Sciencemadness Discussion Board

Some errors

neutrino - 16-5-2005 at 13:17

A minute ago, I was in the Rogue Science Suspended? thread and noticed that one of my posts was showing up twice. Figuring that I had accidentally hit the submit button twice (the times were identical), I went back and deleted the duplicate. Going back to the thread, I saw that both disappeared. What’s going on here?

I was also looking at the Member Websites thread and got this while loading:
Quote:
Fatal error: Maximum execution time of 30 seconds exceeded in /home/sciencem/public_html/talk/functions.php on line 122


It may be because my internet connection lags frequently, but it may be an error in the board software.

Polverone - 16-5-2005 at 13:27

I've never seen the post duplicate error you speak of, so I can't comment on it. It certainly sounds like a board bug, though. The timeout error isn't really a board bug. It could have been caused by a heavy load on the server.

12AX7 - 16-5-2005 at 13:30

Quote:
Originally posted by neutrino
I was also looking at the Member Websites thread and got this while loading:

Quote:
Fatal error: Maximum execution time of 30 seconds exceeded in /home/sciencem/public_html/talk/functions.php on line 122


It may be because my internet connection lags frequently, but it may be an error in the board software.


I've also been having trouble viewing this thread. It can't be me, because every other thread and forum functions just fine, simultaneously no less.

Tim

The_Davster - 16-5-2005 at 14:45

The member websites thread takes me quite a while to load, much slower than any other thread.

chemoleo - 16-5-2005 at 15:05

Odd, I noticed this too! I wonder why. I can't really imagine the different font (courier) is causing that?!?

Edit: No, it isn't. It's the links, if I take those out it loads fast.
I figure it is because the php script on the server takes time to interpret all those links to make them clickable in html?

Edit2: Neutrino, did you reload the page before you deleted the post, i.e. was the error persistent? I have noticed things like that elsewhere, but a reload would sort it.
Looks like there was only one post, which you deleted. I don't think we can retrieve it.

[Edited on 16-5-2005 by chemoleo]

Polverone - 16-5-2005 at 15:35

Ah, you're right! But the board software (or PHP itself) must be doing something stupidly inefficient to make ~80 links take 25 seconds or more to process. Is it faster if you use HTML markup instead of bbcode?

neutrino - 16-5-2005 at 17:02

No, I didn't reload first. Oh, well.

I should have mentioned that all of these errors occurred at about the same time. I had opened a whole block of threads from 'today's posts' (I use firefox & tabs) at once. If it matters, the ‘Fatal error’ was around the middle, while the other one was at about the end.

vulture - 17-5-2005 at 12:15

Quote:

When connecting, the database returned:
Error 2002: Can't connect to local MySQL server through socket '/var/lib/mysql/mysql.sock' (2)


Keeps happening to me in the last ten minutes.

kyanite - 24-5-2005 at 12:29

Here's another error to add to the list.

Screenshot 1 Screenshot 2

Apparently this is the only thread I can't reply to

neutrino - 24-5-2005 at 13:22

No, that thread was just locked by a mod/admin.

kyanite - 24-5-2005 at 15:17

Hahaha, stupid me..... I need to get my head checked!:D:P:o

Madandcrazy - 30-5-2006 at 08:32

I belive, a quite setting of the forums software is, post can edited two days only, some spelling mistakes can`t corrected and post was removed by a moderator. :(

chemoleo - 14-8-2006 at 16:30

I just got a message, from Firefox, while sciencemadness was the front page:

Script is no longer accessible, please click to continue or abort.

Never had this message before.

I hope it isn't malevolent code of some kind....

[Edited on 15-8-2006 by chemoleo]

chemoleo - 27-8-2006 at 12:04

I noticed the changes Polverone wanted were implemented :)

Regarding the attachments becoming inline images:

Check the crystal growing thread:
http://www.sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=5529

You can see that Ashendale's enormous attached jpgs suddenly fill the page, making the thread *extremely* difficult to read, having to scroll back and forth for each line. I imagine similar examples will be in many other threads.

Is it possible to keep the existing attached images as attached and not displayed inline, to avoid this problem from occurring?
Or are there alternative solutions, like to choose whether to attach or display inline?

