MOST REPLYS II: Return of the Reply

[jagur]

i just activated the 5 posts per thread option, i'll post in a minute and tell you who already has the 1000th post in MR

[jagur]

nope fprget it, that would take to long not knowing any short cuts. going page by page would take to long by 5's.

what i cant tell you is that there is currently 2996 pages in MR on that option

[jagur]

time to use the CP and go back to 30 posts per.

[GILD]

ok
sien is glo maar voel is wragtag
i'm going to go change my settings to 30 or 40 ppp and see if i can experience a difference



aaahll bee bak

[john_childs]

Originally posted by GILD
we typed that together
i hear what u're saying, i just don't get it

Viewing with more posts per page would result in less clicking (clicking to get to the next page of the thread) but more scrolling. A trade off.

There is a limit to how much I'm willing to scroll down to get to the bottom of a long long page. The trick is figuring out where the balance is between being inconvenienced by too much clicking and being inconvenienced by too much scrolling. I'm not sure where that balance point is for me. It's probably somewhere between 15-30 posts per page.

The bulk of the page load time is the page formatting and other page overhead. The actual text of the messages doesn't add much to the load time. Messages with inline pictures though are a different matter.

[GILD]

Originally posted by john_childs
The bulk of the page load time is the page formatting and other page overhead.

r u saying that my thinking about that being in the cache allready and therefore quick-loading is incorrect?
how often are pages 'unique'?

Originally posted by john_childs
Viewing with more posts per page would result in less clicking (clicking to get to the next page of the thread) but more scrolling. A trade off.

that makes more sense
i've just been on 40 ppp and read thru the first couple of pages of MR (some weird stuff in there...) and i'm definitely not a scrolling fan
factor in the fun we have ref 'important' pages on MR, and i'm going back to forum default
but at least i tried

the unexamined life and all that

[john_childs]

Originally posted by GILD
r u saying that my thinking about that being in the cache allready and therefore quick-loading is incorrect?
how often are pages 'unique'?

I'm not sure how effective the caching is for the images on the page. There are lots of little images. The avatars, all the little buttons.

The text part of the messages is small compared to the size of the image files for the buttons and avatars that are loaded displayed and formatted for each page.

The biggest hit though is probably the initial server communication. There's database access that needs to go on and all that. The less you have to keep hitting the server (loading new pages) the better overall. Loading more posts per page means that you contact the server less but grab more data each time.

[GILD]

aaah, the 'contact the server less but grab more each time' line of argument seems to make the most sense yet
i have all the avatars and little buttons floating around in my temporary internet files, so i assume they're cached and available

i'm quite happy with my ppp setting
i guess i just like arguing with jagur about it as much as enjoys ragging us page-spotters

[Gilby]

Originally posted by GILD
r u saying that my thinking about that being in the cache allready and therefore quick-loading is incorrect?
how often are pages 'unique'?

Every page is unique. Unfourtunately, the current HTML for this forum software, and probably all other forum software out there, uses a lot of tables and older coding techniques to create the layout and appearance. So you are downloading it each time.

If it used nice and simple XHTML along with CSS to do all the layout, you'd only have to download the CSS file once and the XHTML would pretty much just contain the text, and some markup to designate what each section is. Doing it this way would save a ton of bandwidth.

JC is correct about the database thing where it's more efficient to grab a lot all at once.

[forrestunifreak]

My world is no more.........

[Fuego]

yes.

[chosen]

whatever

[GILD]

Originally posted by Gilby
Every page is unique...

JC is correct about the database thing where it's more efficient to grab a lot all at once.

thanx for the definitive statement on the issue
is there any particular reason why they don't use the more efficient software?

[Gilby]

Originally posted by GILD
thanx for the definitive statement on the issue
is there any particular reason why they don't use the more efficient software?

Yeah, XHTML and CSS is little harder to do and is newer, so not many webmasters know how to edit it and make it their own style.

[jagur]

Originally Posted by forrestunifreak

My world is no more.........

my world is more less.