Having been absent for some time, I can see a clear change in the capacity to put a post up (within the post limit range).

I'm sure this is already known, but it is obvious the system copes with shortish posts, but not those that are still within the word limit.., so why the tantrum?

It is frustrating to wonder whether one's post will be accepted by the system, and currently the only advice is to copy/paste.The way to go of course,(I find that there is enough time when picking up the system's stubbornness,- to 'select all'/'copy' promptly. I have not yet pasted. The system decides on the third/fourth go that the post can be put up).

But why is the system on OLO unable to cope with ALL posts within its word limit?

I AM fully aware of the hard work that must go into a site like OLO, and that is appreciated; but is there no solution to this?

Ginx,

My guess is if OLO knew the answer to your question, the problem would be fixed.

I haven't noticed a connection to the post length, copy/paste or anything else - except perhaps time of day. Trying to post something at 6 PM requires patience. I put that down to load on the site - I experience most problems when the load is highest.

Hi Ginx. I wish I knew the answer. There are a few issues we are gradually working our way through, and that is one of them. I'd also be interested in getting a feel for how widespread the issue is. Who else is experiencing it. I've received one email from a regular poster who thought it might have been a subtle hint to them that we'd tired of their views, but mild paranoia aside, yours is only the second feedback that I have received.

I have problem with the site very often! I supposed that you not only block my posts but even that you block my visits!
Antonios Symeonakis
Adelaide

Oh! oh! Antonio! You surely jest sire?

I have just managed to log on after four attempts, guess what message I got? Yep! 'server error'! It's a wee bugger.

It is easy to think these are covert bans (I penned an email to GY, pathetically obsequious, and promising to be good............; and then put it to Drafts, and tried again). 'ere I is!

rstuart; good point. It IS damned frustrating though, (and there IS a problem Graham),-but it is not the end of civilisation as we know it!

Antonio (if I may?),-when I returned, I checked in as an observer occasionally to get the feel of the place again. I saw the thread about forum traffic being down a bit, (which I personally feel is a cyclic thing). Under these circumstances, do you think it likely that an administrator would covertly discourage posters on a discussion (underlined) forum? He/she would want all the discussion traffic they could get, within the forum Regs of course.

Right. Enough wid' the apple for the teacher.

It IS a pain, but (like me) we must have patience-right bl..dy NOW!

(1st server error message-trying again).
(2nd """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""").
(3rd """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""").
(4th """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""). Going gangbusters....
(5th """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""").

Almost daily server errors Graham. Sometimes it takes several goes to get a post up. The server is also very slow to respond when loading pages. Good luck finding the problem.

Well, I'm doing this post partly as an experiment, because the biggest server load is around lunch time.

I can assure everyone that there is no covert plot to discourage posters in general, nor any specific posters. I wouldn't have started this thing in the first place if that was my attitude.

We're working on the emails at the moment, which are the most urgent problem. After that it will be the server. I have been experiencing employee problems, which are hopefully fixing themselves.

No probs. Yesterday will do nicely.....

It actually seems to be very fast at the moment. Is that how others perceive it?

GrahamY: "It actually seems to be very fast at the moment. Is that how others perceive it?"

Yes. It was also like this earlier this morning.

Graham

I'm getting lots of 'server error' messages lately - two already in a relatively short session just now.

It always says at the bottom of the message that they're being reported to staff, or something to that effect. So I was assuming you knew about them, and am rather surprised to learn now that you're only just beginning to realise the extent of the problem.

I also find the loading speed varies, mostly it's okay but at times it can be very slow. Haven't worked out any rhyme or reason to it, though have assumed it happens at times of heavy traffic.

Have worked out now that I can mostly retrieve a post that doesn't go through by clicking on the back a page arrow, so I'm not quite as bothered as I was about it before I knew that.

Hope you are able to find a solution though, as it is detracting from the site's accessibility.

When I have trouble posting, I now put a note about that at the bottom of the post. Be assured that I'm doing it just to give you a running overview that the problem is ongoing. And yes, the site IS very slow.

I'm not technically au fait, so compared my capacity for posting/browsing on other sites. The problem IS here, Graham.

