|
Tim, Randy, is there any ETA on search functionality?
If no ETA, could you let us know if the current thinking is days, weeks, or months. :eek:
Thanks. |
The following quote:
Originally Posted by Randy Petersen
Managing a high volume Web site has a unique challenge when you consider all the moving parts. Our latest problem turned out to be related to this:
Performance Hit Since PHP 4.3.10 / 5.0.3 Many people have noticed that vBulletin (and a lot of other PHP applications) suddenly started to run significantly slowed than normal after installing PHP 4.3.10 or 5.0.3 in order to patch the security flaw in previous versions of PHP. This cause of this slow-down has been identified as a problem with the unserialize() function in PHP. For more details, see bugs.php.net. This problem has now been fixed by the PHP developers, though the fixed version has yet to be released in a 'stable' version. However, the latest CVS snapshots of PHP 4.3.x and 5.0.x, available from snaps.php.net contain the fix and restore the original speed of unserialize(). While we would not recommend running a 'dev' version of PHP on any production server, we understand that the performance problem has been a major issue for some people. If you are badly affected, you may want to consider running a 'dev' version of PHP at your own risk in order to overcome the performance problem. As it turns out, when we moved to this latest version of PHP to fix a potential security flaw, it caused the slow down (and as noted, not just for our Web site). We are currently awaiting the official release fo the new version with the fix not opting to go with the 'dev' version because there are risks associated with that and we really are not interested in becoming a statistic. Once this fix is released, we'll install, test and reopen search. etc. Thanks for being patient as well as understanding there are a lot of moving parts on this Web site and we're not just talking about our members. HA! Unfortunately, your question really needs to be asked at www.vbulletin.com, or you might be able to ask the question (or find out the answer) at www.vbulletin.com/forum/. |
thanks
|
Originally Posted by Rut Dog
thanks
I truly wish that I had a better answer for you... |
What exactly is a milepost? :confused:
|
Actually the question needs to be asked of the developers of PHP.
vBulletin doesn't have much to do with it. The new release could come at any time. |
Originally Posted by John at Webflyer
Actually the question needs to be asked of the developers of PHP.
vBulletin doesn't have much to do with it. The new release could come at any time. How are the other Internet bulletin board sites — especially those with a larger membership and higher volume of posts than FlyerTalk — dealing with the PHP issue?
Originally Posted by alanw
What exactly is a milepost? :confused:
|
Different boards use different techniques -- one of the largest boards in the world limits the number of connections -- if you hit that board during peak hours chances are good that you'll be locked out. That's definitely something we don't want to do.
|
Originally Posted by John at Webflyer
Different boards use different techniques -- one of the largest boards in the world limits the number of connections -- if you hit that board during peak hours chances are good that you'll be locked out. That's definitely something we don't want to do.
|
Originally Posted by Kremmen
It'd be a hell of a lot better than no search.
(Unless you use search as an integral part of your FT browsing like 'new posts'). I have been involved with IT for many years and generally people prefer restricted/slow access to no access on an 'ad hoc' basis. |
Originally Posted by serfty
I have been involved with IT for many years and generally people prefer restricted/slow access to no access on an 'ad hoc' basis.
What amazes me is that there are so many options to get around this, but none are being employed here: patch php, patch vbulletin, use the php fix issued on Jan 16 (see the bottom of the php bug discussion), go back to a previous version (was there any real risk from the bug anyway? can the risk be circumvented by reducing some less important piece of functionality?), etc. By far the simplest thing to do, if there is any real risk of the latest php versions being unstable (which seems unlikely), would be to run a new version of php in parallel with the current site. www.flyertalk.com could have the current setup, unusable but stable, while ww2.flyertalk.com (or whatever) could have the latest vbulletin and latest php. |
Originally Posted by Kremmen
I've been involved in IT for many years too, and I'd agree that people prefer slow access to no access, which is why we should have search even if it slows the board down, rather than no search, which amounts, in many respects, to no access.
