(.css) file changes not working.... [Archive]

Yukino

8-26-09, 06:22 PM

I'm wondering if anyone else is having this issue, or have any suggestions for me regarding this. (I do have a ticket open atm)

Currently I have all my files linked to my .css file. All is linked properly as it was just working, now each time I update my .css file and upload it (either via ftp or the powweb file manager) despite the changes being uploaded browswers do not reflect the changes (it it's not the cookies on my local computer either as i have tested multiple comps/browsers, had ppl out of the country test it, the representative that escalated my ticket was not reflecting changes they made either)

althought... the representative told me that .css does not change the way a page looks sooo... i don't know if i should put much stock into that...

anyway, changing the .css files and reuploading makes them not reflect changes. i also made new test.html and test.css file to see if this could be duplicated. indeed it can. if u upload the files they work until you change the .css and reupload... then the .css refuses to change. if you go to the .css directly it downloads the OLD .css. bah.

all other files change properly and the changes reflect properly.

this just started this afternoon.

omatic

8-26-09, 06:58 PM

Try flushing your cache, or just hit CTRL-F5 to force the entire page to reload. Your browser is probably failing to detect that the CSS file changed.

YvetteKuhns

8-26-09, 08:27 PM

Did you upload your css file to the correct directory? Can you view your css file by typing its URL to see if it is the old one or the new one? Did you try changing its name to see if the new css file appears with your web page?

When you upload your css file, do you see a message saying it was successfully uploaded? Or are you having a problem uploading which is why you would not see the new one?

HalfaBee

8-26-09, 09:33 PM

If you download the file via FTP, does it reflect the changes?

Yukino

8-27-09, 12:25 PM

I have tried clearing my cache. No change. I tested this on 4 computers using 4 different browsers on each one. In addition to that I had 2 friends that were outside of my country test the site. They were not seeing any changes made either so it doesn't seem to be a local cache/cookies. The representative that was originally helping me recieved the same thing if the .css was edited the changes would not reflect.. but then he/she told me that .css doesnt' change the style of the page sooooo.... yeah.

Try flushing your cache, or just hit CTRL-F5 to force the entire page to reload. Your browser is probably failing to detect that the CSS file changed.

Yes, the .css is uploaded to the main directory and all the pages link to that. Yes I can view my css by typing in the url but it loads the old .css and doesn't reflect the changes. Yet if I view the file via the edit function in the powweb file manager it does show the changes there. Yes. I did try that. i also tried making a new .html page and new .css and linking them from scratch. Upon first upload they work but if you go to edit it the changes do not reflect with the .css. Yes the .css files do upload successful, there does not appear to be problems with that.

Did you upload your css file to the correct directory? Can you view your css file by typing its URL to see if it is the old one or the new one? Did you try changing its name to see if the new css file appears with your web page?

When you upload your css file, do you see a message saying it was successfully uploaded? Or are you having a problem uploading which is why you would not see the new one?

If I download the file it does indeed show the changes. It just refuses to reflect in any browsers.
If you download the file via FTP, does it reflect the changes?

In addition to this my ticket is still being worked, i thought it was resolved because i did see while they were working it that they seemed to get it to work for a bit. But this morning the ticket went from resolved to work in progess status again with the issue persisting. :/

Yukino

8-27-09, 12:46 PM

could it be their system that cache's their files is not uploading fast enough? i dunno. the other files seem to reflect changes almost instantly... it's just the .css files that seem to be having issues...

YvetteKuhns

8-27-09, 03:36 PM

Try deleting all css files from the PowWeb server, then upload the one you want. Make sure the one you want is uploaded to the correct directory and is the exact same name as the one specified in your web page source code. Are you sure your new css is not visible? You could temporarily change it to something extremely different, so the changes are obvious. For example, change black text to red to see if the new css is actually loading when refreshing your page.

I do recall a problem a few years ago with a client using a different ISP. Sometimes I could view changes that were uploaded before he could since his ISP didn't refresh its cache. But you said various people checked. I am in PA and I have RCN. If that is different, I can visit your site and see what css appears. I don't have your site in my cache, so the new css should appear.

Yukino

8-27-09, 05:12 PM

the .css is in the correct directory. i have tried to remove it completely and reupload it. so did the original customer rep. the style still showed. it seems though that it does update but it's taking over an hour or more for the .css file changes to start reflecting on browsers.

