Search function really doesn't work (it just works normally)

About Site Feedback
1

[color=red]Administrator’s note: Goose Egg edited the title; ORIGINAL TITLE: Search function really doesn’t work[/color]

I’ve always thought that the search function doesn’t realyl work, even when it’s supposed to be working.

Now I have proof.

I tried searching for this thread

[Funny Stuff (but not jokes, per se)

Funny Stuff (but not jokes per se)

I knew the title of the thread, and tried severla keyword searches. I also tried a site:forumosa.com search on Google. Nothing.

Maybe there’es something in the coding that doesn’t recognise the topic name as text or something?

I swear there’ve been many times I’ve searched and it has ommitted results that I know should be there.

Can the admins please look into this, and can the mods hold off on the “Use the search function, newbie” comments until it actually works properly?

Brian

2

I may have discovered the answer.

If you type in “funny stuff” and leave all the selections as default, it won’t find it. If, however, you select the “display results as topics” option then search for “funny stuff”, the relevant thread comes up as the first result.

If you look at the first post on that thread, you’ll see that the post title is “HELL FINALLY UNDERSTOOD”. So at some point a moderator must have changed the topic title to “Funny Stuff…”.

If you search for “HELL FINALLY UNDERSTOOD” using either the “display as posts” OR the “display as topics” option, you will find the thread (although when you use the latter option the thread is the 1st result whereas it is 9th result with the latter option, strangely).

It seems that the “display as posts” option does not search topic titles, only post ones. If you want to search for a topic title you have to select the “display as topics” option.

[EDIT]
Sorry, I’ve found that that’s not always a solution. Searching for partial post/topic titles also doesn’t work sometimes. And sometimes you can type in a whole post title but the correct result is still somewhere down the page. Let’s hope that the next version of the phbb software is better.

3

No, Bu, it works normally, just not the way we all want it to

I’ve posted about this not very long ago: forumosa.com/taiwan/viewtopi … 994#193994 phpBB does NOT include titles in its search and NEVER has (feel free to download your own copy and check). But we have included it in the past as a modification.

With the recent server moves and performance problems, we have frozen adding modifications except for the absolute essentials. So the Search Title Mod will return after we have sorted out our modification processes

Please encourage people to search for topics before they post. If they post in the right place, it saves the moderators time from having to merge them

4

[quote=“Goose Egg”]No, Bu, it works normally, just not the way we all want it to

I’ve posted about this not very long ago: forumosa.com/taiwan/viewtopi … 994#193994 phpBB does NOT include titles in its search and NEVER has (feel free to download your own copy and check). But we have included it in the past as a modification.[/quote]What you are talking about over there is the “search topic title only” function. What Bu Lai En and I are talking about is different.

The current search has the options;
“Search topic title and message text
Search message text only”
Thus it clearly has the ability to search for topic titles, as borne out by my successful search for “funny stuff…”. It helps to select the “Display results as topics” option and indeed sometimes that’s the only way that gives any results. It is inconsistent on searches for one or two words within a topic title, and also on searches for phrases or words within the main text of posts.

I know we can’t fix this at the moment and the search function works fine for me 90 per cent of the time, so I feel fine about encouraging people to do a search.

The general point Bu Lai En makes about not being too harsh is a good one though. If a post like this is in my forum then I’ll move it into the relevant thread. If it’s in another forum then I’ll do the search myself and post the results _as_well_as encouraging the poster to do a search. That has the added benefit of preventing me from embarrassment the ten per cent of the time that the search function does not work correctly.

5

Joesax, I couldn’t quite follow how you found that,

My point is that I’ve been using Forumosa for years now, I knew the exact title of the thread, but I still couldn’t find the thing after ten minutes of trying the search function and Google.

So it seems very harsh of us to blast newbies for not using a search function that doesn’t work well.

Goose Egg, I realise that you can’t do ‘title only’ searches, but are you saying that it won’t search titles AT ALL? Then why the ‘search title and message’ option? And hwo come it doesn’t show up on a Google search either?

Brian

6

I tired your suggestion Joesax - selecting ‘display results as topics’. I searched ‘funny stuff jokes’. Still didn’t come up. I Googled ‘site:forumosa.com funny stuff jokes’ - nope.

It doesn’t work.

Brian

7

[quote=“Bu Lai en”]So it seems very harsh of us to blast newbies for not using a search function that doesn’t work well.
[/quote]
My local moderator was nice enough to swiftly merge my new thread for me. No one knows I’ve even done it…(although I did search first)
It did add to his work load however because I did not find what I searched for.(sorry and thank you)
I find the search function somewhat frustrating to use and it translates into a burden for the moderators. I’m new here and the last thing I would want is to be perceived as the guy who litters the streets of Forumosa…Although some may think that sometimes, I’ll never post without exhausting my search. I think it’s the least we can do to support and show appreciation for the volunteers around here.

8

Agreed.

