How long is this going to take, I use the history to check for tag abusers.

I was wondering that to! @.=.@

I use it constantly to fix bad tagging too.

The database queries required to generate the pages were taking unacceptably long, several seconds in some cases, so the features were disabled instead of until they're done fixing the underlying problems with the database. I expect it will take a while, database optimization is hard.

EDIT: I enjoy hearing updates about how projects like these are going. Inkbunny has been doing some work on their database too, and they posted some cool behind the scenes dev jounals.

Halite said:
I use it constantly to fix bad tagging too.

Same. There's a few users who consistently mistag certain things, and by far the easiest way to fix those was to check their tag history daily. :/

Ah well, at least the site is running a bit smoother now.

Now I can vandalise tags and nobody will notice! Ahahahah!

Genjar said:
Same. There's a few users who consistently mistag certain things, and by far the easiest way to fix those was to check their tag history daily. :/

Are some users really so shitty at tagging they need people to check their edits daily? Sounds like an admin needs to slap them around a bit to me.

Saffron said:
Are some users really so shitty at tagging they need people to check their edits daily? Sounds like an admin needs to slap them around a bit to me.

I've tried reporting the worst cases, but those tickets only got marked as "note sent", "contacted", or "handled". No changes to their user record, and no changes to the way they tag things.

One of them got hit recently by the new "Disregard of the Site Administration"-rule, but there's still another two that I need to check constantly. And the thing is... They have tons of useful tag edits and only consistently misuse a couple of tags out of dozens.

So I'd rather keep on cleaning up after them than report them and risk getting a valuable tagger banned.

Genjar said:
And the thing is... They have tons of useful tag edits and only consistently misuse a couple of tags out of dozens.

So I'd rather keep on cleaning up after them than report them and risk getting a valuable tagger banned.

Could send them a personal message mentioning to them the tags they are using wrong. If they're mostly doing tagging right, they're not too likely to get defensive about it.

Nyteshade said:
Could send them a personal message mentioning to them the tags they are using wrong. If they're mostly doing tagging right, they're not too likely to get defensive about it.

Those are hard to word without crossing over to mini-modding, but I have tried mailing two of them about it. Both messages got ignored, and neither of them have ever posted anything on the forums either. Doesn't seem like they're interested in tag definitions.

I probably should report them again, but... Bleh. They do more good than harm, and taggers are always in short supply.

Genjar said:
I've tried reporting the worst cases, but those tickets only got marked as "note sent", "contacted", or "handled". No changes to their user record, and no changes to the way they tag things.

One of them got hit recently by the new "Disregard of the Site Administration"-rule, but there's still another two that I need to check constantly. And the thing is... They have tons of useful tag edits and only consistently misuse a couple of tags out of dozens.

So I'd rather keep on cleaning up after them than report them and risk getting a valuable tagger banned.

It sounds like the admins are trying to resolve the situation without having to involve the disciplinary system. To me, bad tagging is like speeding in front of a cop; it's really easy to not break that rule.

Sometimes, users just don't get it... and we have to warn them repeatedly before issuing records. Sometimes they get better, sometimes they don't.

hmm, well when I come up against a set of posts or a specific person that continues to do that I sometimes ask for others to keep an eye on him/her for a while. cuz...you know, it gets tedious and I forget stuff easily XD

Saffron said:
Now I can vandalise tags and nobody will notice! Ahahahah!

Just kidding. Tag history is pretty important, hope we get it back soon.

Are some users really so shitty at tagging they need people to check their edits daily? Sounds like an admin needs to slap them around a bit to me.

lol, yes there are. there are also some users who need people to check their comments, blips and forum posts daily or weekly too (*coughs* me being one of them) and no amount of slaping around by admin will help sadly... though in my case there arnt very many like me. I have a mental condition that I honestly don't know what to call. its basicly like being mentally colorblind.

but back on topic, yes there are people like that. for example I have one person on my, or was on my watch list in my bookmarks that no matter how many times I came in behind him to clean up his bad tagging within two to four days it would all be reverted by him no less.

The tag history page will be fixed in the next update, which is imminent.

The traditional method of paginating SQL results is to use OFFSET and LIMIT clauses. Retrieving page 4, based on 50 tag history entries per page, would be OFFSET 150 LIMIT 50, which would skip the 150 most recent rows (three pages' worth) and retrieves the next 50.

The problem with this is that even though you're skipping the first 150 rows, the server still has to iterate through all of those rows due to the way relational databases work. When you start getting offsets of over 7 million, it starts getting into site-crippling territory.

So now, the way we do it is instead of using page numbers, we use a system where you provide the last ID, and the database returns the next 100 records after it, which does not have the same performance issues as the above method. This means the tag history page will no longer have page numbers, and you can't directly jump to a later page. You could manually alter the 'after' parameter in the URL to jump really far into the list, but it won't be quite as accurate as page numbers.

If you're familiar with Reddit, this is exactly how their pagination is done. When you click the "next" link at the bottom of the page, it doesn't go to page 2, it just retrieves the next 25 (or however many) results after the last one on the page you were just on. Similarly, when you click the "prev" link, it retrieves the next (rather, previous) 25 results before the first result on the page you were just on.

This shouldn't make tag histories any less usable than they were before, but it'll make them much, much faster than before, which means we don't need to lock it down to the first page anymore :)

tony311 said:
The tag history page will be fixed in the next update, which is imminent.

**stuff**

This shouldn't make tag histories any less usable than they were before, but it'll make them much, much faster than before, which means we don't need to lock it down to the first page anymore :)

Awesome. Looking forward to the update and return.

Sounds like an article I read recently.

Oracle DBs imo.

Sweet, the tag histories are working again.
Being able to browse past the first page makes fixing consistent mistags so much simpler. Thanks for fixing it so quickly.

I haven't been able to figure out how to use the new search, though. It seems to time out most of the time. Maybe I'm doing something wrong...

Hooray for the return of tag history! Thanks to any and all involved in the update.

Yay, thanks Tony.