"Eventual consistency" even would be ok.
Dumb increments (counts F5) would be better than nothing (seems to work for TradeMe lol).
Please.
![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
TimA: Lol, Good old mash F5 trademe. I setup a few VM's and let them run overnight refreshing 5 times a second and lol. had close to 2 million views by the morning.
Please support Geekzone by subscribing, or using one of our referral links: Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies | Hatch | GoodSync | Backblaze backup
Please support Geekzone by subscribing, or using one of our referral links: Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies | Hatch | GoodSync | Backblaze backup
freitasm: One of the reasons I removed it was for speed - less database updates, especially in very busy threads.
Not seeing it coming back yet. I am tweaking with the idea of changing something in our database to improve performance, might come back then.
Please support Geekzone by subscribing, or using one of our referral links: Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies | Hatch | GoodSync | Backblaze backup
freitasm: One of the reasons I removed it was for speed - less database updates, especially in very busy threads.
Please support Geekzone by subscribing, or using one of our referral links: Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies | Hatch | GoodSync | Backblaze backup
freitasm: Would be terrible undercounted. The number of visits from non-registered or non-logged in users is much bigger.
KiwiNZ: The last (big) forum I was Admin for we did away with page views as the hit on performance was such it did not justify keeping for very little benefit, we did away with it.
kenkeniff:KiwiNZ: The last (big) forum I was Admin for we did away with page views as the hit on performance was such it did not justify keeping for very little benefit, we did away with it.
Cool story, neither assumption applies here
KiwiNZ:kenkeniff:KiwiNZ: The last (big) forum I was Admin for we did away with page views as the hit on performance was such it did not justify keeping for very little benefit, we did away with it.
Cool story, neither assumption applies here
It doesn't ?
|
![]() ![]() ![]() |