Technical Issues - TPU Main Site & Forum (2023)

[lemonadesoda]

Nice graphic.But perhaps improve the small print text below to make it clearer. Also a link for more details? It all depends on whether you just error the user, or if you want to educate the user.

i learned more here https://kinsta.com/blog/502-bad-gateway/#what-is-a-502-bad-gateway-error-1

i found the message “error: our server failed to build the webpage, please refresh and try again in 30 seconds” far more helpful.

And perhaps your info graphic would be better as a four party/stage graphic. Showing a failure between the gateway server and the (multiple) servers that build the webpage. Only one of which might be down or errored.

Anyway, through this little discussion I have learned something

 

[the54thvoid]

Nice graphic.But perhaps improve the small print text below to make it clearer. Also a link for more details? It all depends on whether you just error the user, or if you want to educate the user.

i learned more here https://kinsta.com/blog/502-bad-gateway/#what-is-a-502-bad-gateway-error-1

i found the message “error: our server failed to build the webpage, please refresh and try again in 30 seconds” far more helpful.

And perhaps your info graphic would be better as a four party/stage graphic. Showing a failure between the gateway server and the (multiple) servers that build the webpage. Only one of which might be down or errored.

Anyway, through this little discussion I have learned something

Not sure if you're more technically minded than me (hard not to be) but I'd personally disagree with all that you've said (and I'm not trying to pick a fight). The 3-stage graphic clearly shows the fault does not reside in the browser, or the internet connection. The use of big pics with ticks and simple text also helps with non-native english. If anything could change, the longer description at the bottom could be shorter, not more complex.

I find this (bolded):

error: our server failed to build the webpage, please refresh and try again in 30 seconds

a lot more awkward. What does that even mean? (I understand what it infers but it has zero value to remedy the situation. The situation is, TPU's serves are down, i.e., I know it's not my problem).

And I really do apologise if I sound like I'm being combative. I just don't see how the error message doesn't convey it's a site issue, not a user issue.

 

[W1zzard]

Maybe I could add a clickable link "Technical explanation" ?

Something like

"Your request has reached our frontend gateway server successfully, which forwarded it to our backends that generate the page content.
Unfortunately all these servers are down, non-responsive or taking too long to generate the page.
That's why this error page was generated.
HTTP 502 at Wikipedia"

 

[the54thvoid]

I'll still get my info from the pics. But if others want to click a link, it does no harm. Unless the link is broken, in which case, you add an unnecessary confusion.

Edit: I mean, the wiki link would be robust, but it's all technical. I'm genuinely confused how someone that might appreciate the more technical info, can't get the message from your pop-up. But hey, that's my spectrum kicking in. I've said all I can without badgering.

And right now I'm having a massive dose of deja-vu. Has this not happened in this thread before? Or is it actually real deja-vu?

 

[lemonadesoda]

And right now I'm having a massive dose of deja-vu. Has this not happened in this thread before? Or is it actually real deja-vu?

Maybe, maybe not. Was it other people in the conversation? Do you get deja-vu when you see a car breakdown? It's usually different people to the one you saw yesterday.

 

[lexluthermiester]

Maybe I could add a clickable link "Technical explanation" ?

That really wouldn't help. Anyone who can't be bothered to read a clearly displayed message will not be bothered enough to click a link explaining same. Best to just leave well enough alone and when people ask they can be reminded to read the page info they were shown in the first place.

And I really do apologise if I sound like I'm being combative.

No need. Your stance is perfectly reasonable.

 

[windwhirl]

Always. I thought my little infographic and text made that clear enough? Any ideas how to improve?

I think it's fine as it is. Some users do have a habit of checking if it's a browser problem regardless.

I guess you could somehow get an error in one browser and not in another due to a different DNS configuration (Firefox at least does allow for using a DNS service different from the rest of the system)? But even that would be a fairly rare problem that would occur in a very small time window and in that case you'd not even see TPU's error page.

 

[Solaris17]

Always. I thought my little infographic and text made that clear enough? Any ideas how to improve?

I mean it is very accurate

 

[W1zzard]

I'm having a massive dose of deja-vu. Has this not happened in this thread before? Or is it actually real deja-vu?

Yeah I vaguely remember that people weren't sure whether their PC/connection is at fault, which is why I'm trying to get more feedback

I guess you could somehow get an error in one browser and not in another due to a different DNS configuration

In that case you would not reach out frontend proxy, and would never get that message

 

[nomdeplume]

If universally understandable pictures and any modern browser's ability to translate text to any other language aren't enough. Nothing will be.

Seems you are on the edge of overthinking a refinement to something that works perfectly well as is.

Then there is the aspect of being a tech site and not a pastoral forum to discuss items relevant to previous generations.

 

[W1zzard]

I mean it is very accurate

Absolutely, ultimately it's always my fault. We could add more redundancies, better scripts, etc

 

[lexluthermiester]

View attachment 319014
I mean it is very accurate

This is so true! Very funny, but also very accurate.

Absolutely, ultimately it's always my fault. We could add more redundancies, better scripts, etc

Except when TPU is being attacked. No one can hold you accountable for that and maintain even a modicum of credibility.

 

[Solaris17]

Absolutely, ultimately it's always my fault. We could add more redundancies, better scripts, etc

haha sorry, I posted that in response to the "making it more simple" train of thought, and meant it as read from the servers perspective. I didnt mean to insinuate you needed to do or change anything.