HalfaBee

8-27-09, 07:54 PM

There was an issue (quite a while back) with the load balancing servers caching files.

Yukino

8-28-09, 04:02 PM

Thanks all for your thoughts.

I'm not sure what is causing it. Powweb has told me it's on my end although i'm not 100% convinced.

I do have another .css question though if anyone can assit with it thought I would post it here instead of opening up another page.

my sample page will be:

http://www.designfoxmediaworks.com/services.html

if you open this page in IE and FF the sidebar header appears broken. Yet if you were to open this in say google chrome it is perfect. I'm thinking that the content in the middle is pushing it down and i'm not sure how to stop it. I have tried setting overflow and such and if i have the background sidebar content header to repeat there is no broken black area but the box is much bigger than i wish it to be.

any suggestion on how to correct this?

(a perfect example of my previous issue is i just uploaded the style sheet to reflect that page to have a picture as a list bullet and it's not showing me those changes this was done at 1:06 mst)

YvetteKuhns

8-28-09, 04:44 PM

Yukino

8-28-09, 04:52 PM

Your sidebar_header class should have margins set to zero. Also consider setting margins for other tags that may add space where you don't want it such as FORM tags.

<td colspan="2" align="center" valign="middle" class="sidebar_header_text" id="sidebar_header">

vertical-align should be in the sidebar_header class and set to top instead of middle.

alright i will take a look at this. Yvette could you look at the link i posted in the above post and tell me if the li items appear as a flower image instead of the standard circle bullets.

my friend in the us (as i am in canada) is saying he sees no change (this goes back to my prior issue)

Yukino

8-28-09, 05:40 PM

update: it is now 2:40mst and my file .css changes have just been registered and are viewable -__-;;

Yukino

8-28-09, 05:42 PM

Your sidebar_header class should have margins set to zero. Also consider setting margins for other tags that may add space where you don't want it such as FORM tags.

<td colspan="2" align="center" valign="middle" class="sidebar_header_text" id="sidebar_header">

vertical-align should be in the sidebar_header class and set to top instead of middle.

if i set my valign to the top then my text gets pushed to the top and i do want my text to be in the middle.

do you mean like this with the margin (bear with me i'm not very pro at .css):

#sidebar_header {
background-image: url(images/dFox_sideheader.gif);
font-family: Tahoma, Geneva, sans-serif;
color: #aaaaaa;
font-size: 16px;
font-weight: normal;
font-style: normal;
margin:0;
}

doing that didn't appear to make a difference am i doing it wrong? :/

Yukino

8-30-09, 08:44 PM

Ok just to update everyone, after going back and forth with powweb support trying to figure out what was wrong and actually having them reopen the ticket about my .css issue this is what was told to me:

...We apologize for any inconvenience this has caused you. Currently, we are experiencing issue with our Servers. We deeply apologize for this service interruption, we know that you count on us, and our engineering team is working as quickly as possible to restore full service for all customers. This will also be corrected as soon as possible. Your patience is highly appreciated...

ah, relief in knowing that i'm not crazy and there is something wrong on their end. :) thanks to all who were providing helpful thoughts on possible resolutions.

YvetteKuhns

8-31-09, 12:15 PM

LinK started another thread with the same problem and was also told by support that it was a server issue. At least you, LinK and anyone else who reads the forum will know the fault does NOT lie with the customer. ;)

Yukino

8-31-09, 03:34 PM

Yes I see, thank goodness I really did think i was going crazy for awhile. lol

While I wait for that to get worked out, is there any other thoughts on how to fix my IE/FF issue with my .css

I tried the margin to 0 as posted above but it seems to not be working. :(

YvetteKuhns

8-31-09, 03:53 PM

<td>
<img src="images/spacer.gif" width="1" height="5" alt=""></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td colspan="2" align="center" valign="middle" class="sidebar_header_text" id="sidebar_header">Client Login</td>

Use style for the alignment. There is a class and id here where one may be conflicting with the other. The first td should have style="vertical-align: top; margin:0px;".

Yukino

8-31-09, 05:02 PM

YvetteKuhns

8-31-09, 07:09 PM

Don't thank me. If I had taken more time, I would have given you the answer. My husband was home sick, my son is driving me nuts and I am trying to get work done. Try recording live when your son is playing games in the next room. His voice was picked up by my microphone!

