| Redisplay Messages: Compact | Brief | All | Full Show Messages: All | Without Replies |
| Author: | hpoort  | | Posted: | Feb 8, 2024 06:40 | | Subject: | Re: Potato Servers | | Viewed: | 43 times | | Topic: | General | |
|
| In General, PupKiwi writes:
| | When will Bricklink update its servers?
It seems like they are incredibly outdated because of daily maintenance that
lasts too long, as well as the designer program orders breaking the website as
well.
I am struggling to do any order processing because of this.
|
Daily maintenance does not have to do anything with the state of their servers.
It is part of Bricklink's database design that it clusters all statistical
operations into a single daily batch so as to guarantee consistency and not interrupt
daily operations. This is by design, not by outdated servers.
As Russell has written in a recent post, the peak for the BDP far outweighed
their already very high expectancy and planning for much increased bandwidth.
AFAIK, updating their servers is one of the things that Bricklink has done during
the years.
|
|
| Author: | hpoort | | Posted: | Feb 6, 2024 05:38 | | Subject: | Re: View Previous Orders | | Viewed: | 37 times | | Topic: | Buying | |
|
| In Buying, illswerve2 writes:
| | Is there a reason why I can not see my past orders in the orders link under purchases
?
How can I view my previous orders ?
|
The reason is: more than 6 month old orders are purged from the system --
as Bricklink does not have a legal reason to keep these personal data for longer
and for no other purpose than to maintain the historic price list and any disputed
order (those are kept indefinitely).
For financial reporting purposes, the headers and financial totals of all your
orders are available for an unspecified (very long) time at https://www.bricklink.com/orderExcel.asp?orderType=placed
If you still need more details, refer to your personal e-mail archive outside
Bricklink.
|
|
| Author: | hpoort | | Posted: | Feb 4, 2024 01:41 | | Subject: | Re: Plate Variations | | Viewed: | 34 times | | Topic: | Catalog Identification | |
|
| In Catalog Identification, FarmerTed1971 writes:
| | Hi all,
I am in the process of constructing older space sets and just in general Lego
from the 80s-90s. It would be really helpful if someone could tell me what year
Lego changed the underside of the plates to have the little circles in between
the studs not filled in. Specifically, I'd like to know when they did so
for part #4865 Panel 1x2x1 https://www.bricklink.com/catalogItemInv.asp?S=6812-1
as I am trying to complete the Grid Trekkor and I care about having the specific
pieces from the era. Please message if you have any info, thanks. 
|
AFAIK, the difference between hollow and solid bottom pins can not be tied to
specific years.
Have a look at https://www.leggodt.nl to see what is known about similar changes.
|
|
| Author: | hpoort | | Posted: | Feb 4, 2024 01:37 | | Subject: | Re: Strange Plate from the 60's? | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Catalog Identification | |
|
| In Catalog Identification, FarmerTed1971 writes:
| | Hi again all,
I was recently at my local Bricks and Minifigs when I pulled two 2x4 plates in
light gray from the bulk parts bin. The strange thing is, these have a different
font on the studs and are the patent pending versions as it says so on the bottom.
Can someone tell me what era these are from and what sets they came in?
Also, sorry for the really crappy photo.
Thanks
|
Have a look at this site: https://www.leggodt.nl
All about marks from different eras.
|
|
| Author: | hpoort | | Posted: | Feb 1, 2024 07:16 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - January 31 | | Viewed: | 49 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, Teup writes:
| | In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | We have a meeting on Monday (Feb 5) with our catalog admins to go through the
rest of the list and make final decisions. After that meeting, a schedule will
be made for the merges. Due to the large number of minifigure heads in the catalog,
the merge process is likely to not be complete until the end of May.
|
.....
What a mess. Why does Bricklink never keep its own promises? Russell please....
don't do it like this, this is chaos. I have been a seller here for a very
long time, I have paid thousands of dollars to you guys and I really don't
want to close shop but you're really forcing my hand here. I simply cannot
manage my inventory if changes are randomly happening on random days over a course
of MONTHS.
The change was scheduled for 1 Feb. We sent out a newsletter to our customers
about the date. Then it was 15 Feb. That's ok, at least more time to prepare.
I've spent a full day writing software to handle the transition form old
to new item IDs. But now it turns out that the changes are going to be all over
the place between basically today and MAY. And even THAT is not
sure...?
Why wasn't it possible to simply set a date, announce it, and stick to that
plan? Why can't Bricklink go offline for maintenance on the set date of 15
Feb and come back up with the changes in place? It's a real shame that Bricklink
really doesn't seem to take these changes seriously and try to understand
the implications.... Does it really take that long to come up with new numbers?
