Report Problems/Questions Here

[pipistrelle]

The Post Reply button is towards the bottom on the left below the most recent post.

Like I said, I may be confused (happening a lot lately) but I thought it used to be in the one you were replying to.

I think you're right. My muscle memory keeps reaching for a button that isn't there, but I suffer CRS.

Don't we all.

[Foggy]

I always use the Post Reply button at the bottom, unless I'm quoting some post for a specific reason (and I usually try not to quote the entire post).

Having said that, I don't see any change in the arrangement of the buttons, and the phpBB installation is complete and up-to-date. I don't think anything has changed, but in any case, I do a full repair and optimization of the database every Sunday at 6 a.m. and ... oh, wait, that's mañana.

If that doesn't fix it, I'll have to ask Joe Biden for a government grant.

[pipistrelle]

That's the thing. I don't think it's broken. I had a moment.

[RTH10260]

I always use the Post Reply button at the bottom, unless I'm quoting some post for a specific reason (and I usually try not to quote the entire post).

Having said that, I don't see any change in the arrangement of the buttons, and the phpBB installation is complete and up-to-date. I don't think anything has changed, but in any case, I do a full repair and optimization of the database every Sunday at 6 a.m. and ... oh, wait, that's mañana.

If that doesn't fix it, I'll have to ask Joe Biden for a government grant.

I hope it includes re-indexing, I had recently some strange no-dins no-finds on search that ought to have located something.

PS. search using search box in header always worked, I seem to remember not-found when using the search box located at top of thread list.


eta. tyop

[Foggy]

I'm deleting and re-creating the search index. Takes a couple hours, search might be unavailable for a while.

[Foggy]

Finished.

For information purposes, there are several types of search index I could be using.

MySQL Fulltext / PostgreSQL Fulltext / Sphinx Fulltext / phpBB Native Fulltext

I have no idea what the differences are, so I just use the last one. But if anyone wants to research and suggest an alternative, I would consider it.

[Foggy]

At the present time we have 170,165 posts, but there are only 274,328 words in the search index, which means there are 1.6121294038 words per post.

No, that can't be right. I think some of you are using the same words more than once!

[RTH10260]

How does that hurt Biden?

[Foggy]

Now, I don't think I fully understand what the problem is with Reply buttons.

I'm using prosilver, the standard board style. In any particular topic, there are posts. There are buttons inside each post, at the top right of the post, and for ordinary members those are 1) an exclamation mark for reporting the post, and 2) a quotation mark for quoting the post. That's the standard, and it's the same on the support site of phpBB, which makes the software.

And at the top and bottom of every page of a topic is a big button that says Post Reply.

And those are the only ways I know to reply to a post, and they're all working just fine.

So what do I need to fix?

[pjhimself]

Once upon a time long ago I worked on solving these kind of problems.
One of the solutions we recorded was TCC. Trouble came clear.

If I understand, the issue I raised (in this case) it was that I was unable to see a “reply” post capability when trying to add a YouTube to a thread. There’s a whole series of posts to track this sequence, and who else had the same issue.

Was it user error ???
Maybe except pipstrille reported the same experience.

Did it even happen??? Apparently twice.
Is it a big deal, no it’s now TCC.

If the resolution is TCC so be it.

On to real issues.

Tx Foggy

[pipistrelle]

Now, I don't think I fully understand what the problem is with Reply buttons.

I'm using prosilver, the standard board style. In any particular topic, there are posts. There are buttons inside each post, at the top right of the post, and for ordinary members those are 1) an exclamation mark for reporting the post, and 2) a quotation mark for quoting the post. That's the standard, and it's the same on the support site of phpBB, which makes the software.

And at the top and bottom of every page of a topic is a big button that says Post Reply.

And those are the only ways I know to reply to a post, and they're all working just fine.

So what do I need to fix?

Nothing.I had a moment thinking there were more buttons. Later I said other boards don't have more, so, yeah, misremembering.

[northland10]

I repeat myself and have a fondness for homophones so that would decrease my unique wordage.

If you removed however and apparently, my word count would be cut in half.

[RTH10260]

Remember --- the only missing button is LIKE!

[Foggy]

If you removed however and apparently, my word count would be cut in half.

I repeat all my worst stuff all the time, hoping it will improve with age.

That never really happens.

Remember --- the only missing button is LIKE!

[Frater I*I]

Remember --- the only missing button is LIKE!

What about a mushroom cloud emoji You know, to represent irony meters going boom...

[Sam the Centipede]

What about a mushroom cloud emoji You know, to represent irony meters going boom...

