The max limit has changed. It's not max 1000. The default is 100 though. But a GetOldest({limit: 1000}) will get you 1000. This reminds me that I have forgotten to update the autogenerated documentation of the API. I will do that today.by magma1447 - Method requests
This is included with the patch that was released today. It's up to you if you want to rewrite or not. But to be clear. It will fetch the X oldest for region A and B. If X is 100, that is a 100 in total. Not 100+100. I assume this was what you wanted. To me it's the only thing that makes sense, otherwise it's just as easy and fast to make two calls (since it's not asyncby magma1447 - Method requests
:) I assume you noticed it was released.by magma1447 - Checker news
I will most likely release the new code tomorrow (~12 hours from now) if there hasn't been any objections before that. Then we will see what happens.by magma1447 - Checker news
sloth96 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Just a couple of other variants for your > benchmarking pleasure. > > http://project-gc.com/Challenges/GC6K6ZV/21974 > Run with RetiredGuy or some other world traveller. > It does a search over oldest by countries. Current live code: 21, 28, 22 Development code: 31, 20, 20 Seems to average aboutby magma1447 - Checker news
Ah I get it. Generally most likely smart to use GetOldest() on every state there is. The downside is that those really hardcore geocachers won't benefit from that. They will most likely need almost every state anyway. But in average it will definitely be faster.by magma1447 - Checker news
And it should be fixed now, see http://project-gc.com/qa/?qa=13325/profile-janinge68-not-found-names-are-case-sensitiveby magma1447 - Miscellaneous
Interesting, the two QA posts seems related. Your profile does not exist in Project-GC's database anymore. Most likely due to issues with the Geocaching.com API. We have probably received a response that has been interpreted as "the user does not exist". I will investigate this right now. PS! I have splitted the thread and moved the off-topic part to misc.by magma1447 - Miscellaneous
I am sorry if I were to heavy on you. Using the word extremely probably sounded like I didn't like your code, which isn't the case. Most important, I didn't mean to offend you. Since I took a look at your code I understand that it's a bit cumbersome because you have been fighting performance issues. It's of course great that you found a way around that and I appreciateby magma1447 - Checker news
I did not read a single line of wine (edit: I of course mean whine, though I didn't see any wine either), so we are all good. This is exactly the form of feedback I am looking for. If a performance decrease will ruin most checkers using this API method we need to rethink it, and we rather catch it before it's done. Your feedback made me consider using our columnar based dbms instead,by magma1447 - Checker news
This hasn't even been released yet. Regardless it's definitely not related to the issue that user is having.by magma1447 - Miscellaneous
It seems to be extremely slow. About 100% slower with our new api method. I don't exactly understand the approach though. I started with writing a simple pseudo code that does only this, but after I was done I started to run the SQL queries the api methods would run. Seems like it would take ~50*3.5*2 seconds = 350 seconds. It's surprisingly slow to figure out the oldest geocacheby magma1447 - Checker news
It doesn't seem as bad as I thought. I ran a few test cases. Old code: 13, 16, 9.8, 9.5, 9.8 seconds. Average: 11.62 seconds New code: 18, 27, 14, 19, 18 seconds. Average: 19.2 seconds. 65-66% longer execution time for this particular case. On the other hand, the numbers are so varying that I think it could be a lot more accurate using 2*100 runs.by magma1447 - Checker news
sloth96 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don't see an obvious problem with that. The > checkers I wrote should just loop through the data > provided. > > That bump from 100 to 1000ish may also help > performance in some of my scripts. It will pull > in more regions and or countries and keep me from > looping as much to geby magma1447 - Checker news
In the future, we have plans to have the community voting on checkers. Bringing the best ones on top. The cache owner will also be able to "approve" a certain checker, in that case that checker will be well highlighted. Since it's not implemented or designed, I can't go into any more details (since they don't exist). But as stated above. We don't see it as an iby magma1447 - Miscellaneous
We could probably improve that tool for a year, but we think it's good enough as is. I am the creator of that checker and I have fulfilled two 360-challenges with that tools. Showing geocaches for all sectors isn't really feasible. For someone who has quite a few degrees left it would lead to creating a map of 100,000 geocaches for some challenges. Your web browser would not approve.by magma1447 - Miscellaneous
