Searching for the answer (search function)

[Dreaad]

So I uh recently used the search function to look for a users posts. Couple of questions.

First, why is there a limit of 100 posts?
Second, if there is a limit of 100 posts why have the "find posts before date xyz" option? When I used that to try go back to earlier posts it just came up with an error.

Not a big deal obviously, but there are some pretty damn large threads here on the codex (not complaining) so it would be kind of useful to be able to find things a bit easier.

Also as a side not is it possible to add a search function for the most fisted posts in a given thread? Might be a nice way to see where the popular opinion is swinging.

Inb4 someone tells me to use the search function to find an answer to these crucial questions.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

Taluntain.

 

[Jasede]

The search sucks now, that's all.

Maybe you could go Something Awful and offer a better premium search that actually works for $$$.

 

[Taluntain]

So I uh recently used the search function to look for a users posts. Couple of questions.

First, why is there a limit of 100 posts?
Second, if there is a limit of 100 posts why have the "find posts before date xyz" option? When I used that to try go back to earlier posts it just came up with an error.

Not a big deal obviously, but there are some pretty damn large threads here on the codex (not complaining) so it would be kind of useful to be able to find things a bit easier.

Also as a side not is it possible to add a search function for the most fisted posts in a given thread? Might be a nice way to see where the popular opinion is swinging.

Inb4 someone tells me to use the search function to find an answer to these crucial questions.

The limit is there because there has to be a limit set. It could be higher, sure, but given that people haven't been massively complaining about it being too low I assumed that it was high enough for most. Since search is one of the most resource-intensive processes on the server keeping it within normal boundaries helps to keep the resource usage lower too, though since we've got ES running and if it's limited to members only (I haven't checked, is it really?) it could probably be doubled easily enough. I expect the percentage of people who need more than 100 results for every search is REALLY low, however. Do you look at more than 10 pages worth of hits every time you google too?

List me the steps to reproduce your "find posts before date xyz" error.

Searching by relevance might already take most fisted into account, but I'm not sure. It would be a nice option to have, sure, but unless there's an XF addon for it already that also works with our ES that we could install, it's unlikely to happen until it comes with stock XF.

The search sucks now, that's all.

Maybe you could go Something Awful and offer a better premium search that actually works for $$$.

Do tell how the search sucks now vs. how it didn't before (when?).

 

[Infinitron]

There's only one reason to want to see more than 100 posts in search, and that's if you're using search to stalk somebody's post history.

There should probably be a way to view all of somebody's posts without invoking the search routines, if that's even possible.

 

[Taluntain]

There should probably be a way to view all of somebody's posts without invoking the search routines, if that's even possible.

I don't think so, at least every forum I've ever seen has used the search function for that. I expect you'd need a completely separate duplicate database for something like that. And just having a printout of someone's entire post history would be of little use in the majority of cases I expect.

 

[laclongquan]

In that case, click on that user's name. Click on information. Click on find all content of that user. Viola~

 

[Jasede]

You can only go through those 100 posts at a time.


Also you gotta be kidding, the search is just terrible, what more do you need? It sorts things what appears to be randomly and there seems to be no rhyme or reason to the relevancy of the search results. I really miss the old search where I could type in a term and it'd show me the relevant threads, no matter how old or new they were. And the interface is terrible, too. But that's probably XenForo.

 

[Raghar]

The limit is there because there has to be a limit set. It could be higher, sure, but given that people haven't been massively complaining about it being too low I assumed that it was high enough for most. Since search is one of the most resource-intensive processes on the server keeping it within normal boundaries helps to keep the resource usage lower too, though since we've got ES running and if it's limited to members only (I haven't checked, is it really?) it could probably be doubled easily enough. I expect the percentage of people who need more than 100 results for every search is REALLY low, however. Do you look at more than 10 pages worth of hits every time you google too?

When you search current thread, there is no option to select by most recent, or by relevance. It bit complicates finding racist post like "kill all Russians" by our Rusophobes, and look at who was drunk enough to brofist it.

 

[Taluntain]

In that case, click on that user's name. Click on information. Click on find all content of that user. Viola~

Which uses the search function, yes.