And if it does, can you at least update them all at once by then, and announce
it properly?
|
I think what Russell said before was that he is going to do each mutation manually
through the user interface on their back end. This to ensure that all change
logs are filled normally, same as with any change. Doing it the other way - by
a bulk update directly in their database - they seem to lack the ability to keep
all logs updated as well.
|
|
| Author: | hpoort | | Posted: | Jan 29, 2024 10:20 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - January 26 | | Viewed: | 48 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, cartman1 writes:
| | In Catalog, Stellar writes:
| | In Catalog, hpoort writes:
|
|
| | | | | | Can anyone point me to a post of admin Russell where he has acknowledged that
any site enhancement regarding variants is actually taken up? (Meaning the coding,
not the database contents). In my mind he has never responded to any of the suggestions
to enhance the handling of variants.
|
This post?
https://www.bricklink.com/message.asp?ID=1450855
|
|
Yeah, that's the only one I've seen that comes close. At least they have
given it a name internally, although 'Checkbox solution' does not inspire
too much confidence yet.
|
|
| Author: | hpoort | | Posted: | Jan 29, 2024 09:18 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - January 26 | | Viewed: | 59 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, SylvainLS writes:
| | In Catalog, jennnifer writes:
|
[...]
| |
Hmm 🤔, I’m wondering how Studio, or even a ‘simple’ Wanted List for a MOC, could
work with an umbrella system. Should BL propose to change the variants to cheaper
ones / more recent ones? How to know if they (functionally) work in the build?
|
How about to split the database field 'item number' into two subfields,
at every place where a part type is described:
(1) the base part number
(2) a set of which variants are acceptable
Ad (1): this would be the unbrella entry
Ad (2):
For stock inventories ('items for sale' : which variants could this be
/ are not distinguished (= by default: all)
For set inventories: which variants were found during the lifespan of this set
(= by default: the latest)
For wanted lists ('wanted items': which variants would you accept (=
by default: all)
In Studio: which variant to show (by default: the latest) + which variants would
work (= by default: all)
|
|
| Author: | hpoort | | Posted: | Jan 29, 2024 08:35 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - January 26 | | Viewed: | 50 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, jennnifer writes:
| | In Catalog, yorbrick writes:
| | | | You’re arguing for a real umbrella system while Yorbrick was answering BUC who’s
arguing for using a supplementary Undetermined entry “in the meantime.”
|
Indeed, the suggestion I was replying to clearly suggests that no new coding
would be needed, and so would be using the existing undetermined parts method.
But the "checkbox solution" Russell references would require time
and new coding. Using "undetermined type" utilizes an existing
method that would be a quick and easy fix to this so-called problem.
|
I'm going to jump in here and say that the site's current 'undetermined
type' system is not a good solution overall. (Even in the meantime.)
Our set inventories need to have the correct variant listed as using undetermined
parts there would water down our info. Therefore, the undetermined parts would
all be orphaned...ie not showing in the Known Colors or Appears In lists. This
means people creating wanted lists or parting out sets would have to know to
go and switch to the undetermined listing if they did not care to shop for or
list that specific element.
Without the 'umbrella' coding, it would create a lot of duplication and
confusion in the Marketplace.
Thanks,
~Jen
|
So if I conclude correctly, the only proper way forward is to START with the
'umbrella coding' - that have been asked for since many years.
Can anyone point me to a post of admin Russell where he has acknowledged that
any site enhancement regarding variants is actually taken up? (Meaning the coding,
not the database contents). In my mind he has never responded to any of the suggestions
to enhance the handling of variants.
|
|
| Author: | hpoort | | Posted: | Jan 26, 2024 12:33 | | Subject: | Re: Variants Thread - January 26 | | Viewed: | 59 times | | Topic: | Catalog | |
|
| In Catalog, StormChaser writes:
| | In Catalog, Admin_Russell writes:
| | My initial post on this subject earlier this month has garnered almost 700 replies,
|
I would like an official response on why the website is choosing not to implement
the suggestion many have recommended for years. Many of us would like
to see a redesign of basic catalog functionality which allows everyone to be
served equally.
Selectable variants is a long-term solution which demonstrates there is a vision
for the future of this website and a care for all members. What are the difficulties
with implementing a visionary solution? Not enough money? Not enough staff?
Not enough vision at the top?
Looking forward to a quality response to this question which many of us have
asked.
|
+1
Exactly what I was trying to convey with my reply to the original post and the
suggestions to this end throughout the years.
|
|
Next Page: 5 More | 10 More | 25 More | 50 More | 100 More
|
|
Netherlands, Groningen
