No post exist for this topic

Post Reply New Topic

fancy talk. get your ass dirty! thats how we hold it. its almost as cool as blackmetal&trees

son i dont know what you said but you need to go to america one day!

so you encontered a gangster? thats cool you protected the woman like that. i would have run, or not even been with her to begin with

Seems fixed? <fingers crossed...> Thanks for the background info, Quartermass.

I'm an American, native born and raised. I regularly wear a cowboy hat (black, leather). I watch bull-riding competitions when I catch them on the telly. (As an aside, the guys who wear helmets rather than traditional hats annoy me - and the competitions are almost invariably won by someone wearing a traditional cowboy hat.) I know how to ride a horse. I own and can use a bullwhip with reasonable proficiency. I even go so far as to spontaneously make up songs for which the entirely of the words are variations of "Yippie-Ki-Yay". Hell, I'm listening to "Cadillac" by Johnny Cash right now. And...

The comment about getting a cowboy hat and riding that bull cause a rather large "WTF?" bubble to appear over my head.

Good fortune,

- Icarus will try wild bronco riding one of these days...

[quote="jfberge"]I wonder why the bb software calculates the totals differently, instead of just reducing the total count on both?[/quote]

It's likely something like this:

The thread table keeps quick stats on views & replies, for fast display on the forum page listing the threads - you don't want to do a thread/post table join for that page, you'd kill your database software pretty quick!

The real replies available to the system is from a query linking the post table (for the response text) and the users table (for the username / avatar). If the rows are missing from the users table, then the database can't include the post either (since it's missing the user information needed to display it).

There's no "reducing the total count" involved at all - if you deleted a post the usual way, sure - the post would be removed and the number attached to the thread would be decremented. But since it wasn't "deleted" per se, there was no opportunity for the software to update the thread's information.

Think of it is an issue with an old and invalid cache entry due to unknown changes - that's kinda what happened.

That is sort of the issue with denormalised db. I'm for periodically checking the totals every now and then. You could create some smart system just for the most topical thread’s count. There were also issues with the last poster and the topic starter, I seem to remember. Views, etc not really that important anyway.

You can also reduce the overhead on cumbersome tables by dumping the relevant post data in a temporary table, especially with reduced columns aswell as data. The post text is already in a separate table from the post data 1=1, which makes it much easier. It sounds like it wouldn’t work but it can work surprisingly well.

It has been used to improve the speed of fulltext searches.

Then again that doesn't solve the problem of missing usernames. If RB was the last user id on a thread in a topic it may have shown the username blank, skipped the topic all together, errored, etc, depending on how it was set up.