In practical terms, it means more work for us Mods. Not only do we need to know the contents of our topics thoroughly in order to properly merge, flounder, prune but also knowing where we split or move to our follow Mod forums.

I think a FAQ would still be the best way to go. And I mean FAQ not tied to the ForumosaKwiki as it’s beta. Plus with all the uncertainties with the phpBB engine, who knows how that will integrate with the Kwiki (and other modifications) down the road? :question:

9

I don’t get it. What’s wrong with putting the FAQ on the Kwiki.

With the Kwiki, YOU can put ANY question you want (hopefully with answers, and even that’s not required) and it will appear as soon as you hit Submit. This means it’s subject to YOUR schedule, not mine (or Maoman’s). If there’s any part of Forumosa where you can literally “be the change you wish to see” it’s in the Kwiki

And who cares if it is in Beta? Gmail is in Beta. ORIENTED.org never left Beta. It’s in Beta only because I want the look and feel to be closer to the main forums. Functionally speaking, it’s good to go, it’s up to YOU

What kind of FAQ do you have in mind if it isn’t the Kwiki or linked to phpBB?

10

[quote=“Bu Lai En”]I tired your suggestion Joesax - selecting ‘display results as topics’. I searched ‘funny stuff jokes’. Still didn’t come up. I Googled ‘site:forumosa.com funny stuff jokes’ - nope.

It doesn’t work.

Brian[/quote]
So where does this leave us? How about we do NOT tell people to use our search which only works 70… 80… 90% of the time? Or we just remove the entire search function altogether? These options don’t really move us forward, do they?

Actually, I’m not kidding when I say we oughta consider trashing the entire search function. Indexing each and every post for the search database is a real CPU hog (many thanks to Feiren for showing this to me with the diagnostic tricks he’s installed here).

In other words, everytime someone posts, especially a very long message, CPU resources are needed to categorize each word for future searches. This is ONE of the reasons behind our poor performance – too many people talking too much at the same time.

As more and more people discover Forumosa, this situation will only worsen

Bu, the search doesn’t work well – I won’t argue with you, I have trouble using phpBB’s own search on their own forums. But what now? It never worked great before and I’m not going to invest time (nor anyone else’s) to tweak it for marginal improvement, only to demolish everything in a month or 2 when we upgrade to Olympus

I’m open to suggestion. Please… suggest :help:

11

I don’t get it. What’s wrong with putting the FAQ on the Kwiki. [/quote]

The Kwiki is weak; I was being charitable by saying it was Beta, it’s Alpha. Even the articles about it recognize itself as a “work in progress”. Not to mention the fact that if you really want people to use it, it’s got to be user friendly. Not system friendly but UI friendly. It is SO not. So it’s just sitting there languishing from neglect.

The FAQ is meant to read by everyone and prominently visible. Don’t put it in a place where no one cares to go or read about it.

The Kwiki is not the answer to a search feature function. It is also not supposed to be a replacement for one. This is a database-driven web forum which means that people should be able to easily obtain information already stored in this forum. However, that’s not possible now.

Would a Kwiki be an improvement? No, why? Because you’re re-inventing the wheel. Why should people have to rewrite information when that information is already here? That’s double work and a total waste of time. Not to mention that you actually need someone to do the data-entry. Who’s going to do that? Meanwhile, the search feature when used, still does not return useful information. People are used to “SEARCH”, not Wiki, an on-going experiment in on-line information sharing. Forget about the bells and whistles, basic stuff like a meaningful search function is more useful and practical for 99.9% of the users of the Net. Go back to basics, that’s what most people are clamoring for.

It’s in the mod forums. It’s obvious we’re going there, albiet glacially, but you need to catch up with us.

12

You really are beyond me. Are you talking about Search, Wiki or FAQ??

First, re-read my post just above yours – here’s a summary: A BETTER SEARCH I-S N-O-T A-V-A-I-L-A-B-L-E

Now, Wiki? Sounds like you are saying you can’t use it properly, so it must be a bad idea. Your argument is not very compelling, IMHO.

But I completely agree with you – a wiki is NOT an answer to SEARCH – that would be nonsense. It is an answer to an FAQ about how best to live and work with Forumosa and Taiwan

And your FAQ? Are you talking about an FAQ platform that is distinct from phpBB? I really have a lot of catching up to do

13

[quote=“Goose Egg”][quote=“Bu Lai En”]I tired your suggestion Joesax - selecting ‘display results as topics’. I searched ‘funny stuff jokes’. Still didn’t come up. I Googled ‘site:forumosa.com funny stuff jokes’ - nope.

It doesn’t work.

Brian[/quote]
So where does this leave us? How about we do NOT tell people to use our search which only works 70… 80… 90% of the time? Or we just remove the entire search function altogether? These options don’t really move us forward, do they?

Actually, I’m not kidding when I say we oughta consider trashing the entire search function. Indexing each and every post for the search database is a real CPU hog (many thanks to Feiren for showing this to me with the diagnostic tricks he’s installed here).