Sorry about this,-it's a headache for us, but a migraine for you.

GrahamY,

I commented upon site slowness and server error messages in a somewhat off-topic post to the quiescent topic thread 'OLO page defaults', here: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2637#60568

I took a screenshot of a server error message I got while attempting to post just a little time before 10:29 AM on Friday 17 April. It was 'incident number 6717-2910'. 'The fault has been reported to staff'. I had been assuming that there would be a log of such incidents available to OLO staff.

Whilst evidence of any denial of service (DOS) attack upon the OLO site itself would presumably show up in the site traffic logs at OLO, attacks mounted upon sites with which OLO interacts would presumably leave no record accessible to OLO. DOS attacks targetted in this way could both slow page loading in the way described in the linked post, and also presumably have a detrimental effect upon advertising revenue otherwise earnable by the OLO site.

If a third party wanted to disrupt or hold OLO back, that could be a way to go. It could be a line of investigation worth pursuing.

Like Forrest, I too have begun to wonder if OLO is having its own "swine flu". Given that the error messages claim they have been reported to staff (which they obviously don't) and that they occur anytime, not just during peak times.

I had to retry several times to post this morning. When I notice that it is taking a while to load, I stop the page, copy the post to a safe location into a word doc, go do something else and try again. This works but is time consuming and very frustrating.

I hope that OLO can find the bug soon, I do not envy you ATM. Tracing a bug takes a lot of patience.

1/5/09
Server Error
Incident number: 7059-1800
The fault has been reported to staff.
11.49" night

4/5/09 6.21" morning
Server Error
Incident number: 4535-4706
The fault has been reported to staff.

I have found that if you take too long thinking about what you are thinking of posting, the system thinks you have gone for a cuppa,and refuses to wake up when you try to post. I think it likes activity, and has a time out setting that trips.

I have found that if I log out and log back in it works fine.

Someone guessed that no-one gets told when those messages appear, and that is the case, or if there is a notification it was set-up to go to a mail box which is no longer monitored.

We've solved some of our problems, and we're looking at the rest. Perhaps I should do some fundraising on the forum to see if we can pay a consultant to come in and look at it and sort it.

What do you reckon?

Graham

I am prepared to send you a money-order if you need it.

The site is frustratingly slow, and getting a post up is no longer a foregone. One has to wait to see what the system decides.

That's very kind Ginx. I think we'll scope things out properly and then work out what we will try to raise money for. That way we'll all know what we are shooting for. We could discuss costs and campaigns on here as well.

Err - could I ask question? I may be doing something wrong but I lost the whole discussion on the Swine Flu.

Also I find about 6 windows will be open by the time I have looked around and left the odd post.

What am I doing wrong?

Yes, I get that build up of posts/threads. I don't know why. I bring them up as a menu, click on them individually to see if they are threads I've moved on from; and if they are;-close them. I don't know any other way of dealing with it.

Don't know about the swine flu thread..

Jewely,

The OLO index pages revert automatically after a period of inactivity on your computer to display only five topics per classification, and in order of opening posting date.

The column headings are actually clickable buttons. So if you want the index page to display in order of recency of posts, just click 'last post'. At the moment that will bring back your missing 'Swine flu' topic within the default five topic display.

In any display order you can choose to display more topics. Just click the drop-down menu button and select the number you wish to have displayed, then click the 'Display' button over on the right-hand side to activate your selection.

Be aware that your choices will also carry over to the Articles index, so if you have chosen to display topics 'one year back' in the General Discussion index, the Articles index will take a longer time to load than for the default 'one month' setting. If this is a problem to you, change back to the default setting before leaving the General Discussion index.

You will note that later today the topic below this one in the Technical Support category will disappear from the default display, as it will then be over one month old. You can get it back by simply selecting 'one quarter back' in the display options at the top of the index page, should you wish.

One of the little irritations of OLO is that your display preferences are not 'sticky'. I think OLO are working on that in a contemplated site rebuild.

Thank you Ginx.

Forrest I cut and pasted your reply in to Word, I'm going to have to stare at it for a bit. Thank you for the help.