When I saw your code, I almost missed that little TD with no attributes or classes. I expected it to have valign=top or something. ;)

thad

9-1-09, 03:29 AM

I have had similar issues. Two different techs at Powweb examined my pages and saw it too. Unfortunately, they have no solution. Since the problem only lasts for about 20 minutes before proper updating occurs and since I can't produce the error consistently, they claim there is little they can do for us.

I think it may have something to do with sub-domain pointing. For example, http://HawaiiMathTutor.com points to http://thad.com/makemakika. (Makemakika is the Hawaiian word for mathematics.) Last time I has the issue I was tweaking the menu bars and I got this,
http://thad.com/temp/HawaiiMathTutor.jpg
http://thad.com/temp/Makemakika.jpg
which are screen shots of the same file accessed via two different links. Each should produce the same content as the other, but in one, the menus don't reach all the way across the page.

I had been working on my code and made a mistake, which produced the short menu bar. I corrected the code and one link showed the correction. It was about 20 minutes until the other link reflected the change.

CLEARLY, that shouldn't happen.

Sorry I can't be of more hlep.

Thad

Dbrazzell

9-1-09, 12:17 PM

YvetteKuhns

9-1-09, 12:30 PM

Too bad the website visitors and robots won't use Crtl + F5 to view changes!

thad

9-1-09, 01:26 PM

I am glad to see Powweb has now found the source of their problem. I hope it will be fixed soon.

Yukino

9-1-09, 01:28 PM

hmm... i just can't seem to get this to work >_< lol

i went and set a class in the .css called spacer and set valign top and margin 0 like this:

.spacer {
margin: 0px;
vertical-align: top;
}

i applied it to all the spacers...

i went back and set the siderbar_header id to be text align middle in .css:

#sidebar_header {
background-image: url(images/dFox_sideheader.gif);
font-family: Tahoma, Geneva, sans-serif;
color: #aaaaaa;
font-size: 16px;
font-weight: normal;
font-style: normal;
margin:0;
text-align: center;
vertical-align: middle;
background-repeat: no-repeat;
}

but still no luck :/ still getting the push in IE/FF only difference is with me setting the bg to no repeat it makes a big black space lol @_@

it's really bad on www.designfoxmediaworks.com/quote.html the content in the white is pushing everything else down :( any other suggestions?

p.s: i do not like this new system. it's bad. go back to where it does not take 2 hrs for my updates to show!

Yukino

9-1-09, 01:42 PM

for the record Crtl + F5 is not working for me. i really hope this gets corrected quickly. it's not acceptable to have 1-2hrs for changes to show up.

Sorry about this.

We recently released a new system that caches files pretty heavily on the web servers. This means when you modify files on your account it can take some amount of time before the changes are reflected on the live site.

However. The Exception is that the system obeys hard refreshes. You should be able to Crtl + F5 your pages and it should display the new changes.

Ive only just been told this and haven't tried it for myself.

YvetteKuhns

9-1-09, 04:11 PM

I worked on another host where I couldn't see changes to the website or .htaccess for hours to see changes. They did caching to make websites load faster but anyone trying to view changes instantly could not do so. Very annoying and disappointing that it is happening here now.

HalfaBee

9-2-09, 12:19 AM

Well php changes happen immediately, so I suppose the quick fix is to make every file get parsed by php. :)

thad

9-2-09, 12:47 AM

But in my case, I modified a text file (.txt) that was loaded into a php page and came out two different ways as shown above.

HalfaBee

9-2-09, 08:13 AM

Yes, but if you make the server parse every file as php, the changes to to files happen instantly.

It causes the first load to be slow, as it must reload the file from the fileserver and then it is quick.

It is not the way Powweb would like the servers to run, but as a testing method it is a good workaround. Just remember to remove the .htaccess line after testing.

Yukino

9-2-09, 11:10 AM

they told me and i quote:

wanted to let you know that this is not a server issue however it is the result of a recent change. After you make changes to the website you will need to perform a hard refresh by holding control and clicking the F5 key to refresh the website and ensure that you are viewing the live website and not what your browser is holding as a cached version of the website.

needless to say i'm not a happy camper as my system is not caching the page and control f5 is not working. I have asked them to turn off this change on my account, as someone suggested in Links thread this may be possible. We will see what they say.

any other suggestions though on my above .css problem?

