Lock threads over 1k!

[obscuredbycloud]

Hey, just an FYI to the powers that run this place. Threads over 1000 should be locked.

Every time someone clicks on that thread, your server now has to makes unnecessary queries. We know that if someone is clicking on the thread, they are not going to read it all, mostly to continue the last page discussion. But the server has to query all the post and information that is associated with that thread.

Locking threads and starting Part 2 so the discussion can continue will reduce server queries. Threads that get locked don't get clicked on as often.

Talk to your server/tech admin about this. I am sure you will see improved server response as the queries are reduced especially on a massive site like this one.

This means the staff will have to keep an eye out for threads over 1k, locking it and directing people to start part 2, or whatever to continue the discussion.

 

[KharmaGirl]

This already happens periodically.

 

[obscuredbycloud]

Cool, I did not know that, I'm new, cheers!

 

[friscofrqancis]

Every time someone clicks on that thread, your server now has to makes unnecessary queries.

Hmm. Actually the server makes the same number queries, and filters the same amount of data regardless of thread size. All thread information is held in several tables but the content of ALL threads is in one table. So. The size of the thread has fuck all to do with server overhead. The total number of users, groups, threads and content will give a much lager data set to filter through and effect server load. Returned data is stored briefly then forwarded to the browser is dependent on the user selected page sizes, once the page is displayed there is no more load on the server and the data is no longer stored on the server. I admin, moderate, support and sometimes Hack the code of, a couple vBulletin forums we have threads with over 18,000 posts, we own the server. We track server utilization regularly.

just for grins:
opening a thread with only eighty-four replies gets:

Page generated in 0.25788 seconds with 23 queries

thread with 15,742 posts:

Page generated in 0.34740 seconds with 25 queries

thread with 1266 posts

Page generated in 0.25979 seconds with 25 queries

I was actually able to pull up that page with only 23 queries on that one thread, a page of 20 posts with only a few posters involved in a "debate"

When you request a thread page you send a limited query to the server, the app then reads your rights to that thread, this is dependent on the forum and sub forum it was posted in. the server then returns a limited dataset (let's say 20 posts). The server then queries the post author's profile and the post data presenting that data, for those 20 posts only. The size of the thread has no effect on the act of posting in that thread.

Locking the thread does very little, the data is still there to be filtered through. There is absolutely no benifit to locking threads unless the idea is to discourage people opening them. teh only way to effect server overhead is to limit the number of users and stored posts/threads.

I've only responded to this as I've found a wealth of information in this forum in some still active and quite large (1000+ posts)threads. That these threads remain active is one reason I was able to notice and find them.

Removing data would make the server marginally faster (depending on thread, post and user numbers extant and the amount of data removed) but this would have a direct, adverse affect on the the value of the forum.

I like this forum; don't contribute much but read it every day. I think the moderation here is great and the community an eclectic and interesting assortment of individuals with a shared interest. The size of individual threads is only a storage issue. The number of active users reading and posting are what creates server load and man, I'd hate to see that limited.

Aw hell, it's 6:30 AM here in Chiang Mai, this totally useless post was brought to you by some hi-test, light roast arabica coffe beans grown on Doi Tung. Just thought I'd cast my vote for NOT locking threads needlessly.

 

[obscuredbycloud]

Well fuck me gentility with a chain saw!

It seems that my information is incorrect, or I misunderstood. Locking threads at 1k was from someone on the development team for phpbb told me about when I was an admin for a forum.

 

[friscofrqancis]

phpbb

Ah, not sure of phpbb - setup one forum and it was a monster resource hog. Your advice may have been correct, for phpBB Someone turned me on to vB a few years years ago. Much more efficient. Code's a bitch to read through, though.

 

[obscuredbycloud]

Yeah I am not a fan of vB I like open source.

 

[NiteTiger]

Putting aside the technicals, just think of the posters reactions. Thousand plus posts means those threads are extremely popular, and locking them can cause some nasty backlash.

I remember when the first Wake and Bake thread was closed, the wailing and gnashing of teeth was epic! I think that was when a lot of the mods turned off Rep