Mahz's Dev Journal

[Zardoric]

The Status hider would be anonymous, @Pair of Hearts and I meant a 'Hide' button instead of dislike. I would also not recommend any kind of counter or notification that your status was blocked.

But this is all besides the point until the site is...I can't remember the right word right now.

[Zardoric]

Sorry for the double...

[Mahz]

Two of the servers hit that weird 100% CPU bug again, so a lot of requests were timing out over the past few hours (while I slept).

It won't be til this weekend that I deploy some fix ideas that I've come up with, one of them involving to move my database to a different host so I can upgrade its version and rewrite some logic.

My attempted database upgrade last weekend failed because my current host doesn't support the features I need on the new version.

I'm now convinced that the downtime is caused by an underlying dependency update rather than my own code. I've scrutinized every line of code I've written since they began a month or so ago. It's bewildering.

Hopefully if I just keep upgrading the platform, they'll go away.

[GoddessSophia]

@Mahz Ah, that seems tricky. So will the site be up and running, when you take it to a different host, whilst trying to fix the codes?

[NuttsnBolts]

The Status hider would be anonymous, @Pair of Hearts and I meant a 'Hide' button instead of dislike. I would also not recommend any kind of counter or notification that your status was blocked.

But this is all besides the point until the site is...I can't remember the right word right now.

@Zardoric

Basically, we want to discourage bad behaviour and encourage positive thinking. A better site work well without the negative bullshit that some people bring. Simply look at chat when some annoying member that's a nuisance comes online. Just watch now quickly people will scatter because of them.

For statuses to work well you want this ingrained into people's thinking. I don't agree with the whole blocking or hiding people option, nor hide all statuses that was mentioned earlier as you are essentially cutting content and censoring yourself from things that shouldn't really matter. It's like sticking your fingers in your ears and singing "lalala"; a bandaid solution for a bigger problem. However forcing a ranking system that sorts statuses based on positive and negative feedback will show everyone what's more acceptable.

It comes back to that old saying of "don't feed the trolls". If the people that are bitching don't get any feedback, then they'll stop it because it isn't justifying their own pointless existence, but if you reward those with good posts, then others will follow in their footsteps.

[LegendBegins]

<Snipped quote by Zardoric>

I don't agree with the whole blocking or hiding people option, nor hide all statuses that was mentioned earlier as you are essentially cutting content and censoring yourself from things that shouldn't really matter. It's like sticking your fingers in your ears and singing "lalala"; a bandaid solution for a bigger problem.

@NuttsnBolts

I can't agree with this. User customization is incredibly important and people shouldn't be subject to things they don't want to see if there is a way to get rid of it. It's one thing to never make the feature, but actively assuring that it is never created is against the goal of customization and user preference. Some people just don't like statuses, and that's fine.

TL;DR It's fine to not have it but blocking it for the sake of "Get over it" isn't necessary.

[Pair of Hearts]

@NuttsnBolts
That will nurture likes-mingering. So, essentially trying to buy attention by broadcasting opinions that one believes the majority will like. Those that do not get "positive" or "negative" points will be stuck in suspension between top and bottom, which may lead to the poster feeling neglected/ignored.

Mmm, I don't see how ranking can work; for personal ranking, the person still has to see it before bumping it to the bottom and for public ranking, well, that's quite unfair if someone is stuck in the middle of nowhere like Eustice and Muriel.

However, I do agree that positivity is encouraged. So how about a Favourite feature? You mark a user as your favourite feed provider, and there will be a list of "Recent Favourites" which shows the latest statuses from them. Then everybody wins!

Trolls/Grinches get their own fans. Other people build up their own customised feed from people they like. A little bit like Subscribe, so to speak. The Favourite box will be the one we see on homepage, where we are also given the option to "See All Statuses" in circulation (including non-favourites).

[NuttsnBolts]

@Pair of Hearts A favourites feature could be as easy as linking your friends list to the status updates. You're already following that particular person to see if theyre online, naturally you'd wanna know of their status updates.