Peeps have stopped talking about irony meters exploding these days … I think because old-fashioned irony has been forced into the shadows by the coruscation of soul-sapping, mind-wrenching absurdity of mainstream politics in many countries, particularly USA, Russia and UK.

The old analog irony meters just couldn't handle the load: mega-irony has given way to giga-absurdity and tera-stupidity.

[Kriselda Gray]

If you removed however and apparently, my word count would be cut in half.

However, I apparently resemble that remark. (Gotta throw in "unfortunately" as well )

[keith]

At the present time we have 170,165 posts, but there are only 274,328 words in the search index, which means there are 1.6121294038 words per post.

No, that can't be right. I think some of you are using the same words more than once!

Yeah, that can't be right, can it?

How many words do you need to speak a language? (Published 24 June 2018)

We considered dusting off the dictionary and going from A1 to Zyzzyva, however, there are an estimated 171,146 words currently in use in the English language, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, not to mention 47,156 obsolete words.

So stick that in your Funk and Wagnalls!

Of course that's only the Oxford. Websters and/or McQuarie might have oodles more. I wnder what Suzie Dent would say.

[Frater I*I]

The old analog irony meters just couldn't handle the load: mega-irony has given way to giga-absurdity and tera-stupidity.

These meters can not be built in the US, as the resulting meltdown they would have would burn to the core of the planet...


And you feriners say we "Mericans don't care about eh planet...

[RTH10260]

The old analog irony meters just couldn't handle the load: mega-irony has given way to giga-absurdity and tera-stupidity.

These meters can not be built in the US, as the resulting meltdown they would have would burn to the core of the planet...


And you feriners say we "Mericans don't care about eh planet...

The burn would trigger a diplomatic incident once the remains reappear in China

[neonzx]

At the present time we have 170,165 posts, but there are only 274,328 words in the search index, which means there are 1.6121294038 words per post.

No, that can't be right. I think some of you are using the same words more than once!

Yeah, that can't be right, can it?

Totally can be right because if you look at our postings, we make up or change words to be cutesie. Plus, proper names are also not in the Websters. And any indexing is going to throw out short or common words. (I, he, she, and, they, what, the...). The indexing is not checking Websters -- it's just making references back to the post (or topic titles) they appear in. So there are presently 274,328 distinct words in index.

The index is one entry per unique word, not per unique appearance.

On FB 1.0, I could not search for 'Orly' because it was too 'common'.

I'm biased towards MySQL (which I do believe FB still runs on), so it might be worth trying that as the full text indexing instead of phpbb's indexing scheme. Can't hurt to try. MySQL is the database engine, phpBB is a front side application -- which can do it better?

[keith]

At the present time we have 170,165 posts, but there are only 274,328 words in the search index, which means there are 1.6121294038 words per post.

No, that can't be right. I think some of you are using the same words more than once!

Yeah, that can't be right, can it?

Totally can be right because if you look at our postings...

Yeah, I know, and for all the reasons you describe. I was trying to be funny.

I'm biased towards MySQL (which I do believe FB still runs on), so it might be worth trying that as the full text indexing instead of phpbb's indexing scheme. Can't hurt to try. MySQL is the database engine, phpBB is a front side application -- which can do it better?

In THEORY, getting the SQL engine to do it should be faster than having the client ('front side application') do it. But I don't know how smart phpBB is. I would hope it is using its underlying SQL engine effectively. In which case the difference is miniscule, maybe a bit more housekeeping by the phpBB client.

You want the DB server to do as much of the filtering as possible because you want the LEAST amount of data to be transferred from the DB server to the client app. Filtering is probably just as efficient on the client as it is on the server but the data transfer time is the longest part (yes, even if the 'client' is physically on the same hardware instance as the DB server) - that is what needs to be minimized.

Honestly, I would expect that phpBB knows this and does it whenever possible. But if there is some setting that lets you put indeces on the client instead of the server, I would definitely look into what can be done to put the indexes on the server.

[Volkonski]

The "unread" links at the top and bottom of pages are no longer there.

[pipistrelle]

The "unread" links at the top and bottom of pages are no longer there.

I think that’s a customization he said he’d do later.

[Luke]

Makes no difference but at the moment, the Fogbow logo is gone, it's back to phpBB, and the Active Topics link at the top and bottom of pages isn't there (prosilver). ETA: Hadn't looked at the other topic, but still there's no hurry, just using the browser back for active topics. Thanks always Foggy. At first, I thought we were hacked again by Sharon Rondeau, Miki Booth, and the pro hackers at the P&E!

Since some folks may not see it in the AZ Gov topic, this was fun to see: