Blog Documentation Try Vanilla Cloud
Vanilla 1 is no longer supported or maintained. If you need a copy, you can get it here.
HackerOne users: Testing against this community violates our program's Terms of Service and will result in your bounty being denied.
Options

MarkAllRead Extension [Version 1.0]

13»

Comments

  • Options
    dkodrdkodr
    I'm gettin the same error when I set the MARKALLREAD_LIMIT to more than 4 days (4d).
  • Options
    chrischris
    wallphone, did you get round to finishing your version of this? tia! :)
  • Options
    WallPhoneWallPhone
    Nope, kind of abandoned it because I didn't know my way around Vanilla that well back then. Will give it another go.
  • Options
    StashStash ✭
    Yeah, your version that does it "The right way" sounds like a much better plan.
  • Options
    BigKlipperBigKlipper
    edited March 2007
    Hi hutstein, I realize the impact of a community with a large user base and a large number of discussions. First I understand the rational for a TIME_LIMIT to minimize the DB size. I would like to know if it could be changed just to apply to the discussions on PAGE ONE of each of the Categories? Most categories display a limited number, 30+, of discussions AND this is what the user initially views when entering a Forum. So it seems to me that processing only those items would make more sense than processing by AGE... On a small and slow Forum Two Weeks could mean only 3 discussions in a Category and the new Users don't have the ability to "Mark All Read" the bottom of the FIRST page... To me this gives sort of a bad presentation of the Vanilla package for the first time users. Logically it should be easy to alter the process. Second, when viewing a Category and Mark All Read is selected it switches the view to ALL DISCUSSIONS. Does that mean Mark All Read does NOT process by Category? Thanx in Advance...
  • Options
    scheremscherem
    edited June 2007
    @chrismiller

    can you expand on your solution for this--- I'm not sure as to what method you used to clear this problem (next to the actual deleting of entries, which entries did you delete, how did you pick them... ).

    EDITED ABOVE: to better explain what I was asking.
  • Options
    lechlech Chicagoland ✭
    Depending on how the add-on is performing (my guess simply ignoring everything and making a sequential entry) based on how far you're going back to "mark as read". To avoid this I suspect you could first analyze the discussion watch table and pull it into an array, to a comparison and look for already marked tables. Then pluck those out and file the remaining ones in there. If it's not doing that already (I haven't looked) it would be a start to optimizing this add-on.
  • Options
    scheremscherem
    Anyone noticing really old discussion start to appear as unread, and Mark All Read doesn't mark them read?
This discussion has been closed.