We are using umbraco 7.1.8. We had Url Tracker 3.1 and upgraded to Url Tracker 3.9. The upgrade went well on our local and dev sites. On our authoring site, the upgrade appeared to work, but in the backoffice the Url Tracker dashboard load is extremely slow. It will take several minutes to complete and for the results to display. There are no errors in the logs and the authoring and dev sites have approximately the same number of redirects. (The authoring site has a few less than dev).
After we upgraded, we were presented with the option to migrate our redirects. We clicked yes. It appears that we now have duplicates of every redirect. I don't believe this is the cause of the problem because the same thing is happening on dev. Also, the redirects still work despite there being duplicates.
Wow. I just got access to the database, so I can start snooping around. First thing I found is that the icUrlTracker table has over 2.25 million records in it (all since late October 2015). I think this is my culprit.
I'm new to this package. Why are there so many records? I've been sifting through the data trying to figure out what exactly is going on. Is this table the table where the redirects are stored? I know that the backoffice Url Tracker dashboard says that we have nowhere near millions of redirects.
Is there a safe way for me to prevent this table from accruing so much data? is there an easy way to trim out the data that we don't need?
So far, it looks like there are two types of records in this table. 404s and redirects. So far, they seem mutually exclusive, but I wouldn't assume that is always the case. The overwhelming majority of my records have Is404 equal to 1 and a RedirectNodeId and RedirectUrl as NULL. The rest have the opposite.
Url Tracker 3.9 extremely slow in backoffice
We are using umbraco 7.1.8. We had Url Tracker 3.1 and upgraded to Url Tracker 3.9. The upgrade went well on our local and dev sites. On our authoring site, the upgrade appeared to work, but in the backoffice the Url Tracker dashboard load is extremely slow. It will take several minutes to complete and for the results to display. There are no errors in the logs and the authoring and dev sites have approximately the same number of redirects. (The authoring site has a few less than dev).
After we upgraded, we were presented with the option to migrate our redirects. We clicked yes. It appears that we now have duplicates of every redirect. I don't believe this is the cause of the problem because the same thing is happening on dev. Also, the redirects still work despite there being duplicates.
Any ideas? Thanks!
Wow. I just got access to the database, so I can start snooping around. First thing I found is that the icUrlTracker table has over 2.25 million records in it (all since late October 2015). I think this is my culprit.
I'm new to this package. Why are there so many records? I've been sifting through the data trying to figure out what exactly is going on. Is this table the table where the redirects are stored? I know that the backoffice Url Tracker dashboard says that we have nowhere near millions of redirects.
Is there a safe way for me to prevent this table from accruing so much data? is there an easy way to trim out the data that we don't need?
Thanks.
Not sure what's in that table, but it could be 404 URL's. 301 URL Tracker keeps track of 404's in order to allow you to create redirects for them.
Ah. Good call. That seems obvious looking back...
So far, it looks like there are two types of records in this table. 404s and redirects. So far, they seem mutually exclusive, but I wouldn't assume that is always the case. The overwhelming majority of my records have
Is404
equal to1
and aRedirectNodeId
andRedirectUrl
asNULL
. The rest have the opposite.Yep. Now that I know its 404s, I can just disable the 404 tracking until we can get a handle on the 404s.
All I have to do is set this in the appSettings of my web.config:
Thanks!
is working on a reply...
This forum is in read-only mode while we transition to the new forum.
You can continue this topic on the new forum by tapping the "Continue discussion" link below.