Also you gotta be kidding, the search is just terrible, what more do you need? It sorts things what appears to be randomly and there seems to be no rhyme or reason to the relevancy of the search results. I really miss the old search where I could type in a term and it'd show me the relevant threads, no matter how old or new they were. And the interface is terrible, too. But that's probably XenForo.

What I need is constructive feedback, "search sux" or "the search is just terrible" isn't that.

Like I've explained before, currently the DEFAULT results are displayed be relevance and posts from the last 365 days are given priority within that. Now whether you think that's good or bad is likely subjective, whereas I expect whoever coded the search for XF made an effort for it to be objective based on a number of parameters. One of which probably wasn't "Results according to how Jasede wants them.".

On the search page you have the OPTION to select whether you want to see the results ordered by most recent, most replies or relevance. So you have THREE options. If none of them work for you, then I honestly don't know what would. The only thing I could change within search that would affect the results you see is to change the default results output from recency weighted relevance to most recent - which would give you results the way you can see them already if you select the "most recent" ordering OPTION I mentioned above. There never was any other search results option on the Codex AFAIK.

When you search current thread, there is no option to select by most recent, or by relevance. It bit complicates finding racist post like "kill all Russians" by our Rusophobes, and look at who was drunk enough to brofist it.

Yes - searching within the thread is an exception to what I've written above because it defaults to recency weighted relevance without having an option for "most recent" as well. But on a thread level, I would think that recency weighted relevance would be the most useful option in more cases than "most recent". Having the "most recent" option as well wouldn't hurt, however. Sadly XF doesn't (yet) provide it.

 

[ghostdog]

Suggestions to improve search :

I would like the option to increase the number of results to at least 500.

I would like to be able to search:
-Message text only
-First post of topics only

I would like to be able to also sort those results by:
-Member
-Forum
-Post count

 

[Taluntain]

Eh, I'll let DU decide what the number of returned search results should be but serving 500 results for every search is complete overkill as far as I'm concerned. I'm quite convinced that for 99% of searches, nobody will look even at all the 100 results currently displayed.

I'll make a suggestion for the implementation of the rest.

 

[ghostdog]

Is it possible for the user to be able to adjust the number of results manually ? If so, just leave it default at 100 results. In most searches the user wont care to change it. It's just that sometimes when you're searching for something old you need more, so having the option to increase it would be cool.

 

[Helton]

I don't know what most people use search for but for me its primarily to try and look up ancient posts for reference for exact wording and the current search algorithm SUCKS for that. Maybe have an "Older Than" option next to the "Newer Than" one, or allow us to specify year or something?

 

[Taluntain]

Is it possible for the user to be able to adjust the number of results manually ? If so, just leave it default at 100 results. In most searches the user wont care to change it. It's just that sometimes when you're searching for something old you need more, so having the option to increase it would be cool.

There's only a global option for how many results are returned currently. I've put in a suggestion to split it per usergroup level as well, i.e. so we could give patrons more results than regular users for example.

I don't know what most people use search for but for me its primarily to try and look up ancient posts for reference for exact wording and the current search algorithm SUCKS for that. Maybe have an "Older Than" option next to the "Newer Than" one, or allow us to specify year or something?

I'll throw it in the bag o' suggestions.

 

[Melcar]

People use the search function? (more like dis-function right?)

 

[Dreaad]

List me the steps to reproduce your "find posts before date xyz" error.

Like I said it's not a big deal. I tried searching for a users posts within a 680 page thread. It became clear that I was only getting the posts that user made from only the last 80 pages or so. I tried using the 'find posts before date xyz' option to see if that would limit the hundred posts search to an earlier time rather than the most recent 100. Obviously that's not how that works, more of situation where I didn't understand the limits of the option rather than an actual error. Thanks for explaining it anyway.

 

[Taluntain]

Yeah, that happens when you've got threads ballooning to the size of forums, but DU loves them so... :australia:

 

[Severian Silk]

When you search current thread, there is no option to select by most recent, or by relevance.

How do you search a thread?

 

[Raghar]

Click search and select this thread only.

 

[Taluntain]

There's also a search box below the GOG button with a "Search this thread only" option.