Are posts in the help threads also added in to the number of posts you are allowed?

Is there a theory behind why posts are limited and words are limited?

This post is just to test if the notifications are going out OK for anyone following it. Susan P ed.

I've just read this again Susan, and I feel such a damn fool saying it;..but I don't understand what you mean?

Ginx,

Fractelle had complained, here: http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2718#61972 , on the 'Hey good lookin'' thread, that:

"I have not received any email alerts [from OLO] for close to 24 hours now. Have notified the PTB at OLO, but wondered if others had ever experienced problems receiving their selected alerts."

SusanP was posting on this thread, presumably in the hope that somebody who uses the email post alert function had it activated for this thread, and could thus confirm whether or not email alerts were being received by other users. I'm afraid I can't help in this regard as I have not ever used the email alert function.

That is what it is all about. It seems there may be gremlins in the OLO site, but they would need to know whether others are affected before spending time looking for a problem that may only in reality reside in one user's computer.

A user can activate the email alerts function by checking the box at the bottom of the 'Write new post' page labelled 'Send me an email notification whenever someone posts a follow-up comment to this article.'.

Well I'll be damned! I didn't know that Poirot, (that's a compliment btw!).

Strewth! I don't understand any of the technical stuff, but you're right. There are some continuing glitches here.
_________________

Right on cue!!:

1 server error.

(I reckon the gremlin has a sense of humour. When I posted on this thread before I got several server errors!).

Trying again.

Umm... what notifications? Do I need to request them somewhere?

And sorry peoples, I have lost another thread. The Peak.

Err gone and I clicked on the things at the top of the menu. Lots.

Might be just as well. I printed out replies from UOG and Peter and read them umpteen times and sort of felt myself getting dumber and dumber.

Ginx & Forrest

I did not receive any email alerts and due to bugs in system that OLO has been experiencing lately assumed that it was their problem, so reported it to Susan, who promptly checked out their side of the technology, but found no problem. Therefore, I rechecked my system and found that somehow my email from OLO was being directed into my Spam bin. Don't know how I managed that but I did. And thanks to Susan I sorted out what was essentially my 'bad'.

Jewely

Please, I implore you not to try and understand what UOG or PtB write, no one else entirely gets what they're on about either. Your life is too valuable, save your time for the many erudite posts from the legion of succinct posters at OLO.

Cheers m'dears

Fractelle, it was actually a team effort.

GrahamY

QUE?

OK, in future I promise to thank the entire team at OLO for any help I receive, even though my questions were directly handled by Susan.

Sheesh.

"Please, I implore you not to try and understand what UOG or PtB write, no one else entirely gets what they're on about either. Your life is too valuable, save your time for the many erudite posts from the legion of succinct posters at OLO."

Thank you for your advice Fractelle. Do they understand each other?

Now I have to go look up the word "erudite", I thought it was a type of amethyst.

Jewely

What an excellent question: Do PtB and UOG understand each other's posts? I would suggest that they are both religious trains running on different tracks.

"Please, I implore you not to try and understand what UOG or PtB write, no one else entirely gets what they're on about either. Your life is too valuable, save your time for the many erudite posts from the legion of succinct posters at OLO.

Cheers m'dears
Posted by Fractelle, Saturday, 9 May 2009 7:51:07 PM"

Wheyyyhey!! I can post again!

Fractelle, this gave me such a laugh! Thanks!

I thought this was a post about error messages. Can we leave other posters alone? You're right Fractelle. I'm being a little tetchy, but I did guess what your problem was before you got around to checking it. And what with all the sniping I got caught up in the spirit.

It takes a truly enlightened and mature being to apologise and admit to unqualified error.

;-)

OK. I'll stick to the topic; well on matters technical at least.

I want to say at the outset that I would not under any circumstances have the expertise/work ethic/commitment to run a site; any site. I have no real clue about the work, but can guess at it.

So;- I thank-you. I do really.

I needed to say that, to that level (and meant it!), because to be blunt, I'm getting sick of the slowness of the site (took 32 seconds to get on, and clicking from the National forum to the Main page took so long that I clicked out and came back in to the Main page!),-- and the constant server error messages.