Polverone - 27-8-2006 at 12:31

How unfortunate. We may have to revert to the old non-inlined images. I was hoping to make it easier for people to put images in the bodies of their posts even if they don't want to use the scipics FTP account or an external image host.

chromium - 27-8-2006 at 13:59

It should not be very hard to make php or python script that automatically converts all too big images to smaller ones. It does not need to be integrated into forum software, running once a week could be enough. There is free program package called gdimage (http://www.boutell.com/gd/) that is easy to use and works with most programming languages. It can read jpg image tags (including size information) and convert images to desired size. I have used it quite a lot with euphoria (http://www.rapideuphoria.com/) and could write euphoria script but no experience with php or python.

Polverone - 27-8-2006 at 20:02

That would be easy enough if the images were stored in the scipics FTP space; in fact I already wrote an image resizing script for that purpose. It's harder for the attachments, because they are stored and served internally by the board software. The image attachments are blobs of data in the database, not files in a directory.

Nicodem - 6-9-2006 at 12:17

Sometimes I get the icon and notice on the front forum page that there are unviewed posts (for example: “6-9-2006 at 16:13 by memberX” in the “Last Post:” column), but when I check there is no new post by any memberX, for example.

So I just did an experiment. I replied to one thread, edited the post by deleting it, and checked the front page. The unviewed post notice and icon were there even though the post wasn’t there anymore. Check it out, it is cool. :)

A minor bug, I know. I was just curious as to what was the cause of those non existing unviewed posts.

12AX7 - 6-9-2006 at 13:22

Yep, happens sometimes apparently.

https://sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=4097 ;)

Tim

Polverone - 6-9-2006 at 13:22

Members may delete their own posts, or moderators may delete their posts for them. For example, PE Sam regularly re-registers under a new name and starts posting his usual stuff. I IP ban his latest connection, though I don't know how much it helps, then I delete all his posts and his account. If I don't remember to use some additional admin tools, threads that he posted in may appear to have new content even though it's already been deleted.

Nicodem - 30-9-2006 at 11:07

Am I the only one that gets a really strange view of this thread:
https://sciencemadness.org/talk/viewthread.php?tid=4348

I tried in IE6 and Mozilla and always get the same thing. The right side of the page is black al the way to the last post when the black square ocupies the left side as well. This is the first time I get such a bug. WTF is that?

12AX7 - 30-9-2006 at 12:50

I would guess something to do with the last post.
Code:
[i]Originally posted by gucangls[/i] [ASCII]diperchloratephenylenediamine[ASCII] <tr><td>diperchlorate</td> <td>[ASCII]</td> <td>[ASCII]</td> <td>sensitivness[ASCII]=0.00141585)</td> <td>PB[ASCII]</td> <td>VOD,12mm[ASCII]1.1g/cm3</td></tr> <tr><td>m-phenylenediamine</td> <td>[ASCII]</td> <td>350 139.29C</td> <td>106</td> <td><fontsize="1">335</td> <td>-</td></tr> <tr><td><fontsize="1">P-phenylenediamine</td> <td><fontsize="1">[ASCII]</td> <td><fontsize="1">326139.29C</td> <td><fontsize="1">[ASCII]</td> <td><fontsize="1">235</td> <td><font Urbanski>[ASCII] 486</font>[ASCII]AXT)[ASCII]


Looks like very badly written HTML, plus ASCII characters from a language not supported by the forum (which is written in, or at least declared as using, XHTML 1.0 transitional).

Tim

Edit: boy this stuff sucks. Isn't HTML supposed to be disabled?

[Edited on 9-30-2006 by 12AX7]

Sorry for the downtime.

Polverone - 16-10-2006 at 00:09

The host turned off our database temporarily because it was causing too much server load. I ran an automatic table optimization that will hopefully decrease that load. I'm not sure what would happen if the load remains high. I might have to upgrade hosting plans again, and it is harder to spot plans that offer high CPU use (as opposed to large disk space or data transfer).

Also, I just noticed the above two posts. I have fixed the thread in question by deleting the garbage post at the end of it. HTML is actually enabled because it's more versatile than BB code and it's rare that someone abuses it.