Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh
-
@NedFodder said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
I said that before @Magus did. So would you instead say the forum is hanging? There's really no distinction from a user's point of view.
Cooties is a sign of hanging. Refresh notification was typically a sign of crashing. Now all that's been done is convert hanging into preemptive crash so we don't have cooties.
This of course, all my interpretation of the current sitation.
-
@NedFodder my understanding is that the cooties mainly happen when one of the server's two CPU cores is pegged at 100%. Theoretically this means every connection has about a 50% chance of failing, which makes the cooties graph go haywire, and the condition generally persists until an admin comes along and kicks it, but now the script automatically does that when it happens.
The last update that I've heard on the situation was that Ben was trying to do a Node.js build with debug logging enabled to try to figure out what was causing it to hang.
-
@boomzilla Fuck of with your poor reading comprehension and your @-mentioning me into yet another random thread and thereby putting me in the horribly uncomfortable position of agreeing with @Magus.
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
Now all that's been done is convert hanging into preemptive crash so we don't have cooties.
No, it just stops the cooties very quickly. We now have a moral busybody watching out for cooties.
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be "cured" against one's will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals.
― C.S. Lewis, God in the Dock: Essays on Theology (Making of Modern Theology)
-
@Fox said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
@boomzilla Fuck of with your poor reading comprehension and your @-mentioning me into yet another random thread and thereby putting me in the horribly uncomfortable position of agreeing with @Magus.
Stop being the archetype of dumb and it might even happen. That you agree with @Magus just proves me correct, which you are very good at doing, so thank you again.
-
@boomzilla said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
I recall much yelling trying to get you to understand that most refreshes are not and will not be (for the foreseeable) future due to updates.
And then ben chimed in and told you that, no, from now on only updates should be causing refreshes:
@ben_lubar said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
The toaster means updates since the update where I made the cache buster not change without a docker container change.
So why has it refreshed five times today?
-
@boomzilla No, that you disagree with @Magus in this proves that you are still a fucking dumbass. Having a forum cease to function normally multiple times a day is not normal. @Magus is right about that. Completely and totally right. It is not normal, and it is not okay.
-
@anotherusername @Tsaukpaetra Whether it crashes and restarts automatically, or hangs and gets restarted by an admin, or hangs and gets restarted by a script, we still see the "forum has updated, please refresh" toaster. Like I said,
@NedFodder said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
There's really no distinction from a user's point of view.
-
@Magus said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
And then ben chimed in and told you that, no, from now on only updates should be causing refreshes:
I'm pretty sure I told him that what he thought would happen wouldn't because it wasn't.
-
@boomzilla You can't explain my bug reports away. You can't until I shut up. You can ban me and truly become Jeff. But if you do not see constant failure as an issue, you are insane.
-
@Fox said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
@boomzilla No, that you disagree with @Magus in this proves that you are still a fucking dumbass. Having a forum cease to function normally multiple times a day is not normal. @Magus is right about that. Completely and totally right. It is not normal, and it is not okay.
Fuck...here we go again! See, I've bolded the part that you have for reasons known only to yourself decided that I believe.
Well, you were not explicit, so maybe you thought we disagreed about something else, but given that this the only thing mentioned, I believe my reading comprehension skills have lead me to a reasonable conclusion. Do let me know when you've hallucinated something else to say.
-
@Magus said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
@boomzilla You can't explain my bug reports away. You can't until I shut up. You can ban me and truly become Jeff. But if you do not see constant failure as an issue, you are insane.
You are totally delusional. I've probably worked on fixing this shit even more than @ben_lubar, so fuck off with your bullshit.
It's how you refuse to read and comprehend what you're told and then keep saying the same thing over and over. Yes, nice ran out a long time ago when you ignored what you were told.
No one is asking you to be happy about this, and trust me, you are not the only person upset about this, no matter how much glue @fox had to sniff to convince himself that was true.
Just don't be a moron and forget what you've been told every fucking time we have this conversation.
-
@boomzilla said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
See, I've bolded the part that you have for reasons known only to yourself decided that I believe.
That reason is because you said you believe it.
