Why is Beyond running on such an old version of vBulletin?

[em2ab]

Is the version at the bottom of the page correct? Doesn't that leave it open to easy hacking?

[Grogador]

There's still security patches for v2. Admins claim running v3 would overtax the servers... even tho boards this size can run off a single machine with plenty of RAM and some RAID... probably not on IIS tho :rolleyes:

[Mibz]

The board I admin is still running phpbbv2 with a bunch of hacks and patches to make it secure. The only reason we haven't upgraded to v3 is that we'd have to remove and/or redo a lot of the custom code we put in and it's just not worth it for the few extra options.

Why stick to an old version? Because a new version has nothing to offer.

[b_t]

Originally posted by Grogador
There's still security patches for v2. Admins claim running v3 would overtax the servers... even tho boards this size can run off a single machine with plenty of RAM and some RAID... probably not on IIS tho :rolleyes:

I wonder what someone who actually knows what they are talking about will have to say about that?
I'm on another huge forum that runs v3 and its cool and all, but it crashes on a pretty regular basis and needs constant downtime for upgrades.

Stability, speed and uptime > additional pointless features

[em2ab]

Is there actually a way to get the security patches without upgrading to the newest version?

[kenny]

In a nutshell, its just not worth upgrading to the latest version at the moment. We do periodically re-evaluate our situation so we may upgrade in the future.

[alloroc]

Originally posted by em2ab
Is the version at the bottom of the page correct? Doesn't that leave it open to easy hacking?

I think Hackers know enough to leave Rage alone. Think of Japan in WW2 they started off fine with the sneak attack on Pearl but were nuked in the end.

[rage2]

Originally posted by Grogador
There's still security patches for v2. Admins claim running v3 would overtax the servers... even tho boards this size can run off a single machine with plenty of RAM and some RAID... probably not on IIS tho :rolleyes:
We've run performance testing under apache + linux, and there is no difference. IIS runs fine. People that don't know what they're talking about think that Windows can't run things reliably or can't run things fast. I've run this site under IIS since day 1 and I'm willing to bet that it's in the top 5% of all forums in terms of performance.

The reason we don't run on a single box is because of scalability. We can easily handle 20x the normal traffic with zero problems by simply deploying hardware anytime. This was proven during the claw thread earlier this year... we can survive getting on the front page of digg while most sites crumble under the pressure. An added bonus is that we can take a server down for maintenance or upgrade without taking the site down. We do 2-3 hardware upgrades per year. This morning's outage doesn't count BTW, mySQL crashed and I was in meetings all morning :rofl:.

Our current setup is good enough to run about 5x the traffic while maintaining usability for the end user, which is why the site is so fast. That's pretty much our goal, instantaneous access from page to page, 24/7.


Originally posted by b_t
Stability, speed and uptime > additional pointless features
That's exactly why this site was put together in the first place. Not sure how many people remember abcars, but their site was crazy slow and always down. I offered and they didn't want my help in helping them fix their performance issues, so we just started beyond instead. I think it's safe to say that we got our priorities right ;).

[Grogador]

Can't resist cheap digs at IIS. Didn't mean you *should* run it on one box, just wasn't buying the scaling excuse for sticking with v2, but if it's really that flaky and doesn't offer anything great then sure.

No mysql clustering?

[rage2]

Originally posted by Grogador
No mysql clustering?
It's not supported under Windows. We played around with it under redhat, and prefer to wait until it's available for windows.

[Jay911]

Speaking of the software running the board, is there any reason you can think of that the board would not behave right with certain browsers/functions? I have Firefox (latest version) and on the new threads page(s), I hit Ctrl+left-click in order to open a thread in a new tab, like I do on every other forum I visit (using vB, phpBB, and whatever else is out there). In other places, this leaves the main screen alone, and opens the thread in a new tab, as intended. Here, doing the same thing both opens the new tab and changes the main page to the clicked-upon thread as well, as if I hadn't been holding Ctrl and simply just left-clicked. If I do it by right-clicking the thread and selecting "Open link in new tab", that works, but it's a couple extra steps to get what I want to do. Is there some kind of javascript or other code on the board that does something with clicks on thread titles?

Hopefully I'm making sense; if not, let me know and I'll try again.

[kenny]

Yes, if you want to do the ctrl-left click, make sure you click on the link itself and not the cell that the link is in.

We have code that allows the cell to be clicked as well to get to the same link, but the browsers do not support the ctrl-click to open in new window for this function (at least the way we implemented it)

[Mibz]

Originally posted by kenny
Yes, if you want to do the ctrl-left click, make sure you click on the link itself and not the cell that the link is in.

We have code that allows the cell to be clicked as well to get to the same link, but the browsers do not support the ctrl-click to open in new window for this function (at least the way we implemented it) I just noticed the hidden picture in your sig.

[midnite]

I'm curious, what kind of hardware is the site ran on, and what kind of traffic does this site do? I like techy geeky specs. :thumbsup:

[Eleanor]

I wouldn't give a shit if this forum was notepad with pictures. Do we really need anything else?

[gpomp]

Originally posted by Jay911
Speaking of the software running the board, is there any reason you can think of that the board would not behave right with certain browsers/functions? I have Firefox (latest version) and on the new threads page(s), I hit Ctrl+left-click in order to open a thread in a new tab, like I do on every other forum I visit (using vB, phpBB, and whatever else is out there). In other places, this leaves the main screen alone, and opens the thread in a new tab, as intended. Here, doing the same thing both opens the new tab and changes the main page to the clicked-upon thread as well, as if I hadn't been holding Ctrl and simply just left-clicked. If I do it by right-clicking the thread and selecting "Open link in new tab", that works, but it's a couple extra steps to get what I want to do. Is there some kind of javascript or other code on the board that does something with clicks on thread titles?

Hopefully I'm making sense; if not, let me know and I'll try again. this happens to me as well. it's been like this for as long as i remember. beyond is not firefox friendly.

[benyl]

I middle click for that. Works on FF 2 and FF3

[FiveFreshFish]

^^^ Yep, it never fails.