Now it seems (I'll try and get this right), that Articles appear to have a two post limit per twenty-four hours on each thread??

Was that always the case? I raise it because these things combined are making OLO very difficult to navigate and post on.

I must admit, for me personally,- if it continues I'll simply not bother. Only because it is so darn frustrating, that's all.

(That's a way to ban!! Simply make it too difficult! Surely I'm not the only one experiencing this?).

If this was occurring 'across the board' for me, then maybe I need to check my 'puter. But it isn't, though I know that compared to most of the developed world our broadband IS slow.

Sorry Admin,-I am a wee bit fed-up with this. It IS a compliment you know! There is a mass of interesting stuff on OLO. I like to ...er, get into the thick of it...

Hi Ginx, the two post rule was instituted not long after we started the forum. It's 4 posts for forum threads. The idea was to cut down on abuse, and I think it had that effect, which might give you an idea of where things were heading, given how robust debate can still be on the site.

I will be getting someone to look at the site, but I have to hire them yet. Not as easy as you might think. And I do have some volunteers, but again, not necessarily that easy to get them co-ordinated, especially when previous programmers have left some of the facilities to do with the site in a bit of a mess. I think we've got that sorted, but I'm afraid you will have to bear with me for a bit longer.

I'm told the site is working better than it was. There was a problem with the database server which has been fixed. As I flagged earlier in this thread, I'm thinking of doing some fundraising to sort the site out. A different CMS from what we are using is probably the way to go.

( I had to go out and left the computer on-I hope that's not dangerous!)

OK. Graham. I always have a conscience about saying stuff like this, because a friend of mine runs a smaller site than this, and he has to jump through hoops on occasion!

It was an easy site to scoot around last year, but things/personnel change, and that's that!

I'll beaver on;-it's up to me whether I can be patient, not you!

Let me know what you decide. I meant what I said previously.

Given that it will take time to get another technical thread approved, I'm putting this here.

I am finding the post limit message to be totally inconsistent.

My message now (Articles) now reads '..daily post limit..already reached..may post 5 times in any 24 hours,...can post again in 15 hours.'

I thought it was 8 ?
Is it 5/8 per Articles forum?, or 5 per...(hold on,- it must be per Articles-because I haven't made ANY post on the thread that I fully intend to.

5 per,-8 per,thread?/Articles?/Discussion?-2 per thread??

It's all too hard

Given that it will take time to get another technical thread approved, I'm putting this here.

I am finding the post limit message to be totally inconsistent.

My message now (Articles) now reads '..daily post limit..already reached..may post 5 times in any 24 hours,...can post again in 15 hours.'

I thought it was 8 ?
Is it 5/8 per Articles forum?, or 5 per...(hold on,- it must be per Articles-because I haven't made ANY post on the thread that I fully intend to.

5 per,-8 per,thread?/Articles?/Discussion?-2 per thread??

It's all too hard.

Oh for crying out loud!!

On the articles it is 2 per article and 5 across all articles. Presumably you had last posted 9 hours before you got this message. When you go to post on an article you get a notice at the top which spells the restrictions out. When you post on a thread, you can post 4 times and you can have 10 posts across all threads.

This recognises that threads are more discussions between posters than articles are, although thinking about it we could probably loosen-up the restrictions on the articles without the discussion deteriorating.

"Oh for crying out loud!!"

I'm with you Ginx. I have just signed in three times in a row. All yesterday I could post one message, wait an hour, post one message.

If I stayed on line and read stuff it wouldn't register that it had been an hour.

I really don't get why all these new windows keep opening up. The server error comes up a lot.

Now the posting rule and number of words freaked me out enough but the errors are coming thick and fast.

Help. [whimper]

Jewely, I am intrigued that you say you had to log in three times. I've never experienced a logon problem. I also hardly ever experience a server error since we fixed the major one a couple of weeks ago. How is it some posters seem to have all the problems? Is there something different about your web browser?

The reason separate windows open up is that to return to where you were all you have to do is to close the window. If it opens up the new page in the window you are looking at it is very easy to navigate away from the page you were on and have a lot of trouble working out which one to go back to. We made a design decision 5 years ago to work the forum that way. This is the first time I recall having a complaint about that. Interested in feedback, but would take a bit to change.