I think the message is clear as is and agree with nomdeplume. Everyone will always have a preference in the way something is communicated but that doesnt make one more right.

The current cloudflare message does the job for the majority of people. An added link to something like the picture I posted (a definition of the tiers of HTTP status codes) should be sufficient for everyone else. (but so is the literal picture we currently have tbh.)

 

[W1zzard]

Except when TPU is being attacked. No one can hold you accountable for that and maintain even a modicum of credibility.

There's many ways to spend more time and money to mitigate these. But at a few minutes downtime every few days I see no point investing either

 

[lexluthermiester]

There's many ways to spend more time and money to mitigate these. But at a few minutes downtime every few days I see no point investing either

Exactly. And no one can fault you for that perspective.

 

[plat]

The 3-stage graphic clearly shows the fault does not reside in the browser, or the internet connection.

OK, OK. But the way Firefox has been on here lately, it's become a knee-jerk reaction to assign blame. If there's a "next time" I'll simply ignore the message--cuz it'll go away eventually.

 

[cst1992]

LMN if this thing deserves its own thread, but here I go.

The time tracker on forum posts is off by about 4 minutes, in the wrong direction.

The time shown on the tooltip is exactly the accurate time according to the system clock. So it should show "Just now" or "0 seconds ago" or "Less than a minute ago" or similar, but it says "In 4 minutes" meaning it thinks the time is actually 11:27 or 11:28 AM.

My system time is in sync with Time.is or Time.gov websites up to a few seconds - I don't know if those systems just "borrow" time from your system clock or use their own time.

 

[nomdeplume]

LMN if this thing deserves its own thread, but here I go.

The time tracker on forum posts is off by about 4 minutes, in the wrong direction.

View attachment 319911
The time shown on the tooltip is exactly the accurate time according to the system clock. So it should show "Just now" or "0 seconds ago" or "Less than a minute ago" or similar, but it says "In 4 minutes" meaning it thinks the time is actually 11:27 or 11:28 AM.

My system time is in sync with Time.is or Time.gov websites up to a few seconds - I don't know if those systems just "borrow" time from your system clock or use their own time.

Rough uneducated guess here, this one is your browser (including plugins). Shift in the space time security continuum is impacting one of my browsers again that was giving me fits attempting to use ebay. The ISP side of this could also be contributing depending on how quickly they react to changes.

 

[W1zzard]

LMN if this thing deserves its own thread, but here I go.

The time tracker on forum posts is off by about 4 minutes, in the wrong direction.

View attachment 319911
The time shown on the tooltip is exactly the accurate time according to the system clock. So it should show "Just now" or "0 seconds ago" or "Less than a minute ago" or similar, but it says "In 4 minutes" meaning it thinks the time is actually 11:27 or 11:28 AM.

My system time is in sync with Time.is or Time.gov websites up to a few seconds - I don't know if those systems just "borrow" time from your system clock or use their own time.

Where was that screenshot taken?

http://imgur.com/ztaUnbQ

works for me

 

[cst1992]

It was a private conversation. Let me see if it shows in a regular thread.

Edit: nope

Edit 2: it doesn't happen in the private conversation either. Only thing I can think of is that when I was about to send the message, I typed it then accidentally clicked a link to go to another page. I then pressed "Back", retyped the message from scratch, then sent it.

It's very possible that I wrote the original message at 11:28. Maybe it didn't update the time that it used for the post.

 

[Count von Schwalbe]

I see that occasionally too.

Mostly it shows up in the "alerts" drop-down, where all messages are "later_today_at_X" instead of a time.

No pattern of activity seems to cause it, just randomly appears.

 

[Tatty_Two]

I see that occasionally too.

Mostly it shows up in the "alerts" drop-down, where all messages are "later_today_at_X" instead of a time.

No pattern of activity seems to cause it, just randomly appears.

Yeah, occasionally (but not often), if I scroll over a username I get something like "last seen in a moment" or similar, in the future tense rather than the past tense lol.

 

[W1zzard]

Yeah, occasionally (but not often), if I scroll over a username I get something like "last seen in a moment" or similar, in the future tense rather than the past tense lol.

I think that can happen when your computer clock and our server clocks are slightly mismatched. The texts are generated browser-side, based on a timestamp supplied by the server.

 

[cst1992]

It might help to see how the timestamp of a given text is generated and stored. If it's generated once per message and stored on the browser (say in session storage or local storage) then that might not work, because it's clear the timestamp for my message was generated at 11:28 and the actual message was sent at 11:32, creating an offset of 4 minutes that the server then added to the final time of the message.

 

[nomdeplume]

It might help to see how the timestamp of a given text is generated and stored. If it's generated once per message and stored on the browser (say in session storage or local storage) then that might not work, because it's clear the timestamp for my message was generated at 11:28 and the actual message was sent at 11:32, creating an offset of 4 minutes that the server then added to the final time of the message.

Based on my recent experience this might be a good time to replace your CMOS battery and reset time/date. Then make sure it stuck. Then set time/date in your OS to match it as nearly as possible. This morning I was still having the same issue you reported and did the above plus fresh install of browser to hopefully fix it for the last time.

It is unlikely to be a site issue.