FRIHOST FORUMS SEARCH FAQ TOS BLOGS COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Sig display - only once.





Arin
Here's my suggestion - I suggest to install a mod, which will display every user's sig only once per thread or per thread page. Since some of FriHosters really like annoying and huge sigs - I think it would be nice to cut save some bandwidth.

I've been looking around and seems that this mod would fix it:
http://www.phpbbsmith.com/hacks/postinfo.php
but I didnt test it myself.


Cheers,
Arin.
Bondings
Would an option to hide all signatures be ok? I will most likely implement such an option in the profile.
Arin
Bondings wrote:
Would an option to hide all signatures be ok? I will most likely implement such an option in the profile.

If you are asking only for my opinion - well I would prefer that "display once" option. There is second side - opposite to those annoying sigs sometimes people do have something interesting in their sigs, so I wouldnt want to miss such things.

cheers,
Arin.
Bondings
I'll try to make both of them. Wink
S3nd K3ys
I think it's a good idea, but not because it will 'reduce bandwidth'. Cache takes care of that. Wink
Arin
S3nd K3ys wrote:
but not because it will 'reduce bandwidth'. Cache takes care of that. Wink

Image from the sig can be cached, but there's still html code to transfer. And with 7000+ users it can make a difference.

cheers,
Arin.
S3nd K3ys
Arin wrote:
S3nd K3ys wrote:
but not because it will 'reduce bandwidth'. Cache takes care of that. Wink

Image from the sig can be cached, but there's still html code to transfer. And with 7000+ users it can make a difference.

cheers,
Arin.


Huh? Shocked

Even IF there were a thread in which all 7,000 members replied... the amount of html code driving the page would be negligable at best and will not have an effect on transfer speeds even if you're on a 14.4kbps modem.
Arin
S3nd K3ys wrote:
Huh? Shocked

Even IF there were a thread in which all 7,000 members replied... the amount of html code driving the page would be negligable at best and will not have an effect on transfer speeds even if you're on a 14.4kbps modem.

It is not about all users writing in one thread. With every reply you add your sig's html code - in every thread. And every user needs to download your sig's image html code. I didnt mean site loading time neither on my nor yours pc, but the bandwidth from the server side. Do you understand me now? Don't be blinded by your broadband. Also, don't tell me that something can be easilly downloaded with a 14.4kbps modem. It is not the point. The point is that if a reliable webmaster/sysadmin can do something to lower the traffic without harming his project - he just does that. For a better Internet.

cheers,
Arin.
S3nd K3ys
Arin wrote:

It is not about all users writing in one thread. With every reply you add your sig's html code - in every thread. And every user needs to download your sig's image html code. I didnt mean site loading time neither on my nor yours pc, but the bandwidth from the server side. Do you understand me now? Don't be blinded by your broadband. Also, don't tell me that something can be easilly downloaded with a 14.4kbps modem. It is not the point. The point is that if a reliable webmaster/sysadmin can do something to lower the traffic without harming his project - he just does that. For a better Internet.

cheers,
Arin.


Um, first of all, I'm usually on dialup, not broadband.

Secondly, the img code for my sig is exactally 89 bytes.

Code:
<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v240/FukNRekd/Avatars/fymuy1.jpg" border="0">


For all 7,000 members. that's slightly more than 600k bytes. (Less than a meg if you're bad at math) Wink

Also note that when ever someone opens up frihost.com, they're not downloading the entire database of sigs/images. Only when they open a page that contains the images is the server asked for that info. That in and of itself is NOT going to put any more stress on the server, unless he's using a tin-can and string as a modem.

So if I replied to a thread 300 times, the amount of data JUST in the img tag would STILL be less than the size of the image it's loading.

BTW, the TEXT ONLY in your sig is 200 bytes. More than twice what the img code for my sig is. Wink
S3nd K3ys
It just dawned on me... I've often suggested that Bondings give us the ability to 'ignore' specified forums. Doing that ALONE would save hundreds (if not thousands) of times more bandwidth than your suggestion of displaying sigs only once in a thread. (Or page, from the forums I've seen that do that.)

