Pocket Queries won't run

[+Yossarian]

I think the whole "server overloaded" theory is bunk. How is it that new queries run instantly?? If they can run instantly then that server has spare cycles that could be used to address any backlog of PQ's.

 

My understanding is that new queries go to the front of the queue, thereby delaying all the non-new ones. What I'd like to know is what exactly determines where a non-new query falls in the queue? When it was last run? How often it is scheduled to run? How old it is? Or some combination of the above?

[+markandsandy]

I think the whole "server overloaded" theory is bunk. How is it that new queries run instantly?? If they can run instantly then that server has spare cycles that could be used to address any backlog of PQ's.

 

My understanding is that new queries go to the front of the queue, thereby delaying all the non-new ones. What I'd like to know is what exactly determines where a non-new query falls in the queue? When it was last run? How often it is scheduled to run? How old it is? Or some combination of the above?

 

From the bottom of the My Pocket Queries page:

The order they run is based on the last time the query ran last. Priority goes to new queries first, and the others run in the order of the oldest generated. So if you have a query run once a week it will arrive on that day much faster than someone who runs the query every day. It is recommended that you stagger your queries. Or even better, create new queries only when you need them.

[+TotemLake]

I can't help but wonder if all you folks don't realize you have caught yourselves into a loop of sorts. Do you really think because you submitted a new PQ that you now have the priority when some other user has just submitted a PQ behind you and another behind them and another ad naseum?

 

But now the "new" PQs aren't running as quick as you like, you "delete" the PQ to run it again.... bunches of you.

 

Give it a break guys. Your actions are now causing your pain. It goes back to the simple statement... if it hurts, stop doing it.

[+welch]

Brand new pocket queries that have never been run will have priority over everything.

An existing pocket query that hasn't run for a month will have priority over an existing pocket query that hasn't run for a week.

A single pocket query that is scheduled to run every day has the lowest priority in the queue.

That is an explanation of how things were designed to work. Brand new PQ's were NOT showing up instantly as we have come to expect. That is a problem, and just telling us not to "worry" (Raine) is unacceptable. I don't know if something was broke, or if the system was just overloaded by sheer volume. I now have less confidence in the system than I did previously. I only use a very small fraction of my total allotment. Some users obviously are maxing out their allotment. You have to restore my confidence, or I am going to start generating a whole lot more just in case PQ's. If my reaction is typical, this is going to get worse.

Very much agree.

The new pocket queries were not 'instant' but at least fairly fast and often less than an hour. Keeping old slightly out of date PQ doesn't make much sense when I can get a current one in a few minutes. But if the system is taking significantly longer (for whatever unexplained reason) then I have to start planning differently. If I can't expect a new one in at least a few hours, do I start running the PQ I plan on using everyday for a week before its needed? Hoping that at least one makes it?

[+welch]

I can't help but wonder if all you folks don't realize you have caught yourselves into a loop of sorts. Do you really think because you submitted a new PQ that you now have the priority when some other user has just submitted a PQ behind you and another behind them and another ad naseum?

 

But now the "new" PQs aren't running as quick as you like, you "delete" the PQ to run it again.... bunches of you.

 

Give it a break guys. Your actions are now causing your pain. It goes back to the simple statement... if it hurts, stop doing it.

1. Has there been an offical statement explaining the cause? Statement that the cause was fixed? A promise to look into the issue more?

 

2. No idea what other people were doing, but I did not create and delete a bunch of PQs.

I set 3 brand new PQ to run about 9am Friday morning, I know it was correct as I previewed to verify. It had not reached email by noon or 4 pm, and at 7-8 pm checked gc.com and found they had not run. I didn't want to make the 2-3hour drive and set up in the dark, so I decided to leave early Saturday morning instead. Edited them to add Saturday, thinking either they might finally run in the four hours left on Friday, or early Saturday morning. On saturday they had not arrived by 6am, 7am, 8am. Dumped some loc files on the gps and OMG printed some paper with limited info about part of the caches and left about 830am (pq still hadn't run at 830). Those PQ finally did show up in email a little before 4pm.

So Friday after 14 (or is 15 since I'm in Central time?) hours and didn't run.

Saturday about 16 hours to run.

But I 'don't worry' because eventally I'll get them

[+TotemLake]

[1. Has there been an offical statement explaining the cause? Statement that the cause was fixed? A promise to look into the issue more?

 

2. No idea what other people were doing, but I did not create and delete a bunch of PQs.

I set 3 brand new PQ to run about 9am Friday morning, I know it was correct as I previewed to verify. It had not reached email by noon or 4 pm, and at 7-8 pm checked gc.com and found they had not run. I didn't want to make the 2-3hour drive and set up in the dark, so I decided to leave early Saturday morning instead. Edited them to add Saturday, thinking either they might finally run in the four hours left on Friday, or early Saturday morning. On saturday they had not arrived by 6am, 7am, 8am. Dumped some loc files on the gps and OMG printed some paper with limited info about part of the caches and left about 830am (pq still hadn't run at 830). Those PQ finally did show up in email a little before 4pm.