In other words, everytime someone posts, especially a very long message, CPU resources are needed to categorize each word for future searches. This is ONE of the reasons behind our poor performance – too many people talking too much at the same time. [/quote]

Well, you may recall then the messages I’ve posted about re: Database optimization? What you need is to find a database adminstrator who can properly optimize the indexing, tables and the DB calls. It’s in the database, not the hardware, nor the software :unamused:

[quote=“Goose Egg”]Bu, the search doesn’t work well – I won’t argue with you, I have trouble using phpBB’s own search on their own forums. But what now? It never worked great before and I’m not going to invest time (nor anyone else’s) to tweak it for marginal improvement, only to demolish everything in a month or 2 when we upgrade to Olympus

I’m open to suggestion. Please… suggest :help:[/quote]

The advice has been given. The issue is whether or not you believe it to act upon it or continue to do your own thing regardless.

FFS, wtf, look at phpBB Search Engine Optimization - Sessions, static ( SEO )

I promise, I will STFU from hence forth.

14

[quote=“Bu Lai En”]I tired your suggestion Joesax - selecting ‘display results as topics’. I searched ‘funny stuff jokes’. Still didn’t come up.[/quote]“Funny stuff jokes” doesn’t work. “Funny stuff” does. Strange.

[quote=“Bu Lai En”]So it seems very harsh of us to blast newbies for not using a search function that doesn’t work well.[/quote]We should certainly avoid blasting newbies. But as I said, doing the search myself and posting the results works well for me at least 90% of the time, so I feel fine about making a friendly suggestion to use the search function.

The search engine optimization info link YC provided seemed to refer mostly to optimization when searching with external search engines such as Google (Correct me if I’m wrong. The info in that link was a bit beyond me). I don’t believe that most users do this, or would easily be persuaded to. But I do feel that our existing search facilities work OK in most cases, and that they’ve become more useable for more users since the default settings were changed.

15

[quote=“Goose Egg”]…I’m not kidding when I say we oughta consider trashing the entire search function. Indexing each and every post for the search database is a real CPU hog (many thanks to Feiren for showing this to me with the diagnostic tricks he’s installed here).[/quote]I see the search function, tricky though it sometimes is, as one of the very few truly essential things about Forumosa.

Forumosa is a mine of information and although indexing will help (this is something I’m meaning to do myself in the Vroom, vroom forum) this cannot and should not replace the search function.

I have been asking on and off for a while whether making more posts and threads “time-limited”, as with our current flounder forum, would improve server load/performance etc. Does it work like this or do posts which no longer exist remain in the search database, clogging it up?

If reducing the total number of posts would help, there are a great many threads in the open forum which I feel would quite comfortably fit into a time-limited “banter/chat” forum from which the posts would disappear after a couple of weeks of no activity.

I guess you’ve looked at the performance tuning links in the other thread YC refers to. I looked at them and understood nothing. Anyway, just in case, here they are again (found with no problem by the Forumosa search engine);
phpbb.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=1003398
phpbb.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?p=1077206
phpbb2.de/viewtopic.php?p=83735

16

Bullshit. I wouldn’t be asking for suggestions if I’d seen any. Or maybe your just trolling… isn’t it obvious that I haven’t seen your “advice” – quit playing games and spit it out already. Cripes

That’s absolutely what I was NOT asking of you. Geez, I can see it now – Forumosa doesn’t want to hear criticism, they just ignore me… blah blah blah :doh: thanks for nothing, man

I do wish you’d promise to tell us something we do NOT know already. Be constructive – stop the whining and moaning already. Point us in a direction, offer a link, show us the way forward… “be” the change, for crying out loud. And remember that the moderation and administration of this website is done by real people with real jobs.

It discourages me that I feel it necessary to spell this out to you, since you know a little more about where I work than the next person :fume:

joesax, you OTOH are a breath of fresh air :notworthy: Cheers for reposting the phpBB optimization links. We are still in the midst of understanding the problems of phpBB as a large-scale community.

We’re caught in the middle right now because we are hoping the next version of this software – the mythical version 3.0.0 – will be stable and released soon enough to justify our waiting a few more months for it. I expect it to have addressed some of 2.0.x’s problems (but to also have some its own, too)

17

[quote]So where does this leave us? How about we do NOT tell people to use our search which only works 70… 80… 90% of the time? Or we just remove the entire search function altogether? These options don’t really move us forward, do they?

Actually, I’m not kidding when I say we oughta consider trashing the entire search function. Indexing each and every post for the search database is a real CPU hog (many thanks to Feiren for showing this to me with the diagnostic tricks he’s installed here). [/quote]

What joesax says. The search function doesn’t work that well, but is still a very useful tool, so we should keep it. However, we should bear in mind that it doesn’t always work right, so not blast newbies for not using it.

Brian