What amazes me is that there are so many options to get around this, but none are being employed here: patch php, patch vbulletin, use the php fix issued on Jan 16 (see the bottom of the php bug discussion), go back to a previous version (was there any real risk from the bug anyway? can the risk be circumvented by reducing some less important piece of functionality?), etc. By far the simplest thing to do, if there is any real risk of the latest php versions being unstable (which seems unlikely), would be to run a new version of php in parallel with the current site. www.flyertalk.com could have the current setup, unusable but stable, while ww2.flyertalk.com (or whatever) could have the latest vbulletin and latest php. And if there was a security problem in the cvs snapshot that led to the board being pwned and the database damaged, possibly emptied? How would you react to that? We are using the latest vbulletin release, and it looks to me like vbulletin is not going to patch for the unserialize() problem. So that is not an option. Rolling back to php 4.3.9.... 4.3.10 was released to address serious, published, security problems. Rolling back does not seem to be a good idea either. |
Originally Posted by Kremmen
It'd be a hell of a lot better than no search.
|
Originally Posted by John at Webflyer
And if there was a security problem in the cvs snapshot that led to the board being pwned and the database damaged, possibly emptied? How would you react to that?
However, if you think that's a real risk, why not just patch 4.3.10 with the performance fix, if you don't want to risk taking onboard all the other changes in any CVS snapshot? I do wonder though whether it even mattered. Okay, there were some bugs in PHP 4.3.9. Could they actually be triggered by vbulletin? If so, were any particular circumstances required? The only reports I've seen have been very superficial -- PHP had bugs, vbulletin uses PHP, therefore upgrade PHP -- and may have been an overreaction in the first place. It's amazing to me that vbulletin are being so useless in an area they should know intimately. |
Originally Posted by Kremmen
I'd say that the day lost in restoring from backup would be vastly less of a pain than the lack of FT functionality so far.
However, if you think that's a real risk, why not just patch 4.3.10 with the performance fix, if you don't want to risk taking onboard all the other changes in any CVS snapshot? I do wonder though whether it even mattered. Okay, there were some bugs in PHP 4.3.9. Could they actually be triggered by vbulletin? If so, were any particular circumstances required? The only reports I've seen have been very superficial -- PHP had bugs, vbulletin uses PHP, therefore upgrade PHP -- and may have been an overreaction in the first place. It's amazing to me that vbulletin are being so useless in an area they should know intimately. As for the "why not just restore the database", do you have even the slightest clue how large a SQL database is for a site the size of Flyertalk? That isn't something you can restore in an hour, let alone a day... |
Originally Posted by cactuspete
IMO, the lack of a search function is making a shambles of many FT forums. Duplicate posts, duplicate threads, etc. - - generally more noise and less meaningful content (or at least more difficulty in finding meaningful content). The longer that this continues, the damage will be more severe.
:rolleyes: |
Originally Posted by blairvanhorn
A shambles! Heavens to Betsy!
:rolleyes: But then I have come to expect you to disagree with any opinion of mine. :td: |
I'll just add my .02 that I'd much rather have a slow board with search than a fast board where search is disabled. Google is NOT the be all end all - it works marginally well at best, and at worst it's just frustrating and useless - just like not having a search function that works.
I've seen FT over the last few days behave just as slowly as it did when search was working, and reports of slowness are so subjective - it could be a slow dialup connection or a plethora of other things that FT has zero control over. I'm not exactly sure how speed over search won out, but I'd ask folks to re-evaluate that decision, especially when there's no timetable for it to return. One of the best assets of FT is its vast expanse of historical information - information that we cannot easily access right now. It's like putting a drive thru window on the Library of Congress - yeah, you can get to some stuff, but you really need to search inside to appreciate the true value of what it has to offer. - T |
Originally Posted by TonySCV
I'll just add my .02 that I'd much rather have a slow board with search than a fast board where search is disabled. Google is NOT the be all end all - it works marginally well at best, and at worst it's just frustrating and useless - just like not having a search function that works.
