Jump to content

Enhancement request: Delete duplicate log if <1 minute


the Seagnoid

Recommended Posts

Wasn't quite sure where to place this, under android and iphone didn't seem to quite fit.

 

There are a growing number of cachers by cellphone out there, and sometimes their caching application does not appear to get a timely reply when performing an online log on the phone, so that they resend the log. This results in a resend and two (or more) identical logs being posted. This is not a problem easily fixed at the application end, as it related to problems with congestion, etc. This also appears to happen with more than just one geocaching application.

Could we have the server ignore a second log for a cache logged by the same person if the second log is the same log type and sent within a minute of the earlier log? That does require that Groundspeak store the time stamp along with the date stamp. One minute should be sufficient to solve this problem without affecting legitimate second logs.

 

In New Zealand (as in most of the world) we do not have moving caches, so every instance of doubled found logs are screws around with our cache statistics.

 

Thanks,

Tom

Link to comment

:laughing:

The MC comes first.

 

I'd think if this was a real problem for folks this woulda been "fixed" some time ago.

- Isn't it more a phone/wireless provider problem, than a Groundspeak issue?

 

Maybe after the moving caches, caches that replace benchmarks in Countries other than the US, and recycled events finally go bye-bye, double logging altogether could get nixed.

Link to comment
Hey Groundspeak! This is obviously a problem!
Or at least, a number of people think it's a problem.

 

Personally, I think it would be useful to have a pop-up "Are you sure?" warning when posting another Find for a cache you've already found, or any Find for a cache you own. And I think it would be useful to simply block/delete duplicate logs (same cache, same date, same log type, and same text).

 

But it should remain possible to post multiple Find/Attended logs.

Link to comment

You know we are talking about the Groundspeak API don't you? Adding a popup means Groundspeak have to modify the API to return an already found status, and EVERY APPLICATION out there has to be modified to recognise it.

 

Modifying the API to simply discard a duplicate log is easier, especially as a duplicate log is obviously unintentional.

 

The API can return that you have found this cache, but that is a separate request from the logging process. Not all logs are found logs, any log type sent from a cellphone could be duplicated.

Link to comment

Modifying the API to simply discard a duplicate log is easier, especially as a duplicate log is obviously unintentional.

 

Logs of the same type within less than a minute are not necessarily duplicate logs that happen by mistake.

Someone who logs a longer story with more than 2 parts will end up with at least 2 notes. It would be annoying to have these logs deleted

because you and a few others have an issue with some duplicate logs.

Link to comment

Logs of the same type within less than a minute are not necessarily duplicate logs that happen by mistake.

Someone who logs a longer story with more than 2 parts will end up with at least 2 notes. It would be annoying to have these logs deleted

because you and a few others have an issue with some duplicate logs.

 

A long log with two parts logged as a find would result in a distorted find count. The second should be a write note. However you do have a valid point for long write note or DNF logs. I challenge anyone to write a log that long on a cellphone!

Link to comment

Logs of the same type within less than a minute are not necessarily duplicate logs that happen by mistake.

Someone who logs a longer story with more than 2 parts will end up with at least 2 notes. It would be annoying to have these logs deleted

because you and a few others have an issue with some duplicate logs.

 

A long log with two parts logged as a find would result in a distorted find count. The second should be a write note. However you do have a valid point for long write note or DNF logs. I challenge anyone to write a log that long on a cellphone!

 

I wrote with more than two parts - so this needs to be done as one found it log and at least two notes which means that you end up with two logs of the same type within a short period of time, i.e. the situation in which you suggested to delete one of the logs. The API system does not only get logs from cellphones.

Link to comment
You know we are talking about the Groundspeak API don't you?
Yes. But the issue of duplicate logs posted via the API is related to the issue of duplicate logs posted via the web site, and is related to the issue of multiple Find logs (which may or may not be intentional/acceptable, depending on the context).

 

And I think that truly duplicate logs (same date, same type, came content) can be discarded safely. But if anything is different (date, type, or content), then it isn't a duplicate and should be handled with more care (e.g., a pop-up warning if logging via the web site).

Link to comment
You know we are talking about the Groundspeak API don't you?
Yes. But the issue of duplicate logs posted via the API is related to the issue of duplicate logs posted via the web site, and is related to the issue of multiple Find logs (which may or may not be intentional/acceptable, depending on the context).

 

And I think that truly duplicate logs (same date, same type, came content) can be discarded safely. But if anything is different (date, type, or content), then it isn't a duplicate and should be handled with more care (e.g., a pop-up warning if logging via the web site).

(emphasis added)

 

+1

 

Why is this so difficult to understand? There is absolutely no benefit to an exactly duplicated log (except to inflate the loggers "Found It" count). You want to log the same cache (or event) twice? Fine! use different words. Even adding a period (".") will make the content different.

 

When a device re-tries a log, because of a timeout, it will send the exact same data. This can be safely ignored - in fact, it should be ignored, to protect the integrity of the database. And, if handled on the backend (i.e. in the API), then the various front-ends - phone apps, 3rd party apps, even the website, do not have to be modified.

Link to comment

As somebody who often has to use project-gc.com's "Find bad logs" feature to locate duplicate finds on my caches and delete them, which takes my time and sometimes causes bad feeling on both sides - I fully support this simple and logical suggestion.

 

On some of my newbie-friendly series and people using phones, every third or fourth visitor double-logs or sometimes triple or even more (I accept it's accidental, and they don't generally know about it). It's very irritating to us COs who like to keep things right and proper when a code fix would solve it entirely.

 

Please make this change to the API.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...