I finally got around to writing up an Article called "Operation Clean Up SummitPost"
http://www.summitpost.org/operation-cle ... ost/788157



The purpose of it is to encourage members to do a few simple things to help with SP's slowness. I started this thread to get people's opinions on it and for suggestions (wording, ideas, ect.) Credits will be rewarded at the bottom of the article to those members who helped expand the article.

Great post as usual Josh! I deleted 21 PAGES of old PMs and 75 archived versions of route pages, articles, and trip reports. I began removing duplicate and irrelevent photos, but alas, site slowness halted my progress there. I'll keep at it.

This should be like voting. It is everyone's civic duty and if you don't do it, you have no basis to complain about site slowness.

Thanks again for bringing this to folks' attention and offering solutions that everyone can do.

Hey Josh ... another thing we need to do is determine rather (or not) a member is active or non-active or perhaps temporarily inactive.

Then ... a decision should be made HOW to handle their pages. A "pro-active" approach would be page adoption and (ultimately) boosting the standards of SP pages.

Josh,

When I am fully recovered (I started working out again this week) I am going to drag you up all of 'my routes' so you can do your photographic and topographic magic and improve them. Most of the routes I have pages for I did ages ago, remember few details and have no photos.

EB

By my calculations, Larry's youtube links are responsible for 87.36 +/- 1.24% of the SP web traffic.

Traffic ... did somebody state TRAFFIC ? I got that one ..

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptkKZ1MqSK0[/youtube]

Josh would it be necessary to delete entire threads? The 11000 one for example?

How about the "Who Was He?" thread. I can't believe how many people got sucked into that one.

What pics' size is recommended to post Wich weight

Again, I think the problem is more with the number of entries in the database (which has pointers to all the objects) than with the total number of terabytes on the server.

I find that unless I am trying to show fine details of a route, I can usually get the essence of a photo within 1024*768 pixels. For a decent quality jpeg, that may translate to < 250K. A lot of people seem to upload images directly from the camera output, producing images 3-4 MB in size. The bulk uploader will automatically resize images, as will many applications.

Does the bulk uploader reduce images' weight itself Will the bulk uploader reduce the pics if you post them having 4Mb each one Which weight will they have finally

Gracias Moapa

lcarreau wrote:Hey Josh ... another thing we need to do is determine rather (or not) a member is active or non-active or perhaps temporarily inactive.

Then ... a decision should be made HOW to handle their pages. A "pro-active" approach would be page adoption and (ultimately) boosting the standards of SP pages.

According to what I've seen the elves handle it, after one year of not logging in you are considered Inactive. I think the current way the elves handle it is pretty good. The elves don't just snatch pages (give away) from inactive members, but give it to people who they believe will be responsible with the pages and maintain them. Now granted this goes though a request process and such.

I agree Larry, page standards should be set high. In my honest opinion, if your not going to do a great job making a page, don't make one at all. I admit I have at least one page that could use a fix up, but generally when I make a fresh page it's usually pretty decent... I think.

ExcitableBoy wrote:Josh,
When I am fully recovered (I started working out again this week) I am going to drag you up all of 'my routes' so you can do your photographic and topographic magic and improve them. Most of the routes I have pages for I did ages ago, remember few details and have no photos.
EB

Sounds like fun. I got the whole summer off, please invite me on as many climbs as you can think of (and of course are willing to take me on). As long as I'm an admin (of the pages) and as long as I climbed it, photos and topos should be flowing in.

Diego Sahagún wrote:Josh would it be necessary to delete entire threads? The 11000 one for example?

Of course not! We have unfinished work there. Or else why would I be contributing to that thread. Granted once we are finished, eventually it should be removed due to the large amount of posts needed for that thread. The deleting thread example was for stuff that was either old forum posts that hardly gets viewed or posts that are of little value (even good questions, but no responses).

MoapaPk wrote:Again, I think the problem is more with the number of entries in the database (which has pointers to all the objects) than with the total number of terabytes on the server.

I find that unless I am trying to show fine details of a route, I can usually get the essence of a photo within 1024*768 pixels. For a decent quality jpeg, that may translate to < 250K. A lot of people seem to upload images directly from the camera output, producing images 3-4 MB in size. The bulk uploader will automatically resize images, as will many applications.

Agreed! Perhaps I should be more clear with that in the article. Here's a good way to look at it, you have a folder with 50,000 files and it takes up like 20 megabytes. Then you have a folder with 20 files and it takes up 500 megabytes. From my experience the folder with the most files takes longer to delete even though it takes up less space. But if I understand correctly SP is kinda the same with the database. Another for those who don't know already, a database is completely separate from files (photos, gpx tracks, script to run SP).

I usually resize my pictures before uploading them for a number of reasons:
1. Protects some what against photo thieves
2. Takes less time to load
3. Save space on SP's server
4. Shows less noise for full sized picture

Josh Lewis wrote:

Diego Sahagún wrote:Josh would it be necessary to delete entire threads? The 11000 one for example?

Of course not! We have unfinished work there. Or else why would I be contributing to that thread. Granted once we are finished, eventually it should be removed due to the large amount of posts needed for that thread. The deleting thread example was for stuff that was either old forum posts that hardly gets viewed or posts that are of little value (even good questions, but no responses).

Great Josh I neither wouldn't like to clear the 11000 thread. I've already deleted the private messages in my profile page and will clear my pages' historials...

Maybe THIS person can help ... if we could only go back into Time ...

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0ssMVL9I1Q[/youtube]

"Wow look at dat big-ass mess ova' dere ..

Right On! We gots'ta clean it as soon as possible. What it is, Josh! "