@boomzilla said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
@Magus said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
@Tsaukpaetra Which ones? I was shown some logs and told not to worry about it, that it's normal. No, it's not normal. Unless you're @end.
Fuck off with that @Fox interpretation of what people have told you.
You've made it abundantly clear that, to you, "@Fox interpretation" means "the exact opposite of what actually happened". So when you said that @Magus made an "@Fox interpretation" when he was told that it's normal behavior and then asserted that it's not normal, you're saying what actually happened was that it is normal. You're saying that the forum going down 5 times in one day is normal. Fucking moron.
-
@boomzilla said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
You are totally delusional. I've probably worked on fixing this shit even more than @ben_lubar, so fuck off with your bullshit.
First you've mentioned that. Nicely done, then, it's still broken though. I am, however, glad for less downtime.
@boomzilla said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
It's how you refuse to read and comprehend what you're told and then keep saying the same thing over and over.
Because mostly you spam pointless comments about things that don't matter. I really don't care why we're refreshing all the time. At all. I want it to stop. I didn't get a 'we're trying' - instead I got a 'fix it yourself noob'.
@boomzilla said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
Just don't be a moron and forget what you've been told every fucking time we have this conversation.
My empathy for blakey grows with every post you make in this thread.
-
@Magus God dammit, @boomzilla, now I'm liking @Magus posts. What the fuck.
-
@Fox said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
That reason is because you said you believe it.
And I'm sure you can "prove" it, right?
@Fox said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
You've made it abundantly clear that, to you, "@Fox interpretation" means "the exact opposite of what actually happened".
Yes, when a particular thing happens over and over, humans tend to name the phenomenon like that.
@Fox said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
You're saying that the forum going down 5 times in one day is normal. Fucking moron.
Please provide the quote where I said that.
-
@Magus said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
I didn't get a 'we're trying' - instead I got a 'fix it yourself noob'.
Absolutely false.
-
@boomzilla said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
Please provide the quote where I said that.
I did.
Fuck off with that @Fox interpretation of what people have told you.
-
@Fox said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
I did.
And somehow, "Fuck off with that @Fox interpretation of what people have told you," equates to "Having a forum cease to function normally multiple times a day is normal."
Do you see why no one can understand what you're talking about?
-
@boomzilla I already explained to you your own post, but I'll try again, since I know your reading comprehension is shit even when reading your own sentences. I'll try using shorter sentences and simpler words.
You called what he said an "@Fox interpretation". You were saying he was wrong. What he was saying is that "it's not normal." So if you're saying he was wrong about it being not normal, then you're saying it is normal.
-
@boomzilla I was given a log and told 'have fun' yesterday. Today I come back and say it's gotten worse, and now this argument is apparently about how you don't like it when I say broken things are broken?
@boomzilla said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
Help us figure out how to fix it, or expect us to keep posting back telling you the same thing.
@ben_lubar said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
if you can figure out how to make the forum stop crashing, you're better at this than the entire forum staff and the entire NodeBB dev team.
^Those posts up there need to stop. You were never forced to administer this website, or help with it. You aren't going to goad me into helping you fix the broken software you chose.
Seriously, could you maybe have a thread where you log your attempts to solve this or something? I have no visibility on any of your attempts, just this assertion, suddenly, in this thread saying that I should know all the hard work you've put in. How would I get that information exactly? I'd be glad to hear about it honestly, instead of silence and instability, met with when I complain about that instability.
-
@Fox said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
You've made it abundantly clear that, to you, "@Fox interpretation" means "the exact opposite of what actually happened".
You've made it abundantly clear that, to you, it does too.
you're saying what actually happened was that it is normal. You're saying that the forum going down 5 times in one day is normal.
Depends on the forum. But "normal" means "the usual, average, or typical state or condition" and around here that means cootie storms multiple times per day. This has been going on for weeks, so yeah. It's pretty much normal. It's undesirable, and pretty much nobody likes it, and people are trying to fix it, but it's definitely "normal".
-
@anotherusername said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
around here
is not normal. What the fuck are you smoking. This is WTDWTF. Nothing is normal around here.
