I use Search quite a bit and usually no problems, but I noticed just today that searches are not returning any threads older than 12/09/2016.

If I do a site-wide search on Threads for "black" or "white", for two examples I do get a lot of results, but if I go to the oldest thread in those results it is dated 12/09/2016.

It's almost like it has lost the database indexes for all prior threads.

Thanks
Chad

.

 

We are looking into it

 

This should be fixed now, please try again.

 

Similar problem seems to have cropped up for me.

Today I can only see threads back through 7/27/2016. For example, if I do an Advanced search on all posts by NumberDummy.

Thanks,
Chad

.

 

Hm. We've been experiencing similar issues on other sites. Thanks for letting us know.

 

Is it an issue with Posts or with Threads?

 

In someways being able to find old threads may be a waste of time. I don't know how many time I've ran across an older thread, made a comment on it and got scolded by a few people for posting on a thread that is older. I always thought as long as the subject matter is still viable why start another thread when there is already one with a lot of information already?

What's the cut-off?

 

It depends.

Seriously... if the topic is still fresh in my mind and I know what you're talking about, that's one thing.

But people who wake up ages-old (often multi-page) threads by posting a comment at the end and making absolutely no reference to WTF they're talking about and what THEIR problem or interest is, can annoy some people.

It's one thing to tack onto the end and thank the original people and summarize the topic, that's a great way to open up and it invites the reader to go do some homework if they so desire and can help.

But to assume all readers are going to take the time to go back in history to try and figure out what a random question or comment may be talking about...

This kind of thing is also HIGHLY subjective to the mood the poster may be in at the time.

 

I use the search to find my older threads where I've described in detail how to accomplish something or troubleshoot this or that. A real pain to retype all of that when I can just link people to the prior thread on the same subject.

Anyway, today it seems to only be showing results back thru

5/5/2017

Can someone take a look and hopefully figure out how to return all results again?

Thanks
Chad

.

 

Here's a way to reproduce what I am seeing.

1. Go to the 1961-1966 forum

2. Do an Advanced Search on username NumberDummy

3. Go to the Last page of results it returns and note the date

5/12/2017 is what I get. Results seem to vary some by username, but this should be a good example.

NumberDummy has posts going back a lot further than this that are handy to refer to. Similar but slightly different date results if I use a different
username like Jowilker who has posts going back to 1999.

It looks like results are being limited to the first 500 items returned.

Would this be considered an issue and can this be fixed? Tons of older threads that I'd still like to access if possible.

Thanks

Chad

.

 

I'm pretty sure the issue is the search engine will only return 500 results max, dates of the posts has nothing to do with it.

 

I sure thought it did used to return all of the threads for someone like Jowilker - I must have slipped through a crack - I'd sit and read his old threads or NumberDummy - night after night - starting with their oldest and working forward. But, I think I can live with 500 - performance seems great if it could return more, however.


Incidentally, I worked at Microsoft for years for a guy named Jim Allchin. You can Google him if you are interested. Anyway, as an executive of the company charged with making things simpler his mantra was that the software should be easy enough for his Grandmother to use. They may never get there and he has since retired - but I bet the phrase "Easy enough for Jim's Grandmother to use" is still in some peoples minds there at the company. Your signature made me think of his old expression.

Here he is on Wikipedia, even.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Allchin

Thanks!

Chad

.