Jump to content

RichM

AdministratorDonate to Canal World
  • Posts

    1,372
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by RichM

  1. 25 minutes ago, Martin Nicholas said:

    Your SSL certificate only covers: www.canalworld.net & canalworld.net. Probably you need a wildcard i.e: *.canalworld.net to cover any sub-domains you may use. LetsEncrypt do offer these now; verification is by DNS.

     

    An unrelated issue: Last time I got an email notification it was DKIM signed, but the public key was not in DNS.

     

    Yes, but trouble is we don't host those sub-domains. They're hosted by SendGrid who we use for mail relay. The URLs are re-written before re-directing traffic to CWDF. We don't really need them re-written so this feature should now be disabled, but clearly the issue remains. I will look into it further.

     

    I will look into the DKIM DNS issue also

  2. 46 minutes ago, Markinaboat said:

    Hi,

     

    This has happened all of a sudden after many years without any problems.

     

    Does anyone else get this error when opening a link from an email? I've got CWD saved as a fav (have done for as lonh as I can remember) and no issues if I open the forums that way. Doesn;t appear to be a firewall or McAffee problem my end. Am using Windows 10.

     

    Thanks

    Untitled.png

     

    Please can you re-test this and let me know if the error remains?

     

  3. On 19/02/2024 at 19:35, StephenA said:

    Glad you got it all done - it's never easy doing a server upgrade. Luckily when I was upgrading the Canalplan Server I was able to practice the build before we got the new server and once I've built it I kept syncing things up and actually kept both servers in sync for a few days before and after doing the final cut over.

     

    Keeping both in sync is definitely a clever way of doing it, maybe next time. :)

     

    We have a fair amount of database activity so ideally I wanted to keep it simple and limited it to one sync from A to B. I reduced DNS TTLs right down to mitigate the impact of DNS propagation in between and had to block all user traffic at a firewall level to free up resources so I could do a SQL dump and compress the asset data. (we were running between 90%-95% memory utilization for a short period leading up to the migration!) Perhaps not the most elegant or seamless approach but it did the job without a single issue to report. (yet 🙂)

  4. On 14/02/2024 at 17:16, MtB said:

     

    I've been getting this error message occasionally recently. Not a big deal as reloading the page always clears it but its happening more often now. Twice so far today.

     

    Just thought I'd mention it. 

     

     

    image.thumb.png.c5dfb9d5a5c8e14f19bed877376e2b6d.png

     

    Also, just to add that this specific issue is a server side caching issue. I have done what is advised in the error message so hopefully you won't see that error for some time!

    • Greenie 1
  5. We're upgrading Canal World to a new and improved server next week. This upgrade is necessary because Canal World has been using more memory lately. The new server will have double the memory capacity, more storage, and more powerful CPUs to make sure Canal World runs smoothly and can handle its increasing demands.
     

    We will try to keep any disruption to a minimum, though the site will be offline for for a few hours one evening during the migration. I don't have a specific time for the migration yet, but will keep you posted.
     

    Apologies for any inconvenience. 

    • Greenie 2
  6. The server is a little unhappy at the moment and needs more memory. I am going to move the site to another server which is being configured this evening. The migration won't happen until early next week due to a wedding I must attend but hopefully there won't be too much in the way of errors in the meantime. (Apologies!)

     

    • Greenie 2
  7. 55 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

     

    Mine always quoted 2.9mB

     

    It is because there is 1024kB in a megabyte if we're going to be precise. The previous limit was set to 3000kB on the backend hence it showed 2.9MB on the frontend. 

     

    Regardless, I have changed it now so it should show as 4 MB exactly for all. 

    • Greenie 3
  8. The limit has been adjusted to 4MB but we'd still encourage members to optimise files where possible. 

     

    The reason for the discrepancy is because some members are in different permission "groups", some of which are defunct but kept in place in case we need them in future. However, I've gone through them all and they should now be consistent. 

     

    Note some were simply mixing up their units which may have added to the confusion. Though there were none that were previously set below 3000kB

  9. We will be updating Canal World to the latest version of Invision this weekend, either late Saturday or Sunday evening. Canal World will be down during this window though it's not expected to last more than 2 hours. This is a minor update and the overall look and feel will remain the same, but there may be some minor differences. We will confirm on completion.

    • Greenie 1
  10. 31 minutes ago, MJG said:

     

     

    Weird given the forum gives this, when you upload.

     

     

    Screenshot_20240208-203454.png

     

    If you could kindly try again, it should say 3.00MB. Ideally Invision should have some kind of automatic image compression feature but unfortunately it does not. Will look into this further. 

  11. There are a few solutions. Can open it in Paint or Paint3D or similar and save it as a jpg. With a bit of luck it will compress it below the limit. 

    Alternatively you can use a third party image compressor website. Essentially you upload the original photo, it then compresses it and lets you download the compressed version which you can then upload here. The website linked below lets you do this

    https://imagecompressor.com/

    The other alternative is to use a third party image host. However, these have a tendency to disappear after time so I wouldn't recommend this. 

  12. I can't seem to reproduce this issue which is making it difficult for me to troubleshoot I'm afraid. Can any further reports please include the following:

    Browser name and version:
    Operating system:

    On the face of it, it looks like a certificate issue but it's weird how it does not occur for everyone. - Typically certificate issues cause more widespread symptoms, which is not the case here. 

     

     

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.