I've seen FT over the last few days behave just as slowly as it did when search was working, and reports of slowness are so subjective - it could be a slow dialup connection or a plethora of other things that FT has zero control over. I'm not exactly sure how speed over search won out, but I'd ask folks to re-evaluate that decision, especially when there's no timetable for it to return. One of the best assets of FT is its vast expanse of historical information - information that we cannot easily access right now. It's like putting a drive thru window on the Library of Congress - yeah, you can get to some stuff, but you really need to search inside to appreciate the true value of what it has to offer. |
Obviously this would not be a topic if the PHP fixes had been released as we and many other board hosts wished. We all have our own opinions and decisions on things like this, go left or go right. Bunt or swing for the fences. Go for the win or go for the tie. I would only hope that anyone with an opinion on this has read enough to know that there is clearly no vast majority of opinion.
In reality, we have decided a path that serves both - leaving the board fast(er) and still making search available to members, via our moderator staff. Should you have a specific topic in mind during this period, let me or another moderator know what you are looking for and we'll do our best to find it and provide you with the results. You can be assured that once PHP gets a speed/security fix available we'll have it installed and once again open up search. |
Originally Posted by Randy Petersen
You can be assured that once PHP gets a speed/security fix available we'll have it installed and once again open up search.
Here's hoping that the fix happens sooner, rather than later. I never realized how valuable the search feature was until it went on hiatus. |
Cactus, Tony:
this thread caught my eye when it popped up on the front page yesterday. When i was reading through it, something caught my eye. I'm sure glad we're in the position we are in regarding the moves we made to fix the security hole in PHP when we did or as you have seen from ScottC's experience with other PHP driven Web sites, and this one here..... we have not been hacked like the others and while the issue has slowed down FT on a temporary basis, i feel good that we haven't had to face these other types of problems which would have certainly been far more damaging. We'll continue to watch daily for the PHP fix to be released and you can guess that no one would be happier than I. Randy Read this post: http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=410713 |
Originally Posted by ScottC
Oh trust me, it mattered. 6 of the VB sites I host were defaced. And several PHPbb sites were defaced. By defaced I mean vapourized. GONE. Emptied. All that was left was a single index.html telling you the news.
As for the "why not just restore the database", do you have even the slightest clue how large a SQL database is for a site the size of Flyertalk? That isn't something you can restore in an hour, let alone a day... I do know how large a database a site like this entails, ... and if someone is paying you for advice like what you said above ("it takes more than a day to restore...") here are two thoughts: 1.) You've got an excellent client/employer in that you've certainly got them fooled so if they keep paying you for advice like this that's great...for you, and 2.) (more seriously) they, or you, need to find someone with the right skill set for the particular database in question. Unless you're Visa, Mastercard, or the IRS, with multi tera-byte sized databases, it will never take 'days' to restore when done correctly. Never. |
Originally Posted by MileageHound
I'll nominate this as one of the dumbest technical replies I've seen on here in a long time. This sounds suspiciously like someone saying 'look, look, this is a problem only I know about, listen to me'.
I do know how large a database a site like this entails, ... and if someone is paying you for advice like what you said above ("it takes more than a day to restore...") here are two thoughts: 1.) You've got an excellent client/employer in that you've certainly got them fooled so if they keep paying you for advice like this that's great...for you, and 2.) (more seriously) they, or you, need to find someone with the right skill set for the particular database in question. Unless you're Visa, Mastercard, or the IRS, with multi tera-byte sized databases, it will never take 'days' to restore when done correctly. Never. |
Originally Posted by ScottC
WOW... one of the rudest replies I have read here in a long long time, not to mention full of inaccuracies, and that from someone with a whopping 5 posts to their name. :(
|
Originally Posted by TonySCV
One of the best assets of FT is its vast expanse of historical information - information that we cannot easily access right now. It's like putting a drive thru window on the Library of Congress - yeah, you can get to some stuff, but you really need to search inside to appreciate the true value of what it has to offer.