It would definitely be a nice feature. But imagine a run like that for Germany for example. The checker might take ~15 seconds to run per user, depending on what kind of checker it is. There are (or has been) almost one million geocachers in Germany. Such run would take months. An alternative would of course be to run it on the 1000 most active geocachers. But it's also those who are mby magma1447 - Miscellaneous
This has been implemented now, though not tested yet. The release will wait upon http://project-gc.com/forum/read?5,4168 since it's in the same commit.by magma1447 - Method requests
Since we are not reading here often enough we believe this is a good workflow for requesting methods. Write a post here about the request. Explain as much as you feel necessary, purpose, expected parameters and so forth. Hopefully there will be some feedback from others. Depending on how much feedback it could be smart to summarize it all in one post or adjust the initial request. Ones thingsby magma1447 - Method requests
A patch has been created. It's currently included with the http://project-gc.com/forum/read?6,7273 commit so I will hold off the release. I assume it's not urgent since I am quite late on it anyway.by magma1447 - Method requests
Let me first explain how GetOldest() work right now. Simply put, it's a SELECT * FROM geocaches ORDER BY hidden, cacheId LIMIT x In other words, for those who don't speak SQL. It fetches limit geocaches ordered by the hidden date, and then the cache-id. The problem here is that the max limit is 100 (actually it's 1000, newly changed). Since a challenge must include archived gby magma1447 - Checker news
I am sorry for the late response. I actually haven't seen the request, which is quite bad. I should watch this subforum, but that isn't possible in the forum engine. I know there are a few patches and/or addons for that. I will look into if we can fix something. I will prepare a patch for this.by magma1447 - Method requests
I will gladly add this filter. Remind me if it's not done in a week. I will do it together with some other updates (a post on the forum coming soon).by magma1447 - Method requests
There is now way to parse what you see. The challenge checkers works with raw data and a challenge are not allowed to be based on home location. Such challenge that you suggest will not be possible/allowed.by magma1447 - ARCHIVE Checker requests (impossible)
It is very unlikely that the reviewers will approve three challenges being so similar in the same area. https://support.groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=206 QuotePlease do not submit a challenge cache in an area where a very similar or identical challenge cache already exists. http://support.groundspeak.com/index.php?pg=kb.page&id=787by magma1447 - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Currently in the process of updating polygons for Canada. All counties starting with Division and then a number will get a new/real name. The sources for the names are: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_census_divisions_of_Alberta https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_census_divisions_of_Manitoba https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_census_divisions_of_Newfoundland_and_Labrador https://eby magma1447 - Checker news
Seems that colibris7 accidentally hit the report button instead of the reply button. Also seems like it's satisfying; "that this is the checker y require tank you"by magma1447 - ARCHIVE Checker requests (completed)
Today we got informed that two counties in Niedersachsen has merged. Quoting the information we got: "The two "Landkreise" 'Göttingen' and 'Osterode am Harz' merged an became just 'Landkreis Göttingen'." We have confirmed that the change exists in OpenStreetMap and imported their latest data. We could not see any other changes with our eyes wby magma1447 - Checker news
I personally screw up today and disabled all tags, and set all of the comments to the same value. A backup was then restored, but the last 45 minutes of data was lost (for checker tags only). That means edited, created and removed tags. Also the number of runs per tag was lost, but I assume no one will notice that. This happened a few minutes before 10:00 UTC. It took 15 minutes to restoreby magma1447 - Checker news
No worries. I don't know where the thread is myself, and it might only have been visible to script developers. As I mentioned, I doubt that a challenge like this can be published with today's guidelines, but I might be wrong. But if it's not allowed, there is no point in "setting the standard", otherwise I do agree with you. The best solution in my personal opinionby magma1447 - Miscellaneous