Yukino

9-2-09, 11:14 AM

I am glad to see Powweb has now found the source of their problem. I hope it will be fixed soon.

it really doesn't sound like from what they said to me that they have any intention of fixing it. their fix is to tell everyone to ctrl + f5 (even when that isn't working) and it irks the crap out of me.

and honestly, even if that DID work, what client is going to know to do that when they are checking your site for updated information. my guess is 99% of them won't.:mad:

Dbrazzell

9-2-09, 12:16 PM

I did a little testing last night to make sure I had ever thing figured out.

The caching only apply's to static files.
The caching only last for 300 seconds (5 minutes).
If you force your browser to send a "no-cache" request header you will receive the latest copy of the file. In firefox this is Crtl + f5. I tested this yesterday and confirmed that it works.

One thing I should probably go over since it isnt common knowledge is that on our platform. Cgi files (scripting language files like php) are executed on what we call the cgi boxes. These servers don't have caching enabled and the way you are routed to these boxes depends on if your page contains any php,perl,ruby,etc.
Static files are served from another server.

This is why when you echo'd the contents of test.txt using php you saw the real live copy. However when you simply visited the text.txt in your browser you were served the cached copy that the static server was holding in cache.

If you want to get a little more advanced you can look at the response headers from our servers in firefox using either Firebug or Live Http Headers.
What you will see is extra lines that look like

Cache-Control: max-age=300, public
Expires: Tue, 01 Sep 2009 20:57:52 GMTs

After this expiration date when you refresh the page you will be served a new non cached version of the file.

If this caching becomes permanent, at this time I'm not sure that it will, We will document it quite heavily in the control panel. Like Yukino pointed out, I don't expect the average user to understand the principle and theory behind this caching mechanism.

IanS

9-2-09, 12:21 PM

5 minutes seems a little long to sit waiting, as most people customers won't know about this change. The simpler the pages (ie static) the hard you are making it for customers. More advanced customers won't see this as a problem, the beginners will!

Maybe a thought could go into making the cache less time - say 60 or 90 secs.

YvetteKuhns

9-2-09, 12:48 PM

I agree with IanS.

If PowWeb continues to use this method, the people using the least bandwidth with static sites may be forced to parse pages as php and use more resources just to have fresher results! I have a few sites that may be changed now and I was trying to reserve resources. Thanks a lot. :rolleyes:

bdw

9-2-09, 12:59 PM

5 mins? thats a bit much is it not. What if I want people to instantly see new content? bad idea in my opinion.

Yukino

9-2-09, 01:42 PM

I find this totally unacceptable. And I personally have tried the refresh method and it's still not showing after over and hour. (takes about 2 hrs for it to show not 5 mins in my case) and as stated above even 5 mins is ridiculously long, and to make us have to force it to refresh after that 5 mins is even more ridiculous imo.

In addition to that honestly even if it did work, clients who would come to my sites that don't know how to do this will not see content updating right away and will just leave.

I don't think this was very well thought out on powwebs part.

Dbrazzell

9-2-09, 03:31 PM

thad

9-2-09, 03:42 PM

A caching mechanism is fine, if it works. Powweb's does appear to do so. I hope a fix is in place soon. Perhaps they should just go back to the old way.

Yukino

9-2-09, 06:00 PM

Understandable.

One method of disabling this caching mechanism is to edit your .htaccess in such a way that all your files including static files are executed as though they were cgi.
This forces all of your traffic to be executed on the cgi box. Which isnt exactly what we want to do.

well, i'll give it a bit more time to see if they actually resolve it before i do that. it's been about a week since my ticket was first opened on the issue. i do have some .css editing that i'm trying to work through lol although this is making it quite timeconsuming. @_@

on a side note, my latest reply to my ticket was me asking if powweb had a way for me to work around this and the reply i got was the static "we are aware of the issue blah blah"

which in no way related to my question they just requoted what they told me previously -__-;;

HalfaBee

9-2-09, 10:04 PM

Just add

AddType application/x-httpd-php css

to your .htaccess while you are making the changes.
When you are finished, delete or comment out the line.

thad

9-3-09, 12:34 AM

Yukino

9-3-09, 01:49 AM

Just to give everyone a quick update since my ticket is still open with support and i'm still communicating with them this is what they t old me tonight:

I apologize for any inconvenience this has caused you. Unfortunately, it is not possible us to disable Varnish Caching for single account. The server upgrading will be done within 24 to 48 hours.

ironic though at first they told me it was the change they did not anything server related. o_0

YvetteKuhns

9-3-09, 10:04 AM

I made some changes to my css style sheet today and they weren't reflected right away. I saved the file by doing "Save as" instead of "Save" I used the same file name and when it asked if I wanted to overwrite the file I said yes. That cleared up the issue for this time.

