Problem with long threads

[Gary]

Let's face it, who would want to load a single page with 300 posts on it anyway!

to true Simon

[Inactive]

That depends on how you look at it; the feature was not designed to be set as high as it was, therefore the old (high) setting was "broken" so the new setting "solved" the problem of the "broken" setting.

Your surname isn't Blair by chance is it Adam?

[Rik]

So not really solved then.. I think that's hilarious.. ROFL.

Oh the problem is solved, Ann. By empirical testing, we established the point at which the server fell over when assembling messages for the 'All' link, and then set the level so that it didn't happen anymore.

Of course, we didn't try to solve the problem of getting the system to display more than 100 posts at a time.

[Inactive]

In all seriousness, thanks to those involved with sorting this.

[Rik]

It came down to an issue with server memory, which we don't control, In. Because each post in the forum is a database entry, the software had to assemble the complete table of posts in memory when 'All' was selected, before it could display them. With several hundred as the limit, it just choked - hence the blank page, or occasionally, a server error.

The All limit is now set at 100 posts, which should be enough for most purposes. When a thread exceeds that, the All link simply disappears.

[Inactive]

" All " sorted then Rik.. 

Thanks.

[Ann]

You broke it for me.  I used to be able to view many more pages than 4 and now I can't.  But it doesn't matter, was just tickled by the explanation.

[Rik]

Maybe you had your own dedicated server, Ann?