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
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
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/
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
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
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
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)
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
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