Great idea! To the computer, "save as" appears to create a "new" css file instead of simply saving changes to an existing file. Nice workaround. :cool:

jaboaty

9-4-09, 07:20 AM

Great idea! To the computer, "save as" appears to create a "new" css file instead of simply saving changes to an existing file. Nice workaround. :cool:
Hmm, the save as feature doesnt seem to be working for me. I can create brand new css files but I cant quickly update the pre-existing ones. I also tried saving the file under a different name and then changing that name to that of the previous css file but that was met with the same results.

YvetteKuhns

9-4-09, 10:00 AM

I wonder if PowWeb thinks that since static pages don't get changed as often as dynamically generated pages (such as forums), they can be cached to save time and don't care that it annoys us. We could be making changes often but chose static pages to save load time in the first place!

I am really annoyed with this, especially for Mick's website. I add pictures to the html pages, so we don't have a resource hog like Gallery 2 running. Those gallery scripts generate thumbnails and people upload images through the browser via scripts to the database. Mick's website doesn't use a database and we can make different size thumbnails, then upload via FTP software instead of a script that times out.

Instead of punishing those of us who were trying to conserve resources, they should spend more time monitoring the people who abuse resources. If they don't update those scripts in Install Central, they should provide a list and let people install them manually. Keep an eye on the dynamic websites and scan for popular scripts to see if anyone is still running older versions, then send a request for them to update those scripts.

HalfaBee

9-4-09, 05:29 PM

They are not doing it to punish customers, it is all to do with server design.

They most likely have one large central file server and smaller load balancing http servers.
If the file server handles 100,000 customers and each customer has 1000 files, thats 100,000,000 files. The access time to find 1 file in 100 million is quite large, so they now cache the file on the http server when it is first requested and the page speed is improved on the second load.

This is great for images that are repeated on every page and css files.

The caching time might be a bit long, but I am sure they will fine tune it to suit most customers.

YvetteKuhns

9-4-09, 05:39 PM

I understand caching but I don't like that the websites that are designed to use less resources may not be showing accurate/current displays. I didn't see problems when updating Mick's html pages. I added and edited text on some pages and when I refreshed, the pages did update fairly quickly. I didn't edit the css file, though.

I think that many of the forums, blogs and galleries have too many features and use too many resources. That is where I would look for trouble. And not just bulk mailing. E-commerce websites require a lot but it makes sense. I have seen some blogs and forums with dozens of smilies, image and video uploads and lots of useless posts that use resources.

Oh, I am just in a cranky mood with so many funerals and so little time for work. Just not in the mood to deal with these changes right now.

HalfaBee

9-4-09, 05:48 PM

Funerals and changes always hard to deal with.

The caching issues should only affect people making changes to static websites and I would suggest parsing the files via the cgi servers while doing changes, so that the changes show immediately and go back to normal when they are happy with the changes.

One line in the main .htaccess is all it takes.

YvetteKuhns

9-4-09, 07:42 PM

One method of disabling this caching mechanism is to edit your .htaccess in such a way that all your files including static files are executed as though they were cgi.
This forces all of your traffic to be executed on the cgi box. Which isnt exactly what we want to do.

Mind blowing for a web host to suggest such a thing. Not surprising for customers to suggest it, though. I know it is easy to do but I don't think we should have to edit our .htaccess files for all of our customers that use static web pages just to view changes faster. (whine) :rolleyes:

If/when I experience the problem, I will deal with it.

HalfaBee

9-4-09, 09:07 PM

It is not mindblowing, it is just a tool for webmasters to make changes and see them.

If I had to deal with this, I would write a little script to change the .htaccess file from a simple webpage.

