Naked Science Forum
General Discussion & Feedback => Guest Book => Topic started by: Seany on 17/04/2007 00:01:23
-
I've got 90 messages in my box so far. Whats the maximum?
-
90 !!!....wow...ewe is well popular ....
I think the answer to ewer question is no one knows !!....cos I asked it a while agio and got no answer !!
-
Oo.. OK Thanks Neil my comrade!
-
I've got 90 messages in my box so far. Whats the maximum?
Wow Sean! Are you trying to break the record for pm's too?
-
Don't see any reason why there should be any maximum set.
I suspect that all they are are entries in the database, just like the topic entries - and topics, as we can see, can easily take thousands of posts.
The bigger problem might be how large you will want it to get before it gets unmanageable for you to look back through it.
-
I think that there may be a maximum set, because if NKS has a small database, they wouldn't want thousands of messages piled up, which takes their space away.
Carolyn, most of the mails were with Karen, Neil and you [;)]
-
Neil was telling us he didn't get any traffic from you [;)]
The issue about database sizes is that we have a tailored generic system, so the same system is used for the smallest to the largest of databases. If there are limits, it would not be built into the system, but ones that would have to be parameter driven - so the question is whether Dave has set those limits, and how they are set (are they set on a limit per person, or a global limit).
The problem with limits is that while this may be quite easy to implement on the 'outbox' (you just prevent for outgoing messages), if you implement it on the 'inbox', then you need to cascade the error back to the sender (when the 'inbox' is full), and if the sender is sending mail to multiple recipients, you need to identify which inboxes are full and which were sent successfully. All of this is quite possible (since it happens with regular email all of the time), the question is whether that code has been implemented or not.
It may well be that the feature might be there, but left unimplemented until the level of PM traffic starts becoming a significant burden on the system.
-
Lol what was that about Neil?
And yup, I understand about the database thing. What do you mean by a tailored generic system by the way? Is NKS part of a different website?
-
OK. Just to confirm that there isn't a message full thing yet, at over 100 messages. [;)]
-
What do you mean by a tailored generic system by the way? Is NKS part of a different website?
No, not at all.
Look at the bottom of the screen, and look at the link that says "Powered by SMF 1.1", and follow that link.
-
Ohh.. So we like use someone elses codings for web designs, etc?
-
Ohh.. So we like use someone elses codings for web designs, etc?
Exactly - we use their base code, and tailor it to our needs.
-
Ah.. So we may have not changed the codes for maximum amount of messages, or they may have already written it.
-
Ah.. So we may have not changed the codes for maximum amount of messages, or they may have already written it.
We would not very likely to have written new code to limit the number of messages.
It is possible that the original code base included code with such a limit, but they would have then left some parameter that will have to be altered for each installation to adjust this maximum number according to its needs. Since the predecessor to this site did not have Personal Messaging, we had no previous experience with judging the loads that personal messaging will place on the system, so would have had no previous experience to have set these limits. If this is the case, then we could either have just set an arbitrary limit, or more likely, left it without any limit, and allowed that as we gain experience as to the capacity of the site to handle Personal Messages before it gets overloaded, so we will then set those limits.
All of this is speculation, since I was not involved with setting up the site; it is merely working upon what I would likely have done if I was in that situation.
The guy who should know is Dave, but he is a busy boy, and often takes a while to get around to answering these questions.
-
Neil was telling us he didn't get any traffic from you [;)]
The issue about database sizes is that we have a tailored generic system, so the same system is used for the smallest to the largest of databases. If there are limits, it would not be built into the system, but ones that would have to be parameter driven - so the question is whether Dave has set those limits, and how they are set (are they set on a limit per person, or a global limit).
The problem with limits is that while this may be quite easy to implement on the 'outbox' (you just prevent for outgoing messages), if you implement it on the 'inbox', then you need to cascade the error back to the sender (when the 'inbox' is full), and if the sender is sending mail to multiple recipients, you need to identify which inboxes are full and which were sent successfully. All of this is quite possible (since it happens with regular email all of the time), the question is whether that code has been implemented or not.
It may well be that the feature might be there, but left unimplemented until the level of PM traffic starts becoming a significant burden on the system.
I have to step in here and say that until recently (and Sean will verify,) I did indeed not receive any PMs from him...I did announce (in the mods only place)..that I had indeed received my first PM from Sean just a couple of days ago.....and even till now..it's only been a few !!..so there !! *sticks tongue and blows a raspberry*
-
I have tons...LOL I lost track ..LOL Such a great kid!!! LOL Kept the old women hoppin!! LOL
-
u guys r lucky i havent even got one pm....
-
Neil was telling us he didn't get any traffic from you [;)]
The issue about database sizes is that we have a tailored generic system, so the same system is used for the smallest to the largest of databases. If there are limits, it would not be built into the system, but ones that would have to be parameter driven - so the question is whether Dave has set those limits, and how they are set (are they set on a limit per person, or a global limit).
The problem with limits is that while this may be quite easy to implement on the 'outbox' (you just prevent for outgoing messages), if you implement it on the 'inbox', then you need to cascade the error back to the sender (when the 'inbox' is full), and if the sender is sending mail to multiple recipients, you need to identify which inboxes are full and which were sent successfully. All of this is quite possible (since it happens with regular email all of the time), the question is whether that code has been implemented or not.
It may well be that the feature might be there, but left unimplemented until the level of PM traffic starts becoming a significant burden on the system.
I have to step in here and say that until recently (and Sean will verify,) I did indeed not receive any PMs from him...I did announce (in the mods only place)..that I had indeed received my first PM from Sean just a couple of days ago.....and even till now..it's only been a few !!..so there !! *sticks tongue and blows a raspberry*
LOL, well it depends how much it means by "a few".. I counted about 13 messages from you! Heehee [;)]
-
Well I have just reached max on my pms... 184 that is with the 7 that vanished into thin air that I had just recieved...LOL so I believe that is the limit mine still says the 7 that vanished are there, but I cant find them LOL..oh well I saved what I could and deleted the rest appologies to anyone if I missed your message.
-
184! Do you not know where the delete button is! [;)]
-
y do u get so many*pouts*