Signatures Feature Revised

[China J]

Was curious if possible to revise the signature option so that when a user creates a signature it is added to his future posts and not posts prior to the signature creation? Or maybe an admin option to allow either or case?

Thanks

[.Ryan]

So basically when you update your signature it only shows the updated one on future posts? So yours has the Moola image now, and you change it to a flag image, it only updates with the flag on new posts.

See I wouldn't like this because if links change or you wanted to update it I want the updated version to appear everywhere I've posted. So when someone Google's something from a year ago and they look at the post, they see my two companies links update, not an old one.

[Michael]

Yikes, each post would have to have a signature content field assigned to it, which could get pretty big. Either that or a new table storing all prior signatures to join to the posts table. Either way it's probably too resource intensive to be practical.

[Cybertimber2009]

^ Seconded. Too impractical with databases and such. And also, most people with image signatures, will change the image link and then delete the old signature. Then, you have a bunch of posts with a nice red x signature.

But, what you're reason for the request? Maybe with knowing why you'd like it might help see if its worth the effort?

[China J]

Sorry I wasn't more clear on the subject. I was more less thinking in this aspect:

New user joins up
New user has 50 posts/replies since joining
New user now decides to create a signature
New user sig is now applied to future posts only
New user old posts will not reflect a signature.
_________________________________________

Only future posts will signatures be applied to and not previous posts
_________________________________________

User decides to change signature
User signature changes for all posts that signature is currently in (same as it is now)
Users 50 posts/replies prior to the signature creation will not reflect a signature.
_________________________________________

I hope that clearly explains it easier? My main focus is if they decided to make 50 posts with out a chosen signature then those posts shouldn't carry a signature and only future posts should whenever they decided to create a signature. If the member does create a signature at any point or time and later decided to change that signature then only posts that have a signature in it will be affected as currently it is now based on the current method. Sorry I didn't explain it clearly before.

The idea behind this is to save on serving pages/bandwidth by spiders, guests and members. Trust me it makes a big difference as I just had to delete all signatures from a board that's not active right now except by spiders and guests. Removing the signatures via sql query cut my bandwidth by almost 40% - On one occassion I had almost 9gb of bandwidth use in one day out of the blue like I said for a non active site (bfarbers old site **url not disclosed**)

[henke37]

Given that there is allredy a db field for this, it should be easy.

[sunrisecc]

I disagree. The signature should be treated just as the avatar field. If you change an avatar, then all posts change. I do not want history kept on the avatar field nor the signature field.

The only benefit would be to the hard drive manufacturers and shared hosting providers. :lol:

[China J]

I disagree. The signature should be treated just as the avatar field. If you change an avatar, then all posts change. I do not want history kept on the avatar field nor the signature field.

The only benefit would be to the hard drive manufacturers and shared hosting providers. :lol:

Well no one is speaking about the Avatar and as I mentioned in my post an "Option" for all posts or only post immediately after signature creation. What do you mean keeping history? This info is already in the database. The benefit would be faster loading pages in some areas of your site.

[sunrisecc]

There are two ways to keep the info.

The first is to create a file which would keep the history by date for example. This is overhead that I believe is not required. You have ignored comments about the signatures where images are allowed.

The second method is to keep the signature within each post. This is even worse than the first method. The database would grow quickly with redundant information.

You are correct that there is now exactly one field to store the signature. However, of one needs to see a signature at any point in time in the past, one has to keep a history. An example of history is the way name changes are currently kept.

In addition, if I as admin, have to edit a signature of any member, I want it reflected immediately and not have to rebuild any posts under method two.

My analogy to the avatar is correct. Only your current avatar is kept.

[China J]

There are two ways to keep the info.

The first is to create a file which would keep the history by date for example. This is overhead that I believe is not required. You have ignored comments about the signatures where images are allowed.

The second method is to keep the signature within each post. This is even worse than the first method. The database would grow quickly with redundant information.

You are correct that there is now exactly one field to store the signature. However, of one needs to see a signature at any point in time in the past, one has to keep a history. An example of history is the way name changes are currently kept.

In addition, if I as admin, have to edit a signature of any member, I want it reflected immediately and not have to rebuild any posts under method two.

My analogy to the avatar is correct. Only your current avatar is kept.

I have no idea how you came about those theories. I'm not a programmer and far from a wizard, but I think you are misinterpreting what I am proposing. I am not looking to keep a history on signature changes and also you don't need to create a file as signatures are loaded currently from a php file and not the database.

The method I mention will not affect the database far as speed and etc. It would require just one additional field ie. sig_time which would have no effect on the database as signatures are loaded in real time and are not stored in posts in the database. They are added in real time before even showing a post which I believe is func_topic_threaded and func_topic_linear in the sources/lib or topic.

As I believe it will not affect database load = queries load time = mysql work, but will affect page loading in a positive manner (since less images to load) and will affect bandwidth positive too (since again less images to serve)

In the database only one field for signature in members_extra and php delivers this signature to the post end for each member then it sends to the template bit render row. And if you had to edit a members signature as an admin it wouldn't be any different than it is now.

Again, I'm not an expert and maybe someone more experienced can comment or ellaborate on my findings?