YvetteKuhns

9-4-09, 11:25 PM

You don't find it odd for a web host to tell us to edit .htaccess to parse static pages as server scripted pages to work around their caching issue? Oh, yeah. This is PowWeb! :D

HalfaBee

9-5-09, 07:29 AM

At least they offered a simple way to view the files as normal, for testing purposes.

Yukino

9-5-09, 03:47 PM

i don't really know much about editing a .htaccess file and kind of feel like i should not have to do this. has anyone seen any changes in the uploading process? i haven't had time to test it since they told me 24 - 48 hrs...

sigh i really don't want to have to look for new hosts for my sites :(

thad

9-5-09, 06:27 PM

Yukino,

if using "Save as" instead of "Save" doesn't work, try renaming a file that needs a cache update then rename it back to what it was. Once you see it updated, everyone else will too.

Yukino

9-5-09, 07:36 PM

Yukino,

if using "Save as" instead of "Save" doesn't work, try renaming a file that needs a cache update then rename it back to what it was. Once you see it updated, everyone else will too.

i will try this suggestion to see if it works. i haven't tried anything since i posted that powweb had told me 24 -48 hrs and it would be resolved (i'm pretty sure i had tried the renaming thing before also tried to delete and reupload and that didn't work but will have another go at it)

honestly though, the point of the matter is we shouldn't have to figure out these workarounds. imo it's powwebs responsibility t o make sure everything is working in a timely manner.

thad

9-6-09, 04:11 PM

honestly though, the point of the matter is we shouldn't have to figure out these workarounds. imo it's powwebs responsibility t o make sure everything is working in a timely manner.

I agree completely.

Yukino

9-6-09, 10:24 PM

will have a test go at this tommorrow when i redo my site using div's and not tables o_0 hee hee. we shall see what situations arise at that point.

i already fear it's a headache waiting to happen lol.

Yukino

9-7-09, 12:35 AM

this is powwebs latest response to my ticket:

The issue is not resolved; our Engineers are working on this. The issue will be resolved as soon as possible. The ticket will be temporarily closed but you can open it any time you need by just updating the ticket from SupportConsole.

IanS

9-7-09, 03:40 AM

It seems two groups of engineers aren't talking to each other! The support ones don't know the other group changed something and what is being seen is an expected consequence of the change. :D

thad

9-7-09, 04:15 AM

Doc C,

Why did you edit "Thank you for following up with us.

We apologize for the inconvenience this has caused you." and "If you have any further questions, please update the Support Console." from Yukino's post?

Those sentences seem pretty innocuous to me.

Doc C

9-7-09, 01:33 PM

Full quotes of Support is NOT permitted. It was either trim it down or delete it. I chose the lesser of the two evils. :)

Yukino

9-7-09, 03:29 PM

Full quotes of Support is NOT permitted. It was either trim it down or delete it. I chose the lesser of the two evils. :)

uh oook.

Yukino

9-9-09, 01:10 PM

here is the latest response to keep everyone updated. there is apparently no etr on the issue. :(

Our senior engineers are still working n the issue. There is no ETA for the resolution of the issue.

Yukino

9-10-09, 05:59 PM

YIPEEE!!!! this was on my ticket when i checked it today and i wanted to keep everyone up to date:

Currently, changes to existing files, may not be immediately available. We have introduced "Varnish" caching on our storage servers, which will increase efficiency and stability to your hosting environment. You can override this feature, by clicking the (Control R) buttons and refreshing cache.
Given the response we have had this week, we will be making small configuration changes to this feature, which should improve customer usability. In addition, we are in the process of building a tool, that will enable our agents to "turn off" Varnish caching on your particular account.

control r not working for me and the other methods posted as work arounds are not working either. so this was very very good news for me.

HalfaBee

9-10-09, 09:12 PM

Powweb realy need to add some controls in OPS to control "Varnish" caching.

Maybe a "CLEAR CACHE" button and a "DISABLE CACHE for 24 hours"

I don't think disabling the account permanently is a good idea.

thad

9-10-09, 09:31 PM

My problem is that when I'm writing & testing code, if I fix an error, and it isn't reflected when I reload the page, I can keep looking and looking for an error that's not even there anymore for a long time before I realize that it's not me, it's that Powweb didn't properly reload the page. VVVVEERRRRRRRRRRRRYYY frustrating.

