[resolved] Splitting Long Threads

Long threads do not take down the server.

After all we have a thread with well over 1000 pages.

But they very well may take down the reader!

Ya know, I just noticed this topic, and it causes me to wonder ... my understanding is that the lenght of a thread should have no bearing on the length of time a thread takes to "load" onto a user's screen; I figure that would be a function of how many replies a user happens to have chosen to display per-page. I know that "bottlenecks" can occur anywhere in the chain, and that ''net speed can be affected my any number of factors, from general busainess to just plain heavy traffic to a particular domain or server. Anyhow ... I noticed that the US, UN, $ Iraq thread was split several times (In its 3rd incarnation now), with "Taking too long to load" given as the reason for the split. I never said anything at the time, because it just didn't seem to me many folks would havemuch interest in exploring the matter. I gotta say, I page at 100 replies-per-page, so when somebody says "hundreds of pages", to me, that's 20 or 30 pages or so. No big deal ... it really doesn't matter; but a single US, UN, & Iraq thread some 10,000+ pretty much essentially on-topic replies in length would be a kinda neat achievement. Not too many discussion boards could dream of even approaching that claim.

timber,

For the end user there is no problem with a huge thread (see word association).

The long time referenced in the decision to split the US, UN, IRAQ threads was that the modcp does not paginate.

Thing is, you make a very valid point. It'd have been kinda neat to have a single thread. I'll forward some details to the moderators that would enable us to do so.