Wikitech-l February 2002

wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org

10 participants
70 discussions

Re: [Wikitech-l] orphans page takes too long (PS)
by Jan Hidders 01 Mar '02

01 Mar '02

From: "Jimmy Wales" <jwales(a)bomis.com> > > This answered my question. > > When I ran this by hand, it took a long time, so I better just stick with 1000 and > click it a bunch of times. That's no bother to me. > > If I drop the tables will the site break until I create them again? WAIT!! It just occurred to me that there is a problem because you probably by now have dropped the cur_linked_links and cur_unlinked_links columns, right? The script updLinks.php assumes they are still there and gets its information for the new tables from them. So just running it again won't work. No panic, the linking information is still there except we now need a different script because we need to get it out of the cur_text field. This is a bit of a problem because I really have to prepare some lessons for tomorrow. Any of the other programmers feel able to do this? -- Jan Hidders

3 5

Re: [Wikipedia-l] Allowing HTML for ruby text?
by Jan Hidders 27 Feb '02

27 Feb '02

From: "Jan Hidders" <hidders(a)uia.ua.ac.be> > > As a technical remark I would like to see a central array or something that > records what tags are allowed (and perhaps even how they might be nested and > what attributes they may have). For instance, in presenting the search > results I have to deal with HTML tags that might be present, and it would be > pleasant if this would automatically adapt if new tags are allowed. On second thought, I don't really need it because in this case, i.e., the presentation of search results, it is probably better to simply remove all HTML tags anyway. -- Jan Hidders

2 1

Re: [Wikipedia-l] AT&T
by Lars Aronsson 27 Feb '02

27 Feb '02

On wikipedia-l, Kurt Jansson wrote: > After some searching and many errors I figured out that the AT&T article > is under [[ATT]]. There seems to be a problem with the "&". I don't know > if it can be fixed, but maybe we can find a way around this. The errors I once fixed this in UseModWiki for another site, so it can be fixed. Just replace & with %26 in any externally visible URL. The page URL should then be: http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/AT%26T (The + in C++ is a lot harder, and CPlusPlus is really ugly. But this too can be fixed.) -- Lars Aronsson <lars(a)aronsson.se> tel +46-70-7891609 http://aronsson.se/ http://elektrosmog.nu/ http://susning.nu/

1 0

Re: [Wikitech-l] orphans page takes too long (PS)
by Jan Hidders 27 Feb '02

27 Feb '02

From: "Jan Hidders" <hidders(a)uia.ua.ac.be> > > Oh dear. Sorry that my instructions were not clear. You are supposed to run > the script, wait for a link to appear and then click this link for the next > batch. It seems you did only one batch. You need to repeat this until all > the records in table cur have been processed. This means you have to click > about 37 or 38 times, or you have to increase $size to do bigger batches. > (But avoid the 30 s. time-out. If you get a time-out you have the clear the > table "DELETE FROM linked WHERE 1=1;" and start from the beginning again.) Because you already did a batch you need to empty the tables first. The fastest way to do this is simply to drop the tables altogether. After that you can recreate them without the indexes (as in updSchema.sql) and fill them with the script. Considering the speed of your system you might simply try setting $size to 40000 or so, and attempt to do everything in one go. If that times-out, clear the tables 'linked' and 'unlinked' with DELETE and try again with half the value. Et cetera. After this you can add the indexes as in updSchema.sql. -- Jan Hidders

2 2

orphans page takes too long
by Jan Hidders 26 Feb '02

26 Feb '02

Well, the (boolean) search seems to fly and the most-wanted page seems to run smoothly, but the orphans-page get a time-out because it takes more than 30 seconds to compute. I'm baffled by this because on my little PC the most-wanted pages takes about 5 times as long as the orphans page. Is there a way for me to get access to the database to see what's going on? Perhaps someone could check if all the indexes for linked are actually defined? I also would like to know if there are perhaps a big amount of duplicates there. I would like to know what the results of SELECT COUNT(*) FROM linked; and SELECT COUNT(*) FROM linkes GROUP BY linked_from, linked_to ; to see if they are very different. Perhaps a new log of the slow queries would also be helpful. -- Jan Hidders

3 3

New colors, Nostalgy skin
by Magnus Manske 26 Feb '02

26 Feb '02

I updated the background colors to Brion's suggestion (now in wikiSettings.php). Also, I added a "Nostalgy" skin that makes the 'pedia look almost (!) like UseModWiki. The HTML output is far from perfect, but it renders well in Konqueror. Magnus

1 0

IP blocking / color schmemes
by Magnus Manske 26 Feb '02

26 Feb '02

I just commited * IP blocking does not show on Recent Changes anymore * In all namespaces, the "article" body has a white background (fix for now;)

1 0

Quick note on updating the cur table
by Brion L. VIBBER 26 Feb '02

26 Feb '02

One of the wonders of having a TIMESTAMP field in your table is that it gets updated automatically every time a row is changed. One of the gotchas of having a TIMESTAMP field in your table is that it gets updated automatically every time a row is changed. When the latest update got installed, *every article* got its modified date reset to February 25, circa 15:51 (and thus flooded Recent Changes). D'oh! Either we all need to make sure that we throw a cur_timestamp=cur_timestamp into data-changing SQL code that's not supposed to change the dates, or we should just change the field so it's updated manually in the places where it's supposed to be... -- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)

1 0

minimum search size
by Jan Hidders 26 Feb '02

26 Feb '02

Jimbo, Could you please also install the new wikiSettings.php? There is a variable defined in there that needs to be set for the search box to function properly. Thanks, -- Jan Hidders

1 0

IP blocking (fwd)
by Larry Sanger 26 Feb '02

26 Feb '02

Re the e-mail below: I just noticed that the following line appears in the Recent Changes log: (diff) Wikipedia:Blocked IPs; 22:24 (1 change) . . . Larry_Sanger M [IP was blocked by Larry_Sanger] I'd rather not have the log entry there. This represents a significant change in the functionality of the software; frankly, this doesn't need to be made so public. I don't think it should be shouted from the rooftops that I've blocked an IP. If someone wants to know what IPs I've blocked, that's fair enough--I don't want it *hidden* from anyone--they could visit a page to find that out. I just don't want the eedjits constantly getting into a dither about who I'm blocking and why. And they will be, if we log this. This hasn't been a problem so far; there's no reason for it to be made one. Also, please notice that I haven't got a clue as to how the above happened. I simply went to [[special:blockIP]] (WITHOUT any "&target=..."), it seems, and the above log entry was created. Now, when I go to [[Wikipedia:Blocked IPs]], I see the following entry: (1014704640) : IP was blocked by Larry_Sanger Did I just block someone's IP address unwittingly??? I hope not. Can you please check? (I don't know how.) --Larry ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 22:25:50 -0800 (PST) From: Larry Sanger <lsanger(a)nupedia.com> To: Magnus Manske <Magnus.Manske(a)epost.de> Subject: IP blocking Hi Magnus, I found a link to "block this IP" on http://www.wikipedia.com/wiki/What_is_a_wiki&action=history after 4.35.29.174 but not after any other IP numbers. Is that how it's supposed to work? How IS it supposed to work? What will happen if I press the "Block this IP" button? Larry

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

Wikitech-l February 2002