years and years back. Once newbies started bitching about it, it was decided to keep t just to spite them.

quote:

---

an 'PEE Poll' come from?

---

Velourfog correctly argued since this was the PEE Lounge, the natural extension was to name polls PEE Polls. mArc was swayed by her flawless logic and history was made. The fact that it would confuse newbies was an added perk.

In short; we're all about ticking of newbies.

quote:

---

Originally posted by totalnerduk:
The on-topic section is like PEEL's kindergarten.

---

Personally I'd like to shut them all down right now (read: back when they all started), but then the only active thread we'd have is the movies thread.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nixorbo:
I can't wait until we have new Futurama content, not just for the show, but so I can shut down 90% of those inane "games."

Personally I'd like to shut them all down right now (read: back when they all started), ...

---

Nix, you're my hero.

Nix: For about a half a year, I didn't venture into General Disscussion unless it was either to link to a previous thread of the same topic/to the Fry Hole's FAQ for a new member or for the new Futurama thread. Only recently have I gone back into G.D., and that was for the only game I actually enjoy, which is the Framegrab game where one adds a caption to a framegrab. It's one of the only witty and fun "games" left, in my opinion. I really don't care for any of the other ones. Most of the others are just those stupid "What ______ Am I Thinking Of?" threads, which, to me, are just spammy and useless. This just leaves are the framegrab manipulation threads, which haven't been very interesting in about year when we started using generic framegrabs that can be found in every episode and the games have become wild guesses.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Apartment1I:
can I get you to unban one of my friends accounts?

---

As far as I know the only people that can actually unbann are our admins, so you might want to forward your request per e-mail to either SlimmyCGEF, or better yet [-mArc-] (his e-mail is at the bottom of the front-page and every single "alert"-button)

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nixorbo:

I can't wait until we have new Futurama content, not just for the show, but so I can shut down 90% of those inane "games."

---

Oh, yes, those will have to go quickly once 'Futurama' returns. Right now, they're helping the site stay alive, but when the series is back, they'll just become a nuisance.