From a moderator/administrator perspective, what’s the difference between closing a thread and deleting one? I notice that duplicate threads are usually closed, instead of deleted. Is it more difficult to delete a thread? Would search engine or server time be saved if some of the threads that are currently closed (like dupes) were instead deleted, or does it cause some other sort of server strain?
IANAM (of course), but I’d bet my right testicle that it takes a lot longer to delete a thread than to simply close it. To close it, I’m guessing one just clicks the ol’ Close Thread button, and poof, it’s done. But deleting it ties up the server, as the board has to retrieve the thread from the server, then kill it. Or something.
That’s a pretty fair estimation, dan. I suppose we could delete the duplicates and, in fact, some of us (me) routinely do delete rather than close. Deleting all the old dupes would probably save a bit of search time, it’s just a) finding the time to get around to it, b) locating them now and c) doing it during non-peak hours.
How 'bout this? If you (or anyone) chance across old closed duplicates (in any forum), send me the URL and I’ll make a list to delete when I get a bunch of 'em at some point down the road. Sound good?
Jeepers Cripes! I think I just got positive feedback from Uncle Beer!
I like the delete idea, though, because it seems there have been more duplicates lately than per usual. People hit Submit Thread, then their browser locks up and displays an error message; thinking the thread didn’t go through, they hit Back and hit Submit Thread again. (Of course, then there are the boogers who cross post on occasion, thinking their question will be answered more quickly if it’s posted on different fora.)
OK, thanks. I’ll start a list.
One reason that Delete takes longer is that, starting with about version 2.21 and up of vBulletin, the Delete function un-Indexes words in the posts that are deleted from the Search index. So every time you delete a post, it has to go and remove the links in the Search index. Now mind you, on a short post, this isn’t a big deal, but it does add many times the number of SQL transactions compared to closing.
Also with duplicate threads, you’ll often end up with replies to both threads. You don’t want to delete useful information, so the mods usually close the smaller thread, and put in a link to it in the larger thread.
There is now also some way to merge duplicate threads so the replies all appear together, but I’ve no idea what’s entailed in that, and it’s probably pretty hard on the server and/or mods.
Compared to closing theads, merging threads isn’t any harder on us (except our patience). It seems to take a lot longer to go through, so I assume it’s harder on the server. I’ve done it a few times, but I generally avoid it unless there’s good information in both threads.
And one a these days after I snap, I’m gonna merge the entire MPSIMS forum into a single thread.
Would a list of all double/multiple thread titles of the GQ forum help? Not all are duplicates since there are many coincidental coincidences, but it would be a starting point.