Ginx: "I'm getting sick of the slowness of the site"

For what it's worth, I don't think it is the site itself that is slow - unless you are submitting a post. It takes about 5 seconds to load 100 comments, which is fairly average. Occasionally the ads take a while to load, but they don't come from OLO's server.

As for the post limit, all I can say is get used to it. If you compare the posts on this site to a typical newspaper site you see there has obviously been more thought put into the posts here. I put it down to the post limit - posts are precious so you don't waste them. Without the post limit, I'd say OLO would loose much of its attraction to me.

I'll grant you the 5 post total limit does seem low. I presume it is for spam control. But it is so low you can't post a comment to each of the days new articles. It also means you can't be an active participant (ie two posts a day) in more two main article threads. Occasionally I follow more than that.

Ginx: "Oh for crying out loud!!"

This is a fine example of the sort of thing the post limit tends to filter out.

Ginx: "Given that it will take time to get another technical thread approved"

They seem to get approved about twice a day, which probably matches the frequency people scan the site. This doesn't sound like a long time to me, and more to the point I have always been pleasantly surprised at how quickly my new general discussions have been approved. If only our Telco's could respond that quickly to an email.

GrahamY,

Is it possible within the existing Forum software to incorporate a 'sticky'* topic within the respective index pages?

Such 'sticky' topics could take the form of, for example, Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) with corresponding answers or explanations, and/or 'page pages', descriptions of the features available on the Forum on any given page. I suspect many users, or would-be users, whilst possessed of elementary internet surfing skills, may not be as familiar with many of the Forum features or usage techniques as might be supposed. Indeed, many users may have little requirement of, or exposure to, the ongoing computer-literacy education that those within the IT field take for granted.

Jewely herself constitutes an example. Despite having run a bulletin board in the pre-internet days, aspects of this forum's operation are not self-explanatory to her. She is clearly capable in a general sense within an IT environment, simply not current with respect to features and jargon that may be encountered on OLO. Other regular users, and both Bronwyn and Belly spring to mind, have expressed gratitude in isolated instances where site behaviour has been explained during discussions both within and outside Technical Support threads.

Might it also be possible to farm out the writing-up and maintainance of such FAQs and 'page pages' to approved volunteers amongst the regular (and perhaps not yet regular) users of OLO? It is a classic telecommute task. Since it would be a purely technical facilitation of usage of the site, there would appear to be no issues with respect to the creation of any 'privileged' class of OLO user by virtue of any having participated as volunteers in this respect. There may also be some advantage in running an associated blog wherein comments relating to Forum usage techniques could be posted by any users.

Ginx:

"I am finding the post limit message to be totally inconsistent."

So, too, did a now-retired High Court Justice.

* A 'sticky' topic is one that is always on display, being one not pushed down the lists by new topics or article comments threads.

I arrive in my internet explorer taxi; it says “All Welcome” on the OLO invite I am clutching nervously.

I attempt pushing the bell and wait, I push twice more and wipe my feet a few times before the door is finally opened.

It is a tidy house. There are cartoons behind glass in frames on the wall, good lighting and ambience. There is a prayer mat on the floor in one corner, on the wall above is a painting of Krishna with some rosary beads hanging off the corner of the frame. Each time I pass a window it opens and this startles me.

Some well dressed guests have already arrived and are carrying on polite conversations with the odd stutter and an occasional raised eyebrow. One glances up and gets a nod from the host before continuing to talk.

Outside the windows are colourful adverts, the guests are politely ignoring this.

I open my mouth and quickly close it again at a frown from our host. I wait for his nod and have suddenly used up my words for the next two hours with my outburst.

I am told to go down the hall, first door on the right. I find my way and discover a message taped to the seat saying “server error”. I stand there horrified, I am busting with nowhere to put it.

I can hear the rise and fall of a whispered conversation in the hallway;

“ Ginx how dare you accuse me in my own home”

“I am on to you Graham, you force your guests to wee in the garden or leave if they have no patience with the door bell that you deny is broken!”

