Ok, done and ran ..... :)

http://www.xxxxxx.com/devforum/testa...s.php?i1=22804

Output ...

Watermark system finished
Script end.

When I run preview or look at attachments, no watermark shows. In preview, I still don't see demo pic.

Regards,
Doug

In your cache directory, do files appear?
If you download one of those, rename the extension to .jpg (or the according image format) and view them in the windows image viewer, do you see watermarks?

If not, PM me your login credentials and I take a look myself. Very strange.

Nothing in cache...

Downloaded attachment pic and nothing showing anywhere on it...

Regards,
Doug

Update: I just went back to the devforum and checked it again. I have no idea why, but all of a sudden watermarks are displaying on both attachments and in-line attachments. :eek: The "preview" pic still doesn't show, but it's at least working live now, so I guess we can start some real testing. :)

i dont use id's in my url's

this is the error

Invalid SQL:

SELECT a.contenttypeid
FROM attachment AS a
WHERE a.attachmentid = 2006-I-drive-a-eg-4-door;

MySQL Error : Unknown column 'I' in 'where clause'
Error Number : 1054
Request Date : Wednesday, May 25th 2011 @ 08:14:14 AM
Error Date : Wednesday, May 25th 2011 @ 08:14:14 AM
Script : http://nycjdm.com/testattachments.ph...ve-a-eg-4-door
Referrer :
IP Address : 24.136.115.58
Username : XXX
Classname : XXX
MySQL Version : 5.0.92-community

Which SEO Addons do you use?
Also: Which vB version do you have?

i have 4.1.3

Im using VB's Friendly URL's built in feature i have mine set to

Basic Friendly URL's

Interesting, I'll figure it out!

Some questions and thoughts ... :)

It's obvious that using the cache approach, this mod would cause a duplication of attachments, which isn't a problem for people with large hard disk space available.

However, what I was wondering was, is there an impact on performance that would slow down the forums with the mod having to intercept every attachment being viewed by the user, then save it to the cache, then retrieve it again?

Thanks for any feedback ..

Regards,
Doug

It's waaaay cheaper reading a cache file from disk than regenerating the image for every viewer.
Re-generating means:
- load attachment from file or database
- check if large enough, etc.
- load watermark file
- apply watermark file
- output

Loading from cache means:
- load cached image file
- output

Hard-disk drives use an internal page cache as well, so it's the best way to gain optimal performance.

For those with limited disk space, I implemented the cache table, which only keeps a fraction of the attachments which have been viewed recently in the cache. This should allow optimal control between performance and disk usage. Of course the worst case then would be, if an user views all attachment images one after another. But then again, it's a server and they're optimized to handle this kind of stuff.

If you have more questions or suggestions about performance and cache behaviour, feel free to ask :)

Thanks for the detailed answer .. appreciate it ....that was very helpful ... :up:

I think I might try to move this to the live forums, but I'm a little worried that table didn't get created and added to the database during the install. Should I wait until you've finished your beta testing?

Regards,
Doug