So Friday after 14 (or is 15 since I'm in Central time?) hours and didn't run.

Saturday about 16 hours to run.

But I 'don't worry' because eventally I'll get them

In my mind's eye as an administrator, if I look at the server and see normal operations, there's nothing to comment on. The problem I see with everybody deleting PQs and recreating them, is they are also deleting the mystery cause and merely putting new PQs into the que. Again, there becomes nothing to comment on. Can't see it, can't find it, can't fix it.

 

Want a solution? Do like you did, keep the PQ in place and allow an investigation to happen. Sometimes these things are obscure enough they take time to pick apart.

 

It seems to me the problem happened just before a mega event occurred and the system got swamped and somehow glitched out.

Edited October 18, 2008 by TotemLake

[+fo2gra4]

In my mind's eye as an administrator, if I look at the server and see normal operations, there's nothing to comment on. The problem I see with everybody deleting PQs and recreating them, is they are also deleting the mystery cause and merely putting new PQs into the que. Again, there becomes nothing to comment on. Can't see it, can't find it, can't fix it.

 

Want a solution? Do like you did, keep the PQ in place and allow an investigation to happen. Sometimes these things are obscure enough they take time to pick apart.

 

It seems to me the problem happened just before a mega event occurred and the system got swamped and somehow glitched out.

 

The way you are talking it sounds like you are the server administrator for Groundspeak. So is this a "Official Response" in dealing with the PQ issue. And if this is an "Official Response" can you say for sure that the deleting and resubmitting of PQ's is what caused this issue???

 

If this is an "Official Response" why is it not addressed that way? I also notice that you do not have "Groundspeak Lackey" or anything else stating you work for Groundspeak. The only thing I notice is that you are a "Premium Member".

 

If this is not an "Official Response" from Groundspeak, please retrack your statement about being an Administator on the Server.

 

Most of us are still waiting for an "Official Response" from Groundspeak! Not just some other geocachers opinion.

[+Parabola]

So far my PQ's run well. I haven't hade any of the problems spoke of here. I usually run two to three PQ's every 3 to 5 days. I just click on the day I want them which is usually that day. And for the most part I've got them within a few minitues.

 

I have in the past had a couple of problems but this has been near a year ago. That's when I tried the copy PQ method and it worked almost instantly. That isn't something I have to do on a regular basis.

 

I can understand how frustrating this could be for a cacher getting ready to head out the door. I have to wonder if TotemLake and the PQ server is getting swampped by a lot of people submitting then not getting then resubmitting and so on. Thus swapping the PQ generator.

[+Tequila]

I have a PQ that runs daily to get all the new caches within 40 km of my area. It is always scheduled to run.

 

The Friday version did not run until 2300 hrs while the Saturday version ran at 1400 hrs.

 

Over the last two weeks there have been times when it didn't even run.

 

It is all over the map.

[+GeoJunkie]

I have a PQ that runs daily to get all the new caches within 40 km of my area. It is always scheduled to run.

 

The Friday version did not run until 2300 hrs while the Saturday version ran at 1400 hrs.

 

Over the last two weeks there have been times when it didn't even run.

 

It is all over the map.

 

That's normal behavior for a daily query. If you insist on having one run every day, it is given the lowest possible priority, and it doesn't reenter the queue until 24 hours after the last run. I have one scheduled daily, too, but I accept that it won't necessarily run every day on particularly busy days.

 

That's normal, but the behavior last week - running daily queries while leaving new ones alone - was bad.

 

At this point, is there ANY chance of Groundspeak acknowledging there was a problem?

 

Also, BTW, this did roughly concur with a system release. Could the two be connected?

[+welch]

 

In my mind's eye as an administrator, if I look at the server and see normal operations, there's nothing to comment on. The problem I see with everybody deleting PQs and recreating them, is they are also deleting the mystery cause and merely putting new PQs into the que. Again, there becomes nothing to comment on. Can't see it, can't find it, can't fix it.

 

Want a solution? Do like you did, keep the PQ in place and allow an investigation to happen. Sometimes these things are obscure enough they take time to pick apart.

 

It seems to me the problem happened just before a mega event occurred and the system got swamped and somehow glitched out.

That is exactly what seems to be ticking so many off, there hasn't been the admission that anyone from Groundspeak is doing an investigation...or for that matter that yea there was some sort of problem

[+TotemLake]

In my mind's eye as an administrator, if I look at the server and see normal operations, there's nothing to comment on. The problem I see with everybody deleting PQs and recreating them, is they are also deleting the mystery cause and merely putting new PQs into the que. Again, there becomes nothing to comment on. Can't see it, can't find it, can't fix it.