threadID, open/closed, replies, title, …
130952 O 4 08-16-2002 05:02 AM >Shrinking IE Web Browser Windows< acsenray #21592 acsenray
130950 C 0 08-16-2002 02:11 AM >Shrinking IE Web Browser Windows< acsenray #21592 acsenray
130678 O 6 08-15-2002 01:33 AM >When did fans start with counting K’s in baseball?< NYR407 #15862 Omnipresent
130680 C 0 08-14-2002 04:39 PM >When did fans start with counting K’s in baseball?< NYR407 #15862 NYR407
130382 O 13 08-13-2002 03:46 AM >explosions in space< Beeblebrox #15689 David Simmons
72814 O 5 06-02-2001 04:24 PM >Explosions in space< cedwards_1976 #13958 DSYoungEsq
70010 O 25 05-09-2001 02:04 AM >Explosions in space< elucidator #4762 Doobieous
130292 O 5 08-12-2002 03:28 PM >Who wants to be a millionaire?< ollie73082 #24515 astorian
13552 O 24 03-17-2000 04:35 PM >Who wants to be a millionaire?< malaka #4930 tanstaafl
129829 O 30 08-11-2002 11:56 AM >What Kind of Spider is This?< mangoldm #15158 ikcaj
37443 O 5 09-06-2000 07:28 AM >What kind of spider is this?< mega the roo #3655 RickG
130140 O 4 08-11-2002 07:34 AM >Goldfish< JeannineK #24378 BrandonR
47731 O 9 11-24-2000 08:39 PM >Goldfish< Tapanga #10998 Duck Duck Goose
964 O 9 06-03-1999 02:41 PM >Goldfish< Alias #1310 Olentzero
129786 O 24 08-10-2002 05:43 PM >Double Jeopardy Question< MONTY2 #253 Bricker
66364 O 4 04-05-2001 12:11 PM >double jeopardy question< autumn wind chick #13866 Bricker
129278 O 7 08-07-2002 06:52 AM >Pot and the Founding Fathers< Adam P. #22776 Hoops
129277 O 0 08-06-2002 02:10 AM >Pot and the Founding Fathers< Adam P. #22776 Adam P.
129558 O 2 08-07-2002 05:55 PM >penny loafers?< zeboish #24380 robcaro
129557 O 0 08-07-2002 04:17 PM >penny loafers?< zeboish #24380 zeboish
129415 O 1 08-07-2002 05:37 PM >MS-Project. My rage burns with the heat of 1,000 Hindenburgs< javaman #2109 javaman
129417 O 1 08-06-2002 10:39 PM >MS-Project. My rage burns with the heat of 1,000 Hindenburgs< javaman #2109 bcullman
128958 O 8 08-05-2002 02:22 PM >telescopes< shea241 #23858 Martiju
6018 O 18 09-22-1999 02:23 PM >Telescopes< sly #685 E1skeptic
129012 O 3 08-04-2002 11:47 PM >Rechargeable battery questions???< MadSam #4557 ftg
129011 C 1 08-04-2002 05:30 AM >Rechargeable battery questions???< MadSam #4557 bibliophage
129010 C 1 08-04-2002 05:27 AM >Rechargeable battery questions???< MadSam #4557 bibliophage
The full list is 1454 entries… The formatting would be negotiable, I could make it a HTML page with clickable links, or filter out just the closed threads with 0 replies, or we could find a few volunteers to weed it out first,
or you just could run away screaming and hide until I go away, if you prefer… 
Um, femtosecond? How did you get that list? Large automated database queries generally put an awful lot of strain on the server, so it’s best to always ask the mods and admins before doing something like that. And, of course, if they say “no”, don’t.
I realize that you’re trying to help, but this is a very serious matter. People have been banned before for doing things like this.
Didn’t you once threaten to move all of MPSIMS into IMHO and go on vacation?
Why, I loaded the forum list, in the off-peak time, one page after the other (request, wait, receive) as fast as the server was happy to deliver them, then converted it to text.
I know you don’t want people start downloading the entire thread database or harvest all the tens of thousands of user profiles for e-mail addresses. I watched the pages loading, so it wasn’t even fully automated. I was sure that reading this list fell under my normal use of this website, if you don’t agree I apologize and it needs clarification of the rules what exactly ‘something like that’ and ‘things like this’ means. I hope though, I’m allowed to keep it updated with the latest pages.
It’s not a strain on the server, and it sure enough wasn’t an awful lot of it. A single big search in the busy time causes more inconvenience. The case is quite the reverse, it saved me (and you) an awful lot of searches. It’s surprising how far you get with title searches only, when you don’t have to dial up, aren’t restricted to 2 searches per minute, and one search takes less than a second. The forum lists should be exported and offered to download for those who know to grep through it, or say it’s OK with the copyright for me to share, other people could use it.
No worries femtosecond, your method is fine: it’s no different from loading the GQ main page 10 times in a row.
What we object to is automated scripts and the like being launched to derive server stats. People have been banned for that.
Actually, femtosecond, looking at your list, it occurs to me that it would be a lot more useful if you filter it by username (i.e., if two threads have the same title and were opened by the same person, then it’s a duplicate thread). That would cut out a lot of the “false duplicates” like the Goldfish threads.
An even more refined approach might be to say that it’s a duplicate thread only if: (a) it has the same title, (b) it was opened by the same user, and © the difference between the thread IDs is fairly small (say <10). That way, if a user posts two threads with the same title a year apart, it won’t flag them as duplicates.
For the record, there can’t be defined a clear boundary between normal and unnecessary use. Every page we load adds to the transfer volume which somebody has to pay for in the end, and I don’t want anyone to read something as an encouragement to push this up just because.
RedNaxela, I know, it was only a first draft not needing much coding (and to scare the Moderator :D). I started thinking about using the dates, but what if the thread got bumped. Yeah, comparing the IDs is such a crazy idea, it might even work. :smack:
Like a charm. That filtered out 389 groups with just the same title, 79 containing at least two threads from the same thread starter but with distant IDs, finally leaving 180 groups additionally containing threadIDs less than 10 apart (85 with dates from after the software upgrade). UncleBeer, want to tackle it?