I don't waste as much time now, since I'm aware of Powweb's problems, but it's not fair for them to do this to us. I say. "Fix it Powweb. Fix it now."

Yukino

9-10-09, 09:59 PM

tpoynton

9-10-09, 10:07 PM

I've avoided chiming in here for a while...I think the caching is a good thing - if it is done to improve performance, and not pack more accounts into the same number of boxes!

Yes, I could see how it is annoying when you are testing pages...1 line in your htaccess, as stated in post 41 above by halfabee (and alluded to earlier by dbrazzell, I believe), will allow you to see changes instantly. I update my pages relatively infrequently, as I suspect a lot of people do.

It would be great if you could temporarily disable it via OPS. Frankly, though, I think it would be faster to add/comment/uncomment a line in htaccess than it would be to dig through OPS to find the place where they would put this!

This is the kind of thing that should be publicized...they've probably gotten a lot of tickets about it!

Yukino

9-11-09, 12:40 AM

well it's been ongoing for over 2 weeks now so i don't doubt that they have gotten lots.

personally i don't think i have ever moded my htaccess file and am kind of a bit leary on doing it. the point being caching would be good if it wasn't taking 2 hrs or so to reload, and it shouldn't be our responsibility to have to edit htaccess each time to work a round a feature they implemented.

Croc Hunter

9-11-09, 09:50 AM

I'm also reluctantly chiming in. Powweb was founded on the ethos - community code and customer. Many brilliant hard core code fanatics no longer frequent and offer help in this forum for reasons like this en masse forced caching. Good customers are forced to suffer because a small percentage abuse privileges. Powwebs methodology seems to have become take privileges away rather than code and structure to catch and ban the few. If you read this Andrew and Winnie, know your ethos impressed me and I carry that community spirit in all my endeavours today.

YvetteKuhns

9-11-09, 10:11 AM

The current PowWeb caters to the people who don't even know how to create or customize websites. PowWeb has instant installers to install outdated software for these people who don't even realize that they will create problems for the server and themselves. The customers are not programmers who understand scripts and server limits.

The old PowWeb catered to programmers and I used to consider this a good (cyber) neighborhood until the new customers moved into our neighborhood. Now the legacy customers are suffering and it isn't fair. We aren't supposed to compare the old with the new, but those of us here that long wonder why things are getting worse instead of better.

The focus for maintenance and improved performance should start and finish with the dynamic websites that are often exploited and using the most resources. Why punish a 50 page static html website while letting a monster gallery, forum or blog cause server interruptions? It still appears like PowWeb chose an easier method to attempt to improve load time, but that only works for static websites. The dynamic websites using databases will still have problems and the static websites are showing old style sheets!

Still whining on this subject. It reminds me of when my sister would do something bad and we both got punished by our parents. I didn't even do anything wrong. :(

Dbrazzell

9-11-09, 11:47 AM

Posting what is hopefully good news.

Ever since the caching system was released we have been working on a tool to disable it on an account level basis. That tool is supposed to be released today. This way support agents can disable/enable it if a customer puts in a ticket about caching issues.

Ill post again here when I know that tool is up and running and works correctly.

*Small edit: When the tool is released, only tier 2 or higher will have access to it. A support agent that you speak to when you first contact us is generally considered a tier 1. We held training on proper use of the tool yesterday.

Also I know that crtl + f5 does clear the cache. Ctrl + r does not work. I tested in Firefox 3.5.

Third thing that I just remembered. We disabled caching of .html files. Right now the only things that will get cached are jpgs .css and possibly java script depending on how you include it on your website.

For croc and Yevette. I suspended a little over 1000 phpbb bulletin boards that were getting spammed this week and a little over 300 gallery2's. You guys just dont notice those because that particular system works so well :)

Croc Hunter

9-11-09, 12:56 PM

....Cgi files (scripting language files like php) are executed on what we call the cgi boxes. These servers don't have caching enabled and the way you are routed to these boxes depends on if your page contains any php,perl,ruby,etc. Static files are served from another server..... Is Ruby supported here now? That would be sweet. Rails has awesome potential. Here I was trying to reduce my drain on Powwebs resources by using a combination of dynamic & static content, I didn't realize resources were spent deciphering which is which for EVERY request visitors make. Put me in one box that can handle both anyday. Trouble with being thrown into a server pool is someone has already or will pee in it.