Just some food for thought, and to put things into perspective.
Arin
S3nd K3ys wrote:
For all 7,000 members. that's slightly more than 600k bytes. (Less than a meg if you're bad at math) Wink
I mean site hits generated by these 7000 users...

Also note that when ever someone opens up frihost.com, they're not downloading the entire database of sigs/images. Only when they open a page that contains the images is the server asked for that info. That in and of itself is NOT going to put any more stress on the server, unless he's using a tin-can and string as a modem.

Is forum reading based on watching at forum index? No. It is based on watching threads, and sigs codes are in those threads. How many times do you visit same thread? Many times if it is interesting. Same goes for any other user, and any other thread. Server needs to pass html code below every reply, unless it's deactivated by poster. It is passing this data through server-user route, affecting every machine on routing way, coz it needs to pass data packet to its destination. Now, how many hits have all threads here daily? A lot, I can bet. And what it would be if we would add some more forums? In wider, not-FriHost-only scale? In my opinion sending sigs below every reply is a waste of resources. I dont really care what is the amount of waste - if it is a waste to avoid - it should be avoided. But as I said, this is only my opinion, and you are free to have your own.

S3nd K3ys wrote:
BTW, the TEXT ONLY in your sig is 200 bytes. More than twice what the img code for my sig is. Wink

I know. But tell me, how many bytes would have this text when saved as a gif image? Less than 200 bytes?

cheers,
Arin.


edit (addon):
S3nd K3ys wrote:
It just dawned on me... I've often suggested that Bondings give us the ability to 'ignore' specified forums. Doing that ALONE would save hundreds (if not thousands) of times more bandwidth than your suggestion of displaying sigs only once in a thread. (Or page, from the forums I've seen that do that.)

What do you mean by 'ignoring'? No one forces you to visit the Polish subforum for example.
S3nd K3ys
*sigh*

Quote:
What do you mean by 'ignoring'? No one forces you to visit the Polish subforum for example.


From the 'new posts' link that I start at (from my bookmarks), there are forums in Polish, Spanish etc, as well as Music, Request Account Change etc that fill the page with forums I will not visit. Just one of those forums, (they are often duplicated), takes roughly 1,250 bytes of data to display, not including the icon.

Right now there are 30 topics I will not visit on page one of "new posts". That's only page one! That's about 37,500 bytes of data thruput just for the code on the very first page.

Compare that to the 89 bytes of data to display my sig.

89 bytes vs 37,000 bytes.

Rolling Eyes
Billy Hill
Arin, I'm afraid K3ys is correct. Limiting sigs to one per page will do very VERY little to reduce bandwidth on both server and client sides. It will only make the page easier on the eyes.
Arin
Billy Hill wrote:
Arin, I'm afraid K3ys is correct. Limiting sigs to one per page will do very VERY little to reduce bandwidth on both server and client sides. It will only make the page easier on the eyes.

It is not a reason to be afraid :]. And I'm not saying he isn't right at all. Look at my first post - I said that for me those sigs are annoying and consuming resources. Both of those things can be fixed.

Thing is in his way of posting Wink. I'm trying to find his "often suggestions" addressed to Bondings. Search tool can't bring any light on that, guess it was in PMs...

I've been also looking around mods for filtering subforums in new posts search, but didnt find anything yet. Thing is that I am not using that "new posts" feature, so it's kinda brand new for me.

I would like to see K3ys posting a link to such mod. Not only posting criticism, but also to show how to make it better, what to fix directly, what to apply. Just like I did. Problem named, showed why I would like to change it, and found code to do that. Without any "*sigh*".

Anyway I'll try to look for it in upcoming time.

