Problem with the Forums?

[SteveZilla]

THIMC,

I can access this page just fine:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/show...ctures/page825

But the very next page won't display at all:

http://www.herogames.com/forums/show...ctures/page826

Please help?


Thanks,

[gojira]

Works for me (both links). I does take a really long time to load, however. Maybe just try to let it go until it does load.

[SteveZilla]

I switched to 5 posts per page from 10, and I can "jump past" the problem area now. But I still can't see the posts 8251-8260 in the Neat Pictures thread. Did someone post a ginormous picture in there?

Alternately, does anybody know how to change the timeout setting in IE? I can't find it in any easily accessible location...

[Sougen]

On that one page there is a number of large pics / quotes of that pic. Also there is a gif embedded into it. Also, there is one png file that is so large that I can't get it to display (can't even save it to my comp to then open - just opens to a "too big" notice).

Have you thought of using Google Chrome? It runs quite nicely and is generally much faster than IE.

Also, if you really want, I can save those photos you are missing and e-mail them to you. Just send me a pm if you want that.

[SteveZilla]

Post # 8254. I don't think its the image that is too large, its the link itself that is too big imo. The link (not the picture) as I am seeing it, is 900,173 bytes long. Perhaps the DB/SQL hiccuped/choked on something when it was posted.

Oh, and I had to edit my registry (first time ever!), and changed the

HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\Curre ntVersion\InternetSettings\ReceiveTimeout

entry, which defaults to 10000 (ms) in IE9. I just added a zero and restarted IE. Now my timeout is 100 seconds instead of 10.

EDIT: Thanks for the offer, Sougen. I wanted to try to resolve the issue with IE before resorting to dual-browsing, or taking up other's (genersouly offered) time.

[Simon]

Post # 8254. I don't think its the image that is too large, its the link itself that is too big imo. The link (not the picture) as I am seeing it, is 900,173 bytes long. Perhaps the DB/SQL hiccuped/choked on something when it was posted.

Oh, and I had to edit my registry (first time ever!), and changed the

HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Windows\Curre ntVersion\InternetSettings\ReceiveTimeout

entry, which defaults to 10000 (ms) in IE9. I just added a zero and restarted IE. Now my timeout is 100 seconds instead of 10.

EDIT: Thanks for the offer, Sougen. I wanted to try to resolve the issue with IE before resorting to dual-browsing, or taking up other's (genersouly offered) time.

[edit to tone down a bit]
1. I cannot recommend strongly enough that users NOT go into their registry and start mucking around with settings unless they are very (very) comfortable doing so.

2. There was no error in the forums, in the db, or anywhere else.

3. As stated by others, you're dealing with a thread that has a large amount of rather data-intensive content. Running a sub-par browser like IE (even IE9), you should be used to little disappointments like these -- no need to start panicking. Either start using a better (faster, more compliant, leaner) browser, or accept that there will be sites/pages on the web that you will not be able to view.

4. The links to all images in the thread fall within the RFC guidelines (note: not hard limits, guidelines) for HTTP. The image _content_ (data) was just shy of 1MB.

[SteveZilla]

BrokenLink.txt

[edit to tone down a bit]
1. I cannot recommend strongly enough that users NOT go into their registry and start mucking around with settings unless they are very (very) comfortable doing so.

2. There was no error in the forums, in the db, or anywhere else.

3. As stated by others, you're dealing with a thread that has a large amount of rather data-intensive content. Running a sub-par browser like IE (even IE9), you should be used to little disappointments like these -- no need to start panicking. Either start using a better (faster, more compliant, leaner) browser, or accept that there will be sites/pages on the web that you will not be able to view.

4. The links to all images in the thread fall within the RFC guidelines (note: not hard limits, guidelines) for HTTP. The image _content_ (data) was just shy of 1MB.

1. Agreed. In my case, I had done a fair amount of research on the registry & how it works, so was not unfamiliar with what I was doing. I also made an export copy before making any changes.

2. Okay. I was conjecturing because in all my time I had never seen a link itself be almost 1 MB (text of link attached in a text document).

3. Actually, IE9 (and IE8 before it) have been quite good on my computer, except for this little hiccup. Since I have increased the timeout, and discovered the "1 MB broken link" was its main issue, I think it'll be sufficient for my needs for a bit longer.

[Ndreare]

But firefox sounds so much cooler than explorer

[SteveZilla]

What, a browser named after a moderately decent early 80's Clint Eastwood movie?

[IndianaJoe3]

What, a browser named after a moderately decent early 80's Clint Eastwood movie?

I think it's a great name. I've gotten a lot of mileage out of, "You must think in Russian." jokes.

[Ndreare]

What, a browser named after a moderately decent early 80's Clint Eastwood movie?

I am ashamed to admit how long it took me to 'get' this.