[edit] That is reasuring thankyou Dbrazzell. Punish the abusers not the good guys.

YvetteKuhns

9-11-09, 01:27 PM

Trouble with being thrown into a server pool is someone has already or will pee in it.

You said it!

I suspended a little over 1000 phpbb bulletin boards that were getting spammed this week and a little over 300 gallery2's.

I believe it. I always complain about those particular open source scripts. Many have not been updated by customers, especially if installed using Install Central. If web hosts want to offer automated installations, they should be sure to offer current, stable versions.

Is Ruby supported here now? That would be sweet.

The new wave of customers won't even know what that is while some of us have to experiment on other web hosts! It wouldn't hurt to make it available here but it isn't a priority for PowWeb. They would sooner update the scripts in Install Central since they are used more often! ;)

Croc Hunter

9-11-09, 01:45 PM

Don't even start me on IC versions, especially PHP related.

YvetteKuhns

9-11-09, 02:47 PM

Yeah, we did that in another thread. We kinda got off the topic. Sorry.

YvetteKuhns

9-11-09, 03:36 PM

I made minor changes to Google AdSense on one html page to see how it would look. It works fine locally but the cache problem won't show the changes on the server. I tried Ctrl F5 and it didn't work. I had to refresh after a few minutes to see the changes.

The problem is affecting Google as expected. It doesn't recognize updates to pages. People who submit sitemap.xml or other files to Google will have to be sure changes appear before updating things in Google Webmaster Tools. I feel sorry for the people using the site builders! They will probably blame themselves or the site building tools instead of the cache.

Dbrazzell

9-11-09, 05:14 PM

Good point Yvette. I didn't consider xml files. But those will get cached by the system.

The ruby interpreter is installed on your accounts. No rails though. Its pretty bare bones and I honestly dont know what you could use it for. I had a conversation with a few people and we do want to host a ruby on rails environment on our platform. If its even technically possible or will ever be implemented no one knows. Even if its feasible its a long way off.

Ive seen a few customers make use of python on our servers. It works fine.

Yukino

9-11-09, 06:17 PM

control + f5 doesn't work for me either unfortunately :(

i'm looking forward to knowing when the post goes up saying the support team can disable it.

PeterPan

9-12-09, 08:27 AM

I have same issue

I upload CSS - No changes in browser - If I download the file via FTP - I see the updated / new file...

i go into the CSS directory on the FTp & DELETE it (no longer have css directory)..

But i go to the browser & the Css directory / file is still there (& yes, I did refresh etc& cleared cache etc...)

YvetteKuhns

9-12-09, 09:03 AM

JavaScript is also a problem.

Yukino

9-12-09, 01:07 PM

i have one page that it's taken over a day and no change. : /

Dbrazzell

9-14-09, 12:33 PM

Can I have you try and add the following to your .htaccess

<Files *>
Header set Cache-Control: "private, pre-check=0, post-check=0, max-age=0"
Header set Expires: 0
Header set Pragma: no-cache
</Files>

After a little testing this morning this appears to work.

Yukino

9-14-09, 01:59 PM

yup i will try that when i get home. is this a permanent edit or is this the thing that i have to add/delete each time?
any word on if they have released the tool to disable this yet?

Dbrazzell

9-14-09, 02:46 PM

Yukino

9-14-09, 06:09 PM

You can leave it in permanently if you like. It disables the caching completely. If at some point you actually want the caching enabled you can turn it on.

The tool that's going to be released soon essentially creates an .htaccess file in your account if you don't already have one. Or if you do, it appends this to the end of it.

The tool just gives the support team an easier way of enabling/disabling caching for a customer, instead of editing the file by hand.

if this works. i will bow down to u. ^_^ ty for posting it. i will be testing it soon.

Yukino

9-15-09, 03:51 PM

You can leave it in permanently if you like. It disables the caching completely. If at some point you actually want the caching enabled you can turn it on.

The tool that's going to be released soon essentially creates an .htaccess file in your account if you don't already have one. Or if you do, it appends this to the end of it.

The tool just gives the support team an easier way of enabling/disabling caching for a customer, instead of editing the file by hand.

i'm sorry, for the silly question but i have never actually edited this before, do i do this in the OPS manager?

i went into the OPS, .htaccess, direct editor and selected the root directoy and added that.... is that correct?