[jmarkpatton]

That is a user setting. You can set it yourself.

I don't think that setting would be thread specific. Maybe forum specific.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[cpl]

Robotaz, I usually look at this thread through tapatalk on my I phone, and I didn't understand why they needed to start new threads either. It works great, loads right up etc. But then the other day I tried to look at this thread on my PC, and now I understand perfectly. On the PC, it takes like ten minutes to load this thread because there are so many replies. So for those of using phones and apps etc, it doesn't make sense to start a new thread, but for those with a PC it makes perfect sense. I don't know about Macs, I don't have one of those to try it out on.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't get this. Whether PC or phone it only loads one page at a time.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Ticonderoga]

Massdrop has Seiko SGEG97P1, SGEG97P2 and SGEG99 quartz dress watches with sapphire crystal for $79.99 plus $7.50 shipping. The cheapest on Amazon for any of the 3 is $119 at the moment.

https://www.massdrop.com/buy/seiko-sgeg-quartz-watch

SGEG97P1
View attachment 6496161

SGEG97P2
View attachment 6496169

SGEG99
View attachment 6496177

Great drop - description reads hardlex crystal but these are clearly sapphire.

 

[cel4145]

On topic, isn't loading a page on PC a function of how many posts per page you select in settings? Who in the world would try to load an entire thread in one page? lol

I don't get this. Whether PC or phone it only loads one page at a time.

You guys are only focusing on what you can see. Uber large threads like this might very well require more resources (e.g. ram, cpu processing, hard drive queries) at the server level. Depends on how the CMS software is written.

 

[jmarkpatton]

You guys are only focusing on what you can see. Uber large threads like this might very well require more resources (e.g. ram, cpu processing, hard drive queries) at the server level. Depends on how the CMS software is written.

Correct the one page at a time you are seeing is a result of how fast your computer is. The queries in the back ground that are stored and cached in memory for the paging results are what is taxing on the server. If there are 1000 threads for the software to query and it takes 30 seconds and you add another, it would now be 1001 to query through. The difference would be minimal, but it's not going to make it any faster. You could put this on the latest software on the fastest server possible. It's only going to be as fast as the weakest point. Which in most cases is the end user's wifi connection or equipment.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RidingDonkeys]

Robotaz, I usually look at this thread through tapatalk on my I phone, and I didn't understand why they needed to start new threads either. It works great, loads right up etc. But then the other day I tried to look at this thread on my PC, and now I understand perfectly. On the PC, it takes like ten minutes to load this thread because there are so many replies. So for those of using phones and apps etc, it doesn't make sense to start a new thread, but for those with a PC it makes perfect sense. I don't know about Macs, I don't have one of those to try it out on.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Everything on this forum takes forever to load. This is the slowest forum I participate in by a long shot. I'd love to be able to chip in to keep the ads down and the speed up.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

 

[Robotaz]

OK. I agree the site could be quicker anything to speed it up is good.

Thanks for the explanations. I wasn't aware of the background load on the server.

 

[cel4145]

Correct the one page at a time you are seeing is a result of how fast your computer is. The queries in the back ground that are stored and cached in memory for the paging results are what is taxing on the server. If there are 1000 threads for the software to query and it takes 30 seconds and you add another, it would now be 1001 to query through. The difference would be minimal, but it's not going to make it any faster. You could put this on the latest software on the fastest server possible. It's only going to be as fast as the weakest point. Which in most cases is the end user's wifi connection or equipment.

Do you have any experience in development, installation, and management of CMS's for websites on commercial hosting services? What's happening is much more complex at the server level than what you describe. It very well could be that the uber large active threads like this one tax the server's resources more heavily. As I already pointed out, one would have to know much more about how the software is written to evaluate this one way or the other. Plus--which I didn't mention before--knowledge of the limits of the commercial hosting account WUS is using.

 

[cel4145]

And I just got the database error that shows up sometimes when accessing my subscriptions page, which suggests that the hosting environment may not be sufficient for the size of the website, the CMS, and the amount of traffic it's getting.

 

[taike]

Happy new year.
Thread 5 here https://www.watchuseek.com/showthread.php?t=2728537