“Ginx if you keep this up I will have to ask you to leave”

“I’m going anyway Graham and I am taking the balloons from the mailbox! And that damn High Court Justice was taking a leak on it when I arrived!”

I am scared now and desperate to get back to my ancient cottage, I know my flush works.

Only just noticed this thread.

"Below the fold" on my machine, you see.

I reckon I get an average of one Server Error per post.

Sometimes I get three in a row. Sometimes I get three uninterrupted posts in a row.

Since I only have to hit the back button and re-enter (my dribblings are still there where I left them) I see it as a mild inconvenience, probably caused by a configuration issue on the OLO server. NBD.

But just in case Graham thinks it is a problam that has gone away, it hasn't.

Two today. So far.

If it helps your techies, my browser is Firefox 3.0.10, with Ubuntu 9.04 purring away underneath.

I guess I should add my name to the list of those who get the "Server error" message regularly. My experience is very similar to that of Pericles, except that I'm using IE v.7, running on Windows Vista.

The 'crying out loud' thing Jewels, is because I posted twice, which happened a coupla days previously as well!

The post would not go up, I clicked again;-(NO post acknowledgment message),-I clicked again. There they were:- the TWO of them.
_______________

"Ginx: "Oh for crying out loud!!"

This is a fine example of the sort of thing the post limit tends to filter out." (rs).
_______________

I've got to say it: please explain?. I will say as little or as much as I want. Are you really saying that the system will even assess how MANY words are in a post? God! it's a mine field!
________________

Ginx: "Given that it will take time to get another technical thread approved"

They seem to get approved about twice a day, which probably matches the frequency people scan the site. This doesn't sound like a long time to me, and more to the point I have always been pleasantly surprised at how quickly my new general discussions have been approved. If only our Telco's could respond that quickly to an email.
Posted by rstuart, Wednesday, 13 May 2009 9:25:17 AM
________________

Please note: I posted in the early hours of the morning. I am not concerned at the possible sudden departure of a poster, but what CAUSED her to withdraw. That enrages me, having visited a thread that has directly contributed to that. I was and still am looking forward to joining that thread..

It was gone 2am. I knew that if I were to start a new thread with my question, it must of course be accepted/denied the next day. However, if I put the question on THIS thread, I would very likely get my response this am. And I did.

I trust that clears that up?
_________________

Poirot: Thank-you.

Jewels: you're a cheeky sod!

And Graham; Please DO loosen it up. With the problems occurring- to get the 'you can't post message' is the last straw! (I should add that yesterday I got a server error trying to log on, and a couple days previously).

This is still happening.

The ratio of error messages to successful posts is, if anything, starting to increase.

It occurs to me that if the second part of the message is accurate...

"The fault has been reported to staff"

...then the webmaster already is aware of the extent of the problem.

But I suspect this is not the case, it's just a pacifier to provide reassurance to the punter that hey, we're really working on this.

I wonder also if the fault number is equally meaningless?

I know it's difficult, guys. But the present situation is damaging the trust between you and your public.

I would not like the cessation of feedback here to give the impression that there are no further problems.

The site is 'slow', and server error messages are still a daily occurrence.

Particularly dysfunctional today, but it seems okay tonight.

Correction:

<<Server Error
Incident number: 14028-3219

The fault has been reported to staff.>>

Bugger!

I'm still having the same problems as others.

When I attempt to load a post and see that it is taking too long, I stop the browser, go to some other links, then come back and try again - usually this works and I don't feel like I am wasting my time as much as just sitting there and getting that dumb server error message.

Ratio of successful requests to server error messages - doesn't seem to matter if you are posting, previewing or looking up a User - has now reached one in four.

Is anyone actually listening, I wonder?

I don't know whether this post made this morning by Banjo, http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=8954#142254 contains any hint as to where problems encountered by users in posting may be occurring.

It appears as if the timestamp has been applied twice to the one post, with a short interval of around six minutes between applications. Of course it is possible that Banjo may have typed the first, and slightly incomplete, entry himself as part of his post, but such is not normally done by users.