-
@Magus said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
Seriously, could you maybe have a thread where you log your attempts to solve this or something?
Maybe!
-
@Fox said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
@boomzilla I already explained to you your own post, but I'll try again, since I know your reading comprehension is shit even when reading your own sentences. I'll try using shorter sentences and simpler words.
You called what he said an "@Fox interpretation". You were saying he was wrong. What he was saying is that "it's not normal." So if you're saying he was wrong about it being not normal, then you're saying it is normal.
Put the drugs down, dude.
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
"crashing? Don't worry about it, that's normal."
SNAFU
-
@Fox said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
What he was saying is that "I've been told it's normal."
Missed the mark a bit, I think. :)
-
@Magus said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
Seriously, could you maybe have a thread where you log your attempts to solve this or something?
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
@Fox said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
What he was saying is that "I've been told it's normal."
Missed the mark a bit, I think. :)
Well, what he was saying is "I've been told it's normal, but it's not normal."
-
@Magus said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
You can ban me and truly become Jeff.
Movie Quotes: "If You strike me down"(Star Wars IV) – 00:09
— ebbybeh
-
@Fox said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
@Tsaukpaetra said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
@Fox said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
What he was saying is that "I've been told it's normal."
Missed the mark a bit, I think. :)
Well, what he was saying is "I've been told it's normal, but it's not normal."
Yes, there's two points in that statement. I disagree with the first part, but agree with the second part. The last 100+ posts or so have been misunderstanding that you can't just blanket disagree or agree, you have to partition it out, which nobody has.
-
@Tsaukpaetra My points here are:
- It refreshes here a lot more lately, and it should probably stop that
- If those are caused by a catastrophic failure (i don't care what kind) it should be fixed
- Software with an issue like this should not be shipped
- This shouldn't be hard to see happen elsewhere, even if it can't be reproed on demand
- Well designed software makes failures obvious
- Bad software makes the cause of errors hard to find
- Communication and information are good
- 'then you try' is a dumb statement which means either 'trust me, i know more than you' or 'you should feel guilty for making me do all the hard work' - neither of which does any user care about ever
-
@magus The difference between our devs and Jeff is that Jeff was the fucking brand ambassador for his company's flagship product. By contrast, we have a couple of volunteers supporting us because they care about the community.
It was Jeff's fucking job to deliver a stable product, and his attitude was unprofessional and inexcusable.
Our dev team is working hard for free on a product they didn't create because it benefits us.
-
@Magus said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
It refreshes here a lot more lately, and it should probably stop that
Not until...
If those are caused by a catastrophic failure (i don't care what kind) it should be fixed
... yes.
Software with an issue like this should not be shipped
Mu.
This shouldn't be hard to see happen elsewhere, even if it can't be reproed on demand
Agreed.
Well designed software makes failures obvious
We'd like to hope so, anyway.
Bad software makes the cause of errors hard to find
Usually.
Communication and information are good
We're not lacking this. @Tsaukpaetra posted like 4 different threads.
-
@Magus said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
@Tsaukpaetra My points here are:
- It refreshes here a lot more lately, and it should probably stop that
- If those are caused by a catastrophic failure (i don't care what kind) it should be fixed
- Software with an issue like this should not be shipped
- This shouldn't be hard to see happen elsewhere, even if it can't be reproed on demand
- Well designed software makes failures obvious
- Bad software makes the cause of errors hard to find
- Communication and information are good
- 'then you try' is a dumb statement which means either 'trust me, i know more than you' or 'you should feel guilty for making me do all the hard work' - neither of which does any user care about ever
- Agreed.
- Obviously
- Under ideal circumstances, of course. However, as soon as a product exits the test bench, you are no longer under ideal circumstances, and things will inevitably break, especially if you let others touch it (which, it is by default because open source).
- I don't understand what you mean here. Are you saying that there is no evidence that other installations of NodeBB don't have this problem?
- Of course, even when not in debug mode. When was the last time you saw a Flagship Product mysteriously die for no reason? I can tell you how easy it is to get something that costs massive money to break merely by inputting a file with three extra bytes at the beginning of it. For this site, yes, failure is obvious, you can tell because there's a toaster every few hours (now) or the site being completely unresponsive (before).
