# So, am I the only one....



## Tiarhlu (Mar 2, 2006)

...that has been getting MySql errors two straight days now? I thought someone on here would have a post about why this keeps happening so often, but there isn't anything that I've found. It's frustrating. I can't load the site at all.


----------



## Sym_Gryphon (Mar 2, 2006)

I've been having the same problem; nothing but MySQL errors for 2 days straight, with barely any access for a few days prior.

I have also been watching this forum for news on why this is happening, but... I haven't seen anything either.

The part that is bothering me most is that the last admin message I saw on FA said that they had identified the problem...

The server has a mind of its own.   :shock:


----------



## ediskrad (Mar 2, 2006)

No. I have been timing out and getting MySQL errors for the past two days too. And the thing is.. is starting to get on my nerves. I'm seriously thinking of removing my account.... as soon as I can access it again, if that ever happens.



> The part that is bothering me most is that the last admin message I saw on FA said that they had identified the problem



A healthy advice. Don't believe *anything* the admins say... They're full of it.


----------



## Tiarhlu (Mar 2, 2006)

I have faith they're working on it, but it'd be nice to know what's happening.


----------



## timoran (Mar 2, 2006)

The problem is probably that Jheryn just doesn't have time to work on the server, because he's doing work and things like that.

Which I could respect, except for the fact that he has not appointed someone who is able to work on it now to work on it now. Thus it just sits there as the SQL error dispenser.


----------



## NeoWarriorCat (Mar 2, 2006)

Server = Kaput right now.

Got on for all of 10 minutes at about 4 PM Eastern time. (US)

Then the blackout of MySQL errors appears. 

Now it's 9 PM, and no sign of life from the server


----------



## uncia2000 (Mar 3, 2006)

Yeah, no response from the server as far as I can see, at present.

The SQL errors have been legion for me for the past few days, too.
Why that should now be the case compared with the _relatively_ better period last weekend I can't say, since I'm unaware of what parameters have changed.

Don't know about anyone else, but the most common error was persistent deadlocking on <df_useronline>: painful, given that we've actually ditched that "number of users currently online" from the top of the screen.
e.g.

```
Database error in www.furaffinity.net: Invalid SQL: DELETE FROM df_useronline WHERE online<'1141262669'
mysql error: Lock wait timeout exceeded; try restarting transaction
mysql error number: 1205
User: uncia2000
Date: 01.03.2006 @ 21:05
Script: /mc/1/
Referer: http://www.furaffinity.net/user/uncia2000/
MySql ERROR! Please check the logs for information on the error(s)
```

Does this tally with what everyone else was seeing (save those who stated they had few/no problems!?)

=

Anyhow, there were discussions back-scenes as to whether just to pull everything until the code is re-written (afaik there is no data corruption), by which time we'll also have a working primary server (hopefully) - or else to try to strike out those SQL errors on a table we no longer require and try to get performance back to the state it was at last weekend with a visible health warning to users and regular updates whilst recoding work is ongoing - or some other solution...

That's as much as I know at present (02c).


----------



## uncia2000 (Mar 3, 2006)

[p.s. Of course, several minutes after posting that, I can get my user page again, albeit with fairly poor (8-20 second) response time. 
Hrrr....

Better response viewing individual submissions, of course, but "Browse" pics is still hanging]


----------



## Tiarhlu (Mar 3, 2006)

I'm not seeing all that code you've got up there, nor do I understand it. I don't even know what MySql is.  All I know is I keep getting a blank screen with tiny text at the top saying MySql error.

Anyway, I love the site, but like most everyone I think, I'm frustrated.


----------



## blackmuzzle (Mar 3, 2006)

virtually unusable *cries*


----------



## kitsulobo (Mar 3, 2006)

A few days ago I got lots of mysql error screens. Since yesterday I just get blank screens, and sometimes it loads ok after a loooong time. I've noticed this at the bottom of the page (if the page is loaded right):

```
This page was generated in [b]43.81312[/b] seconds. Queries used: 5. Server load: [b]0.38%[/b]
```


----------



## Strawkitty (Mar 3, 2006)

Well for me FA loads forever(hours) but when it does it works... for about 10 minutes. Anyhow towards the evening(luckily I live in a different time zone than majority of the users so I don't have to wait for night time) it gets better and eventually I can browse through it normally(or not... apparently). So I think it has something to do with the system not being able to handle all the users(well their queries as the Administrator notice informs us).

"Administrator notice:
We have identified a problem with the way the coding handles queries. This issues is causing issues with site response and speed. We are currently testing an update which will fix this, and resolve many of the site's speed problems. We will more than likely roll out this patch sometime over this weekend. You may experience occasion mySQL errors. Just reload the page and they should clear up. This will be fixed with the queries."

Anyhow hopefully this patch will help when it's applied. Then again this was put up last week.


----------



## Myr (Mar 3, 2006)

FA normally doesn't work when I try to use it, and when it does work it works for about 10 minutes and then gives up. I either get a completely white screen, a white screen with "MySQL error! Please check the logs for more information", or a time out or server not responding error. It's currently unusable for me as I can't quite get into my watchlist so I've got some 500 messages built up. X_X

I hope it gets fixed soon. It's really time to consider a complete recode. I know I was going to look into creating a UI, but that's going along slowly. I'm no graphic artist, but not some newbie either.