And by the way...
Is it hard to bookmark only "interesting" subforums indexes? Like http://frihost.com/forums/viewforum.php?f=9 ? New posts (since last visit) will be highlighted anyway...

cheers,
Arin.
tingkagol
Installing mods in phpbb was really a nightmare for me. I almost destroyed my board. Laughing

Anyway about signatures, "saving resources" is not really the real reason to remove it or display it once per page. Even if it were displayed once per page, it would still be annoying as hell if one guy had a 500x500 banner. Removing it won't do either. I've posted in super strict forums where sigs are not allowed and avy's are 50x50 max. It gets really boring in times. I dunno, people seem to enjoy posting when their "oh so beautiful" sigs are attached.

I believe the solution to this is to agree on a max banner size and/or lessen the max character limit. I've seen boards with 468x40 max banner size and the results are pretty amazing. Any image on 468x40 looks really cool. Razz

Just my two cents.
Billy Hill
Arin wrote:
And I'm not saying he isn't right at all.


Actually, it sounded an awful lot like you did:

Arin wrote:

Image from the sig can be cached, but there's still html code to transfer. And with 7000+ users it can make a difference.

cheers,
Arin.


Arin wrote:

It is not about all users writing in one thread. With every reply you add your sig's html code - in every thread. And every user needs to download your sig's image html code.

Do you understand me now?


Arin wrote:


Is forum reading based on watching at forum index? No. It is based on watching threads, and sigs codes are in those threads.


You're making it sound like the html code to display an image is some kind of strain on a server. It's not. Yet you've argued K3ys with every post that he tried to explain to you that it doesn't. Even if the same code were displayed on the screen 50 times, (not sure what the max threads per page is here), that's only 5,000 bytes, or 5 kb.

(The odds of that happening are pretty slim, too) Wink
n0obie4life
Bondings, I would rather have a "hide signature" option in the profile than do that.

And stop that damned debate. We don't have a debate forum yet, nd we're still waiting for it.
Arin
Billy Hill wrote:
You're making it sound like the html code to display an image is some kind of strain on a server. It's not. Yet you've argued K3ys with every post that he tried to explain to you that it doesn't. Even if the same code were displayed on the screen 50 times, (not sure what the max threads per page is here), that's only 5,000 bytes, or 5 kb.

I respect your opinion. But still, I'm not convinced. Sure it's not a strain for the server. And it hardly could be. Maybe in a very large DDoS..? Anyway, I've said - this is a waste - no one denied. And I've said that I dont really care about wasted amount of bandwith - I care about waste itself. If we can agree that it is a waste - I think we can end on that. Only Bondings have enough data to count a simulation or something, and see how much bandwith such sig cut would save monthly.

Again - it's a matter of opinion. For me it's a waste to avoid.

And one last thing:
Billy Hill wrote:

Actually, it sounded an awful lot like you did:
[...]
Arin wrote:

It is not about all users writing in one thread. With every reply you add your sig's html code - in every thread. And every user needs to download your sig's image html code.

Do you understand me now?

[...]

My post looks slightly different. You've cut significant sentence, altering the meaning of above quote. Please, dont do that again.

cheers,
Arin
althalus
Wouldn't the option to hide individual signatures be more pleasing? Many signatures, like my own, are just text/links. I can live with them. I have a harder problem with images though, and the bigger * they are... Just a thought. Smile

n0obie4life wrote:
And stop that damned debate. We don't have a debate forum yet, nd we're still waiting for it.
Rolling Eyes

Edit: * And by bigger I mean dimension wise. I'm on brodaband so filesize doesn't bother me.
Related topics
is banner display in Signature allowed?
Gimp - Sig making:N00b to pro!(finally finished)
Sig tut
Sig wanted, PM with your price!
Once alert box
::..Space on my sig..: Available now!! Come and get yours!
Page within a page...
Rent O'calhoun's sig space; ]]One Week Free Sale[[ *Open*
CivilizeD DezignS Custom Gaming Sig Shop
CivilizeD DezignS Premade Sig Shop.
how can i make my website background show correctly
Help in detect terminate script
How to "folder forward"?
Self destructive file
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> General -> Suggestions

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.