User talk:Monchoman45/SigReal

Editing your sig
"please do not edit my sig, it is used on thousands of pages and each edit greatly stresses the jobqueue" - Just to point out, while editing your sig (or any page transcluded onto other pages) does indeed add all pages transcluding it to the job queue, reverting an edit also does so, but it does not remove the previous jobs.

In addition, this is part of the reason it is recommended that signature templates be substituted, rather than transcluded, onto pages - the signature template of a prolific editor is basically a high-use template, with all the associated problems of editing and vandalism. 「 ディノ 奴 千？！ 」? · ☎ Dinoguy1000 18:02, October 23, 2011 (UTC)


 * I was about to say that. At least Dinoguy1000's version saves a lot of HTML code and thus CPU time the parser needs for rendering the page --Ciencia Al Poder (talk) -WikiDex 18:05, October 23, 2011 (UTC)


 * Both of these are irrelevant - firstly, if you knew it would stress the jobqueue, you shouldn't have edited it in the first place. Yes, I do agree that your code is better; I originally wrote this sig when I had little understanding of HTML (I wouldn't use  if I were to write it again today). Secondly, as it is mostly HTML, the wikitext parser will ignore it, thus Wikia's servers don't see any change in performance. The browser would, however, take a few milliseconds less when rendering it - this is unnoticeable to the human eye, and thus is not important.


 * Monchoman, HTML code does indeed put stress on the MediaWiki parser. Just FYI, everything between &lt; and &gt; is parsed and filtered, to allow only specific HTML tags to be outputted, passing by several function hooks for each tag. Also it checks for every HTML attribute those tags have, and specially the style="" attribute, since it also parses the contents to strip out malicious or unallowed code (like filter: or background-image: etc.). Your signature isn't probably too complex to be a problem, but there's a change in performance. Probably unnoticeable on Wikia's servers, but there's a change. --Ciencia Al Poder (talk) -WikiDex 18:20, October 23, 2011 (UTC)


 * Regardless, as you said, is it unnoticeable, and is still irrelevant. Again, I know Dinoguy's code is better; I'm not disputing that, but to significantly disrupt the jobqueue for a change in a few milliseconds of parsing time is not worth it.


 * Ok, that's fine. I've just informed you about performance impact on wiki/HTML code, so next time you face a similar situation, if the edit is good, you leave it as it is instead of just reverting, which is what significantly disrupt the jobqueue. --Ciencia Al Poder (talk) -WikiDex 18:31, October 23, 2011 (UTC)


 * It should not have been edited in the first place. Reverting the changes reinforces the idea that it should not be edited. Were I able to, I would have protected it to avoid exactly this situation. Discussion over.