----------



## Pico (Mar 3, 2006)

It'd probably be best to just take the site offline officially (accompanied by a _useful, grammatically correct message_ and a link to the forums), since it would at least give people an idea of what's going on so they don't have to check to see if the site is up every half hour or so.  We can't use the site anyway, so you might as well take it down until the new, supposedly "improved" version is complete.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Mar 3, 2006)

Pico said:
			
		

> It'd probably be best to just take the site offline officially (accompanied by a _useful, grammatically correct message_ and a link to the forums), since it would at least give people an idea of what's going on so they don't have to check to see if the site is up every half hour or so.  We can't use the site anyway, so you might as well take it down until the new, supposedly "improved" version is complete.



I'm inclined to agree, it will probably cut down on the new "FA has a problem, and I need to feel important by making a new post" followed by a "me too" post.


----------



## *morningstar (Mar 3, 2006)

Pico said:
			
		

> It'd probably be best to just take the site offline officially (accompanied by a _useful, grammatically correct message_ and a link to the forums), since it would at least give people an idea of what's going on so they don't have to check to see if the site is up every half hour or so.  We can't use the site anyway, so you might as well take it down until the new, supposedly "improved" version is complete.



This post makes so much sense that it makes my brain hurt.

Quick, delete it before anyone else can read it.


----------



## Ursus_Amplus (Mar 3, 2006)

*morningstar said:
			
		

> Pico said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Hahahaha


----------



## Pico (Mar 3, 2006)

*morningstar said:
			
		

> Pico said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



but you quoted it so you have to delete your post and oh wait um :gonk:


----------



## yak (Mar 3, 2006)

> I'm inclined to agree, it will probably cut down on the new "FA has a problem, and I need to feel important by making a new post" followed by a "me too" post.


it makes me feel so much better knowing that at lest _that_ is never going to change  there is a 'post reply' button for a reason, is it?
and i've seen people leave comments just because they were given the chance, not that they really wanted to.


----------



## Sslaxx (Mar 5, 2006)

*Huh.*

Site hasn't worked for me for three days now... this is a (bad) joke.


----------



## uncia2000 (Mar 5, 2006)

*Re: Huh.*



			
				Sslaxx said:
			
		

> Site hasn't worked for me for three days now... this is a (bad) joke.


Don't think anyone was claiming this is particularly "funny" :?

I've managed to get in from time-to-time and (through goodness-knows how much patience) a large number of people are still using the site although they've only been managing to access a few pages at a time since last weekend, it would appear. 

Best suggestion under the circumstances would be to come back once or twice a week and check for updates rather than getting yet more frustrated from hitting enter every few minutes.
Sorry, I can't suggest a "better" course of action but work is still ongoing to resolve the issues and the only alternative to leaving the site half-live whilst working on some of those alongside recoding efforts/database tweaks would be to take everything down for a month or more. No win on that, either way, I think.


----------



## Sslaxx (Mar 5, 2006)

*Re: Huh.*



			
				uncia2000 said:
			
		

> Sslaxx said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Then take the site down while you're working on it! Put a redirect to the forums explaining why. Frankly, that'd be better than what's currently there.


----------



## uncia2000 (Mar 5, 2006)

*Re: Huh.*



			
				Sslaxx said:
			
		

> Then take the site down while you're working on it! Put a redirect to the forums explaining why. Frankly, that'd be better than what's currently there.


Is that a unilateral decision on behalf of the rest of the community, Sslaxx?

It's impossible for me to say whether a few DB2 fixes might result in a half-decent performance whilst the bulk of the recoding/reworking is ongoing. And it's difficult to know whether those have been successful unless there are sufficient people to stress-test the changes.

JM-02c, anyhow, but I'd personally say it is easier and more constructive to allow an individual to make the choice just to check back every few days, to see whether the system can meet their minimum needs, so long as the techs keep everyone abreast of current progress and it is made clear that there are no guarantees re. minimum performance standard in the interim.


----------



## Sslaxx (Mar 5, 2006)

*Re: Huh.*



			
				uncia2000 said:
			
		

> Sslaxx said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And where did I say I spoke for anyone bar myself?


----------



## uncia2000 (Mar 5, 2006)

*Re: Huh.*



			
				Sslaxx said:
			
		

> And where did I say I spoke for anyone bar myself?


Spot the question mark, please.


			
				uncia2000 said:
			
		

> Is that a unilateral decision on behalf of the rest of the community, Sslaxx?


=


			
				Sslaxx said:
			
		

> Site hasn't worked for me for three days now... this is a (bad) joke.
> ...
> Then take the site down while you're working on it! Put a redirect to the forums explaining why. Frankly, that'd be better than what's currently there.


Thanks for the input.
Any reason why taking the site down would be better than a VERY clear message and updates in the Admin box, per my previous post?


----------



## missdavies (Mar 5, 2006)

Mrf   So much bad luck with FA...where's that easy button?


----------



## nullenigma (Mar 5, 2006)

*Re: Huh.*



			
				uncia2000 said:
			
		

> Any reason why taking the site down would be better than a VERY clear message and updates in the Admin box, per my previous post?



Umm.... serving a static page would ensure the site had enough resources to actually LOAD to show the message.


----------



## Veritas (Mar 6, 2006)

No kidding. Up again, down again, up again, down again... Keeping the site live isn't helping most people, AND can only make it harder (and longer) to fix.

Now it's just giving me 403... well, at least THAT isn't a very resource-intensive server action, however useless.


----------



## Arshes Nei (Mar 6, 2006)

*Re: Huh.*



			
				nullenigma said:
			
		

> uncia2000 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Don't insert common sense in here


----------