I mention this because it is an apparent event that might otherwise be easily overlooked. If the first timestamp entry was not typed by Banjo, then something in the OLO software may not be operating correctly, or worse, some hacker may have found a way to fiddle with timestamps.

For what it is worth, since changing ISPs from Bigpond to Internode, I have experienced fewer 'Server error' messages, and generally much quicker page loading on OLO. I do not know whether it is relevant, but I understand that Internode operates a lot of its own 'backbone' transmission cabling independently of that of Bigpond. I just wonder whether some 'server error' messages might not originate from some intermediate switching of traffic over the Bigpond network at times of congestion thereon. Just a non-technical speculation: I don't know whether such a thing could be made to occur in order to disguise inadequacies in Bigpond bandwidth as problems originating from the OLO servers.

Do any geeks know whether such can happen?

For those wanting to continue watching or posting to this topic, bear in mind that it is due to disappear from the default display of topics for one month back at 4:35 PM either today or tomorrow. You can continue to display it by selecting 'show [drop-down selection] discussions per category, having been started one quarter back' from the right-hand drop-down menu at the top of the General Discussion index page, then clicking the 'display' button.

No Pericles, no-one is listening, but I am reading the thread. I have someone starting on Monday who will hopefully be able to clear this issue up. Forest, you'll find that Banjo copied and pasted the post from another thread where he had incorrectly put it. When he copied the post he copied the date stamp.

BTW, I have been keeping track of my use of the site and error messages. So far today I have had 14 page downloads and no error messages. I'll keep looking for one. Maybe it will happen when I try to post this response.

Just ran into an unusual server error at 6:20 PM while attempting to refresh the 'On Line Opinion' page (the page where the new articles for each day are first displayed) which I keep open in a tab in Firefox.

Today's articles were all listed, as was the 'Today's most popular articles' panel. Beside that panel appeared a 'server error' notice, Incident number: 33941-2018. None of the articles for the month preceding were listed.

A re-try at refreshing yielded the same result. I did note that the status bar showed 'Waiting for onlineopinion' for around 20 - 30 seconds before any loading progress bar appeared on each of these attempts.

An attempt at around 6:30 PM was sucessful at refreshing the complete contents of the page with very little delay before the page commenced loading.

Two attempts at logging on.

Hi all. Thought you would like to know that we started a new programmer today who is looking into the problems. He's already making some progress from what I can see. Site seems to be running much better to me already. And I've now done over 150 page views without a single database error since last Friday. During which time I've deliberately been posting to forums etc. more than I normally would to check and see how things are running.

Just to advise that I have just encountered two successive server errors when attempting to bring up the (default) General Discussion index page.

They were:

Incident number: 3909-0209 at 9:02 AM (by my computer's time), and;

Incident number: 4433-0309 at 9:03 AM.

There was a delay of around a minute in each case before the server error advice loaded, with the status bar in Firefox displaying 'Waiting for www.onlineopinion.com.au' during that delay.

In most circumstances the site is responding reasonably quickly. I am using Internode as my ISP, on a 1500/512 rated ADSL service.

We're currently defragging the disk, which can make the disk very busy when it is getting requests from people using the site at the same time. The lack of defragging is also part of the problem, we think, with server errors etc. As a result of which I'm now sitting at around 2% site problems as a percentage of the number of page views.

Well you are certainly working on the site!

Today has been a humdinger on OLO!

////
(",)
<!>
_/\_

I hold my breath and hope this continues..

The site seems to have returned to its former glory!

I shall say thanks to all concerned in a few days....,all being well..!

(>""<)
(='o'=)
(,,)-(,,)

I said I would return in a few days...

Many thanks for the hard work put in by all of you to correct the problems.

(Ironically the site is currently a wee bit slow...!)

Anyway, my thanks and goodbye.

Hi Ginx,

I think we are getting there, but it is taking time. I got an error message yesterday trying to post, so I know the problems haven't gone away, just not as apparent to me as they were at one stage.

Graham

I am an early bird always, my last visit is OLO every morning and I get the problem often.
Last two mornings after server error comes up twice I have edited my comment and posted it as edited comment it gets on without a problem.