+shunra Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 (edited) Why does GCJY7B show up in my PQs, which is limited to active caches, but when I click on the link, it tells me it isn't approved yet? Edited July 15, 2004 by Shunra Link to comment
+Marky Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 (edited) Why does GCJY7B show up in my PQs, which is limited to active caches, but when I click on the link, it tells me it isn't approved yet? I was going to ask the same thing. I have a query that only returns active caches that haven't been found yet and it had GCJZG4 when I ran it as a search, but when I click on it, it says it has not been approved yet. It sounds like some bug has creeped into the pocket query code. "Hey Signal! Look, a bug. It looks yummy." --Marky Edited July 15, 2004 by Marky Link to comment
+Nappy10 Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 No...its not in the PQ code. It happens on a reqular zip code search too. There must have been something that changed in the last day. Do a search for zip: 59405 and go to page 3. The "New" GCK029 cant be viewed either. Check out this thread: Is this normal? Link to comment
+Marky Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 I ran a regular "filter finds" search and the cache didn't show up, so it looks like it's a bug in the PQ code. Maybe it's a feature to let premium members know of caches in advance. --Marky Link to comment
+Marky Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 No...its not in the PQ code. It happens on a reqular zip code search too. There must have been something that changed in the last day. Do a search for zip: 59405 and go to page 3. The "New" GCK029 cant be viewed either. Yeah, your right, it's not just a PQ thing. --Marky Link to comment
Jeremy Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 The pocket queries are actually correct, while the web site is not. There is an apparent issue with the pages getting regenerated after they are approved on the web site. I'll look further into this. Link to comment
+planetrobert Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 Darn I wish I could get a PQ of unapproved caches, that would be cool, FTF!!!! Link to comment
+Nazgul Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 I wandered into the forum wondering about the same problem, having seen the same cache Marky had in one of my PQs. Nice to see te answer already waiting for me. (Meanwhile, while we're posting here and thinking that we know right around where it will be anyway, Winini or workerofwood are out going for the FTF on it. ) Link to comment
Jeremy Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 Well, turns out the problem occured this morning when I rebooted the PQ generator. The caches ended up not being rebuilt after they were updated. I'll be running through the logs to make sure they do get updated. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. Link to comment
+Nazgul Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 (edited) That's odd... At about 1300hrs PDT I got a server error message (too busy or something like that) then after hitting 'refresh' in my browser about 2 minutes after that, the page for GCJZG4 showed up as if it had been approved, with coords, description and all that. Now when I try to bring it up again, it's back to "Sorry, you cannot view this cache listing until it has been approved." (edit for typo) Edited July 15, 2004 by Team Nazgul Link to comment
+shunra Posted July 15, 2004 Author Share Posted July 15, 2004 I wandered into the forum wondering about the same problem, having seen the same cache Marky had in one of my PQs. Nice to see te answer already waiting for me. (Meanwhile, while we're posting here and thinking that we know right around where it will be anyway, Winini or workerofwood are out going for the FTF on it. ) What do you mean you think you know where it is? It's here in Washington, and Workerofwood is in California... Link to comment
Jeremy Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 I updated it when I saw your message. For a short time this afternoon I was trying out a switch from file based listing to direct database queries. After the database had a fit I went back to file based. Link to comment
+Nazgul Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 What do you mean you think you know where it is? It's here in Washington, and Workerofwood is in California... You used in GCJY7B your example at the start of the thread. Mark responded saying he saw the same thing for GCJZG4. I chimed in and said I had noticed the same thing that Marky did with GCJZG4. And thanks to Jeremy for quickly "workin' on it" as always. Why don't I ever get such good customer service when I'm actually paying for it??? Link to comment
Jeremy Posted July 15, 2004 Share Posted July 15, 2004 I'm going to rebuild a fresh copy of all the cache listings. It's due anyway. Hopefully soon we'll be querying from a secondary read only database, which should speed up queries and have more updated info. Link to comment
+geo-jedi Posted August 17, 2004 Share Posted August 17, 2004 While attempting to reconcile my finds, it seems that my list of logs has one fewer cache. The missing one is GC2221 which has the "Error has occured [sic] because cache is not yet approved." Is this the same problem as discussed in this thread, or is someone trying to revive an old cache? Thanks, Team Geo-Jedi p.s. after this long awaited reconciliation, please delay adding archived caches to PQs for at least another several months Link to comment
Recommended Posts