 

Want a solution? Do like you did, keep the PQ in place and allow an investigation to happen. Sometimes these things are obscure enough they take time to pick apart.

 

It seems to me the problem happened just before a mega event occurred and the system got swamped and somehow glitched out.

 

The way you are talking it sounds like you are the server administrator for Groundspeak. So is this a "Official Response" in dealing with the PQ issue. And if this is an "Official Response" can you say for sure that the deleting and resubmitting of PQ's is what caused this issue???

 

If this is an "Official Response" why is it not addressed that way? I also notice that you do not have "Groundspeak Lackey" or anything else stating you work for Groundspeak. The only thing I notice is that you are a "Premium Member".

 

If this is not an "Official Response" from Groundspeak, please retrack your statement about being an Administator on the Server.

 

Most of us are still waiting for an "Official Response" from Groundspeak! Not just some other geocachers opinion.

That's a big jump in assumption based on a general statement.

 

Please point out another website that gives official statements on demand regarding server issues. You're lucky you get what you do at this site when it comes to keeping folks up to date. I suggest the arrogance gets notched back just a little bit.

 

 

In my mind's eye as an administrator, if I look at the server and see normal operations, there's nothing to comment on. The problem I see with everybody deleting PQs and recreating them, is they are also deleting the mystery cause and merely putting new PQs into the que. Again, there becomes nothing to comment on. Can't see it, can't find it, can't fix it.

 

Want a solution? Do like you did, keep the PQ in place and allow an investigation to happen. Sometimes these things are obscure enough they take time to pick apart.

 

It seems to me the problem happened just before a mega event occurred and the system got swamped and somehow glitched out.

That is exactly what seems to be ticking so many off, there hasn't been the admission that anyone from Groundspeak is doing an investigation...or for that matter that yea there was some sort of problem

 

It seems people forget how to help a tech to solve a problem. When you have an issue with a company computer, do you delete the file causing the problem or do you give admins a chance to look at it? It appears the deletions of PQs in this instance was a failure to think ahead and allow time. So if you're going to be ticked off, be that at yourself for shooting yourself in the foot. (in my examples, the "you" is a general term.)

[+Tequila]

I have a PQ that runs daily to get all the new caches within 40 km of my area. It is always scheduled to run.

 

The Friday version did not run until 2300 hrs while the Saturday version ran at 1400 hrs.

 

Over the last two weeks there have been times when it didn't even run.

 

It is all over the map.

 

That's normal behavior for a daily query. If you insist on having one run every day, it is given the lowest possible priority, and it doesn't reenter the queue until 24 hours after the last run. I have one scheduled daily, too, but I accept that it won't necessarily run every day on particularly busy days.

 

That's normal, but the behavior last week - running daily queries while leaving new ones alone - was bad.

 

At this point, is there ANY chance of Groundspeak acknowledging there was a problem?

 

Also, BTW, this did roughly concur with a system release. Could the two be connected?

 

Reread my post. My daily PQ ran 15 hours apart. The first run was several hours late from the usual 1700 run time. The next day it was 3 hours earlier than 1700.

 

I am merely suggesting that the algorithm, if there is one, is not exact.

[+Lydford Locators]

Our "My Finds" pocket query runs nice and fast, but it repeatedly comes back with no data within it!

 

Is this all part of the same problem or do we have a new one all of our own?

[+Tequila]

Our "My Finds" pocket query runs nice and fast, but it repeatedly comes back with no data within it!

 

Is this all part of the same problem or do we have a new one all of our own?

 

I ran the My Finds last Tuesday and it was fine. Ran quickly and all the data was there.

[+Parabola]

Not to "throw it in anyone's face" but I just ran the two PQ's I usually run on Sunday night and both of them after I checked the box where e-mailed in aobut 5 minitues. But I haven't had problems with them. Both of these PQ's have ran before and I use them weekly and one I sometimes use more than that.

 

I did have the other day one that took about a hour to reach me but then I wasn't in a hurry or nothing so I wasn't trying to get it right away.

[+Lydford Locators]

Our "My Finds" pocket query runs nice and fast, but it repeatedly comes back with no data within it!

 

Is this all part of the same problem or do we have a new one all of our own?

 

Haven't solved my problem, but it appears that the fault isn't with the pocket queries, it is with the Logicweave programme that I'm using.

[+DTHT]

It would still be nice regardless of all the opinions here that an "Official" statement be released by the Administrators and IT support of this board. I would think if it was simply a lot of backed up PQ's running that were bogging down the server it would be simple to state this again. It doesn't seem plausible that the server could be bogged down for this long of a time frame regardless of what anyone is doing in the area of deleting and recreating PQ's. If this is not the case I feel that an explanation is not only due but overdue, your membership deserves better!