- Oh, tying in the previous statement so that it modified the meaning? No, even excellent software can make the cause of errors hard to find. Now, if you had prefaced with "Well designed software should make the cause of errors easy to find" we would be in agreement.
- Is that why there are posts on the bughunt here? And here I thought it was just for entertainment!
- I don't understand what you mean by this... I don't recall saying "then you try", and out of context this statement doesn't make sense...
-
@error And I do appreciate that, I just have very little visibility on it, but I don't like some of those responses to a legitimate problem, you know?
Besides, I voted for https://what.thedailywtf.com/topic/17246/vanilla
-
@NedFodder said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
You're seeing the refresh toaster because the forum crashed and had to be restarted.
Well it would be nice if the message was a bit more accurate. "The server burped. Again. Please refresh your session".
-
@FrostCat said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
@NedFodder said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
You're seeing the refresh toaster because the forum crashed and had to be restarted.
Well it would be nice if the
message was a bit more accurate. "The server burped. Again. Please refresh your session"ere wasn't a message at all, because as far as the user is concerned, it technically didn't happen if they didn't notice it happening, and by toasting you just called out the fact that something happened.???
-
@boomzilla said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
Help us figure out how to fix it, or expect us to keep posting back telling you the same thing.
If it's not good enough for @blakyrat, it's not good enough for anyone else!
-
@Fox said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
Fuck of
Is that the sex fuck off or the other one? I'm asking for a friend.
-
-
@boomzilla said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
@Fox said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
You're saying that the forum going down 5 times in one day is normal. Fucking moron.
Please provide the quote where I said that.
Strictly speaking, if the forum goes down several times a day, more or less every day, that is normal behavior. That doesn't mean it's right or acceptable, of course.
-
Disclaimer: I initially posted that on the staging server's version of this topic and then wondered why nobody was replying.
-
@boomzilla said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
Do you see why no one can understand what you're talking about?
Ima go with "no".
-
@Tsaukpaetra I actually would say that. I wouldn't have complained about this stuff at all this week if that had been the solution.
I still find it hard to believe that the devs don't have some internal instance they can reproduce this on. If they do have one, this shouldn't have been shipped, and months should not have gone by without messing with the changes around the time the problem was introduced until it was found. These are basic things anyone producing software should be prepared for.
-
@Tsaukpaetra Iunno. I assumed the refresh was necessary for bookkeeping or something.
Me, I got a nice cushy desk job and enough to eat, and some free time to play video games, so all these forum issues, while annoying, are totally FWP. I mean, it's right up there, too, a little under "my town doesn't have a cereal bar where I can get a $9 bowl of Cap'n Crunch with organic goat milk".
-
@anotherusername said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
We're not lacking this. @Tsaukpaetra posted like 4 different threads.
And not even all of them where we've talked about this stuff. Plus more in staff areas and email, though admittedly of course those aren't public. But if you think people haven't been trying to figure it out and are happy with the status quo you've probably got your head in the sand.
-
I thought those lines looked a little bit odd. I'm not sure, though, why they wouldn't work either way.
-
@Magus said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
I still find it hard to believe that the devs don't have some internal instance they can reproduce this on.
-
@Magus said in Refreshrefreshrefreshrefresh:
@Tsaukpaetra I actually would say that. I wouldn't have complained about this stuff at all this week if that had been the solution.
I still find it hard to believe that the devs don't have some internal instance they can reproduce this on. If they do have one, this shouldn't have been shipped, and months should not have gone by without messing with the changes around the time the problem was introduced until it was found. These are basic things anyone producing software should be prepared for.
The issue is that even with basic testing, I double it would be sufficient to catch the issue, because it seems to only happen through TDWTF-levels if usage, and (obviously) the devs don't have that kind of test bench to try it with. And when you account for the fact that this isn't a vanilla deployment of NodeBB, there are so many factors that it would be impossible to sift through all the myriads of ways our instance is different from the base code and pinpoint the issue.