- T Tattikat2 |
:td: I'm not sure what was wrong with the "old" search function. OK, it wasn't perfect, but at least you could find things. Maybe it slows FlyerTalk down, but like another poster noted, I would prefer a slower FlyerTalk with search than a faster one without search.
The google search is simply not an effective alternative. I've followed all the guidance provided and tried several searches. Seems that the google search is not exactly up to date and it returns questionable, and limited, results.....at least in my experience. My last resort now is too post additional questions to the forums, questions which have likely been answered previously. |
Originally Posted by MileageHound
Quantity doesn't equate to quality -- maybe if you have something to prove, it does. I've read your replies on here for a while now, and you're just off base on lots of technical issues, but this one takes the prize.
|
Originally Posted by cactuspete
IMO, the lack of a search function is making a shambles of many FT forums. Duplicate posts, duplicate threads, etc. - - generally more noise and less meaningful content (or at least more difficulty in finding meaningful content). The longer that this continues, the damage will be more severe.
It's pretty depressing how far downhill FT has gone without a search function. The repetition is just staggering. It was problematic before; now it's destroying some of the forums. Take a look at the Starwood forum, for example. Seems like there are brand new threads asking about the NYC Starwood hotels every day (OK, maybe an exaggeration, but not that far wrong), as well as on a host of other well-worn topics. How many hundreds of separate threads on essentially the same topic do we need, anyhow? As for the moderators helping by doing a search (which they still have access to), very few of them do that. (In some cases, I wonder if the moderator even knows how to use the FT search function. Maybe a little tutorial would help.) My impression is that most moderators act as police officers, trying to prevent or end flame wars and off-topic ramblings, more than anything else; there are notable exceptions, of course!!! |
Originally Posted by KathyWdrf
As for the moderators helping by doing a search (which they still have access to), very few of them do that. (In some cases, I wonder if the moderator even knows how to use the FT search function. Maybe a little tutorial would help.) My impression is that most moderators act as police officers, trying to prevent or end flame wars and off-topic ramblings, more than anything else; there are notable exceptions, of course!!!
I've gotten several requests from members to do searches for them. I've done so fairly quickly, and I think I also did a pretty good job in each case culling down the results to the threads most relevant to their questions. In each case the customer seemed satisfied. If there's a search you'd like help with, feel free to PM me. Btw, I've posted some search results on threads where doing so seemed germaine. But mostly I've just replied to requests when asked. |
Originally Posted by KathyWdrf
As for the moderators helping by doing a search (which they still have access to), very few of them do that. (In some cases, I wonder if the moderator even knows how to use the FT search function. Maybe a little tutorial would help.) My impression is that most moderators act as police officers, trying to prevent or end flame wars and off-topic ramblings, more than anything else; there are notable exceptions, of course!!!
Now I don't want to open a can of worms here but, time permitting, I'm willing to perform search functions for those that are in need. If you see the little green light that shows I'm online, feel free to PM me and I'll help out where I can. One caveat: If I start getting 50 PM's an hour, I may be forced to go into "invisible" mode....;). PS....I see gleff beat me to the punch with this offer....I'm a slow typer :). While I certainly don't want to volunteer other moderators for assisting on the search function, I think you'll find most of us are a helpful bunch and will pitch in where we can. |
FYI.. . just so the "facts" are provided here since Kathy has brought up the *wood forum.. .every person who requires a search and PMs one of the moderators has been provided a personal response with the appropriate threads.
I asked Kathy to stop posting "do a search" as her response to the newbies on the board since it was not a constructive response and was causing others to have bad feelings with that response. Kathy, to my knowledge, as of today you have never requested any searches to be performed by any one of the mods in *wood. |
Stalkers...
I'm kinda glad the search engine is down.
