|
Where is the legend that describes the member's status
e.g. difference between bronze and golden member
differnec between writer and contributer
I saw that legend once ago, but it dissappeared now
Mohamed Gouda
Egypt
|
|
|
|
|
UUps. It really dissapeared.
Will be fixed soon.
Sincerely,
Elina
Life is great!!!
Enjoy every moment of it! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I have login in, but I tried to download .zip source code file, only got the TermsOfUse.aspx!!
I tried to login out and login again, the same problem! What's wrong with codeproject.com??
HELP! HELP! Who can HELP me?!
|
|
|
|
|
Did you click the "Help!" button at the top of the page?
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Thank you! Exactly the IE Add-ons WebThunder cause this problem.
|
|
|
|
|
After you logged on, did you see your name information in the yellow header instead of login textbox? The most probable reason might be your logon was incomplete due to failure of accepting cookies in your web browser.
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
A pessimist sees only the dark side of the clouds, and mopes; a philosopher sees both sides, and shrugs; an optimist doesn't see the clouds at all - he's walking on them. --Leonard Louis Levinson
|
|
|
|
|
I am not able to vote for any messages. I am getting "Forbidden" message.
|
|
|
|
|
Since it is a normal message, I just voted a '3' to yours. It went in. Let me now try the other options too and keep you posted.
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
A pessimist sees only the dark side of the clouds, and mopes; a philosopher sees both sides, and shrugs; an optimist doesn't see the clouds at all - he's walking on them. --Leonard Louis Levinson
|
|
|
|
|
Try now?
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: Try now?
Nope. It's showing "Failed,Forbidden" in red color.
|
|
|
|
|
Did you try routing through Fiddler to see what is the response?
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
A pessimist sees only the dark side of the clouds, and mopes; a philosopher sees both sides, and shrugs; an optimist doesn't see the clouds at all - he's walking on them. --Leonard Louis Levinson
|
|
|
|
|
No, I haven't checked. I will try
|
|
|
|
|
This is an extension of the Bug Report filed over here:
http://www.codeproject.com/script/Forums/View.aspx?fid=1645&msg=2458881[^]
I feel that this validation itself is a kind of superflous since when there is a missing logon cookie (not logged in) the submit button itself can be hidden off; replaced by a text "Signin", similar to 'Reply' and 'signin' link in forums.
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
A pessimist sees only the dark side of the clouds, and mopes; a philosopher sees both sides, and shrugs; an optimist doesn't see the clouds at all - he's walking on them. --Leonard Louis Levinson
|
|
|
|
|
Added to bug list
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
When you attempt to participate in the survey when the logon cookie is missing (not logged in), I am presented with the following message:
You need to be Signed In in order to vote <big>fo</big> this survey.
Please check the item highlighted in red.
Vasudevan Deepak Kumar
Personal Homepage
Tech Gossips
A pessimist sees only the dark side of the clouds, and mopes; a philosopher sees both sides, and shrugs; an optimist doesn't see the clouds at all - he's walking on them. --Leonard Louis Levinson
|
|
|
|
|
added to above bug entry
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Just now I saw the message counts keep increasing, but I could not view the forum messages. After having tried several combinations of settings, I realized that "Normal" + "Last Day" fails to display the forum messages.
For example:
"Normal" + "Last Week" : Works.
"No Javascript" + "Last Day" : Works.
Maxwell Chen
|
|
|
|
|
I've viewing this forum currently using "Normal" + "Last Day"
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: I've viewing this forum currently using "Normal" + "Last Day"
Me too. The problem is gone.
Maxwell Chen
|
|
|
|
|
Oops, the problem is back again!
How to do to debug at my site locally, to provide you some information? 
[Update]
Two computers (at work and at home), the same result below.
Forum "Suggestions" is OK for "Normal" + "Last Day".
Forum "VC++" fails for "Normal" + "Last Day".
Maxwell Chen
modified on Monday, March 10, 2008 10:36 AM
|
|
|
|
|
CP seems to be as snappy as it was pre-conversion. Fasterfox is reporting < 3 seconds for loading most pages. Can you give us any details on what changes you made to improve performance?
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks Hans.
The complete rundown would take pages to go through but here's the basic outline of how things went post upgrade:
0. Tested, tested and tested and were convinced we would be faster than the previous version by sizeable amount.
1. Release. There was much wailing and gnashing of teeth.
2. Anything vaguely non-critical was turned off. Member searches, article filtering by attribute, the 'number of articles found' totals, even the number of articles and members on the homepage. Result: Site was usable again and was (mostly) as quick as it is now though there were still occasions when pages hung and timed out.
3. Caching was aggressively pursued but there was a limit to what we could cache and what had to be realtime. Result: Site was faster overall with less timeouts.
4. All stored procedures were then gone over, again, with a fine tooth comb. Further optimisations were found, some approximations were made in some of the queries that didn't need. Some lock contentions were spotted and fixed. Some functionality that had been limited was reinstated. Result: Database load was reduced slightly (things were already very well tuned) and there were less 'log-jam' events where requests outpaced the capacity to serve those requests.
5. Databases were partitioned vertically and some load balancing done to determine which peices of functionality should be split onto which DB servers. Result: initial visits (first page view) sometimes took 15 seconds at peak load time. This was reduced to usually no more than a few seconds.
6. Further caching based on the results we witness after Google rampaged through the site at 60,000 page views in about 10 minutes. On top of this functionality was modified so that aggressive bots and spiders would not bring the site to its knees. Result: nice increase in first page view speed.
The main killers were errors and new version releases.
1. Errors meant the site simply didn't function, or that the processing of errors when something went wrong in turn caused massive slowdowns as the code hunted around trying to find the next best course of action. We have a very flexible system which means our errors can be a royal pain to find, but we think we have this mostly under control
2. We were releasing new versions of the code multiple times a day up until a couple of weeks ago. Sometimes this was no more than just a spelling mistake, some broken javascript or a formatting error. Sometimes it was a revamp of a major peice of infrastructure. The problem we find is that a new release can cause a massive deadlock as all the webservers when they try serve all requests that had built up while they recompiled while also recaching the data they keep on hand. Updating a single server will cause an outage of a few seconds. Updating them all at once can cause 5 - 10 mins of downtime.
Outages are a weird thing in that you can visit the site 10 times and read a page and then forget you ever visited, but then you try and visit during an update and you will remember that 5 minute outage for the rest of the day. It was at the point where I could tell the size of my inbox by the number of updates we'd done that day.
For now, though, we're down to 2-3 updates a week as we fix bugs, add new features and continue working on expanding capacity. I'm in Australia for a couple of weeks on family matters which means I can do updates when most of our visitors are safely offline.
3. SQL issues. SQL Server was crashing a lot, especially after we released new code on the web servers. We talked to Microsoft and found that reducing the amount of memory we allowed SQL to use fixed this. Yes, we think this is ridiculous, too.
We have two major improvements to make:
1. Turning on our database load balancing system. We're looking at a 33% increase in write capability, and hopefully somewhere in the vicinity of 40%+ speed increase in reads. Stage 2 of this will increase this significantly and may be combined with a hardware upgrade
2. Some cleverness in our attribute matching system that drives all content display. This should bring significant speed improvements
At the moment we are database limited and have not paid too much attention to web application object creation and GC issues. Once (if) we see these being an issue we'll tackle them, but for the moment we're being thrifty with our use of development time.
cheers,
Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
Wow! That was a hard trail!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