[Pair of Hearts]

@NuttsnBolts
Um, no. There are people I am not friends with but still enjoy their presence on my feed.

My diplomat-and-analyst mode is switched on for this, so remember this: I still see you as an acquaintance (shy of being a solid friend) so everything I say in the following is purely to assess the best possible way we can deal with the matter at hand, okay?

Onwards. Buckle up.

The suggestion of yours is inconvenient. Namely because: (1) it becomes a requirement to add the person, which expands my Friendlist, making the roster look clunky and long - a mortal enemy for a procrastinator to feel motivated; (2) I have to check their profile, which is extra work because I r slothz; (3) you can't Like a status on someone's profile.

...

In the case that someone ever suggest we dump status liking:

Now, regarding why I don't mind the "Likes" for statuses is because, if someone told a good joke or useful tip, why not show some appreciation? It doesn't cost you anything, and let's face the truth: it's sad but some people do need their presence validated by virtual currency of fame. Maybe they have a battle we don't know of. If my single Like makes them feel less crappy, why not?

[Mahz]

Two of the servers hit that weird 100% CPU bug again, so a lot of requests were timing out over the past few hours (while I slept).

It won't be til this weekend that I deploy some fix ideas that I've come up with, one of them involving to move my database to a different host so I can upgrade its version and rewrite some logic.

My attempted database upgrade last weekend failed because my current host doesn't support the features I need on the new version.

I'm now convinced that the downtime is caused by an underlying dependency update rather than my own code. I've scrutinized every line of code I've written since they began a month or so ago. It's bewildering.

Hopefully if I just keep upgrading the platform, they'll go away.

@Mahz

Bump, since the Guild hit the CPU issue again.

It's insane. Sometimes it goes a few days without an issue. Hopefully it gets magically fixed this weekend after some upgrades.

Until it's fixed, I should make the servers reboot every 2 hours, but not sure how to do that off the top of my head.

[Shienvien]

Some script can do it, chances are. Can't say much without knowing what servers those are and how you access them.

[Always]

@Mahz I don't know if someone said this already, but the timing thing of how long ago someone replied is litterly going crazy. For example it will say I posted 20 minutes ago one minute and ten minutes later it will say I posted 10 minutes ago.

[NuttsnBolts]

<Snipped quote by Mahz>

Bump, since the Guild hit the CPU issue again.

It's insane. Sometimes it goes a few days without an issue. Hopefully it gets magically fixed this weekend after some upgrades.

Until it's fixed, I should make the servers reboot every 2 hours, but not sure how to do that off the top of my head.

@Mahz

What's the server running on, ie. Linux, Windows, etc. Could that be what's having an issue with the CPU.

Bringing this up cause I had troubles with my laptop a while ago where the hard drive would crank up to 100% running capacity for no reason, so this sounds similar.

[Shienvien]

CPU hitting 100% is actually a very general issue that could be caused by whatever, from an infinite loop to a program that's simply too demanding for the system. You can pull it off with pretty much literally any system.

(It's a symptom, not a cause.)

[The Grey Dust]

APPLICATION ERROR!

[Mahz]

Yeah, Guild's been rekt the past 24 hours.

Tomorrow I'll try to get a CPU profiler online. Figure out where it's spending all that sweet CPU time.

[Dion]

Sounds a bit strange that it's suddenly, for no cause at all, using up CPU for no reason. Something must've changed for it to act that way, right.

[Doc Doctor]

APPLICATION ERROR AS POSTING ABOUT APPLICATION ERROR

[Mahz]

Sounds a bit strange that it's suddenly, for no cause at all, using up CPU for no reason. Something must've changed for it to act that way, right.

@Buddha

And sometimes it goes a few days without much of an issue.

Anyways, my weekend is dedicated to deploying hacks, profilers, and more platform upgrades to see if I can magically get rid of it the same way it magically appeared. This issue is starting to eat up my time.

The saying is "easy come, easy go" right?

[Dion]

@Mahz see, that sounds really weird. Has something changed with the server host (assuming that you are not hosting privately on your own PC's)?