Keeps troublemakers from doing searches on another member's past posts, so that they can bring that post up in one of their arguments as "evidence". It also keeps troublemakers from "researching & profiling" you. When the search engine goes back up, how about a feature that blocks one from searching on a member if that member requests so? M8 |
Originally Posted by Martinis at 8
I'm kinda glad the search engine is down.
Keeps troublemakers from doing searches on another member's past posts, so that they can bring that post up in one of their arguments as "evidence". It also keeps troublemakers from "researching & profiling" you. When the search engine goes back up, how about a feature that blocks one from searching on a member if that member requests so? M8 For those who are looking to trade/gift in Coupon Connection, a search of a members postings provides enough info to see if that poster is always a give me give me poster. Many times I have not sent a free cert to someone who always takes, but never gives. As for the statement above about FT being 'littered' (my words) with the same new questions over and over again... oh well. Does make for some interesting reading. dhammer53 Brooklyn Reality Tour takes place Friday April 29. |
Originally Posted by ldsant
FYI.. . just so the "facts" are provided here since Kathy has brought up the *wood forum.. .every person who requires a search and PMs one of the moderators has been provided a personal response with the appropriate threads.
I asked Kathy to stop posting "do a search" as her response to the newbies on the board since it was not a constructive response and was causing others to have bad feelings with that response. Kathy, to my knowledge, as of today you have never requested any searches to be performed by any one of the mods in *wood. 1. "Every person who requires a search and PMs one of the moderators" does not cover even a small fraction of the cases where a search is needed. My point is that very often, posters are not even aware of the existence of dozens (or hundreds) of existing posts on a topic, and therefore it would not occur to them to PM a moderator for a search. @:-) 2. I haven't posted "do a search" in a long, long, long while. Instead, I have called attention to the existence of the search function (previously, the FT search function, and now, Google). If someone is unaware of this function, this info can be helpful to them in two ways: they find out about the existence of search, and they find out about the existence of a wealth of information on the topic they are asking about. @:-) 3. I have never requested a search of the moderators because I can use Google or other search engines myself. My point is that although moderators may REACT to search requests, they may or may not be proactive in helping people who start the hundredth new thread on the Hilton NYC, the Sheraton NYC, or whatever well-worn subject it may be. Of course, moderators vary in this respect; obviously some have or make more time to devote to their moderation duties and some are more likely to be proactive than others. But since moderators now have exclusive access to the FT search function, perhaps being proactive and helpful is appropriate. It isn't just about being a police officer. @:-) @:-) @:-) |
Originally Posted by KathyWdrf
I have never requested a search of the moderators because I can use Google or other search engines myself.
I am sure that there are many moderators who are more than willing to help on request on occassion. And good for them. But this reality is hardly a viable substitute for the return of a regular search feature. |
Originally Posted by Martinis at 8
I'm kinda glad the search engine is down.
Keeps troublemakers from doing searches on another member's past posts, so that they can bring that post up in one of their arguments as "evidence". It also keeps troublemakers from "researching & profiling" you. When the search engine goes back up, how about a feature that blocks one from searching on a member if that member requests so? M8 CF |
Why is this a secret?
Originally Posted by KathyWdrf
As for the moderators helping by doing a search (which they still have access to), very few of them do that. (In some cases, I wonder if the moderator even knows how to use the FT search function. Maybe a little tutorial would help.)
|
Originally Posted by Rut Dog
Tim, Randy, is there any ETA on search functionality?
If no ETA, could you let us know if the current thinking is days, weeks, or months. :eek: Thanks. |
Originally Posted by Martinis at 8
I'm kinda glad the search engine is down.
Keeps troublemakers from doing searches on another member's past posts, so that they can bring that post up in one of their arguments as "evidence". It also keeps troublemakers from "researching & profiling" you. When the search engine goes back up, how about a feature that blocks one from searching on a member if that member requests so? M8 |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 4:51 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.