VOGONS

Common searches


First post, by red-ray

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

As I recall the current limit is 5.00 MiB, is this correct?

Looking at SIV support for 386/486/586 class CPUs and 3Dfx + Matrox GPUs you should see my largest attachment is 4.96 MiB which is getting perilously close to 5.00 MiB. At the moment most of the attachments are self contained as this makes it easier for those who download them, but I suspect that in a few weeks some will be > 5.00 MiB.

What are the chances of Vogons upping the attachment size limit and what could I do to make this happen please?

I guess I could create a multi-file ZIP rather than having different .ZIP files, but this would not be ideal when a user just needs say SIV32L.

Thank you in advance.

Note: I am only asking about increasing at attachment size limit and I specifically do not wish to hear about work arounds to the current limit of 5.00 MiB

Last edited by red-ray on 2021-11-08, 22:23. Edited 3 times in total.

Reply 4 of 72, by Dominus

User metadata
Rank DOSBox Moderator
Rank
DOSBox Moderator

I think the problem is the same as with building more streets to have less traffic on the streets -> this leads to more traffic...

Windows 3.1x guide for DOSBox
60 seconds guide to DOSBox
DOSBox SVN snapshot for macOS (10.4-11.x ppc/intel 32/64bit) notarized for gatekeeper

Reply 5 of 72, by red-ray

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
robertmo wrote on 2021-11-07, 19:27:

make multi-file ZIP for SIV32L only, btw check if 7z is not more compressive

Thank you for your thoughts, but AFAIK you can't by default use explorer to extract the files from .7z files and explorer seems to have issues with a multi-part .ZIP file.

At the moment it's simple for users to extract all the files from the .ZIP files and I am hoping to keep things this way rather than needing to have WinZIP or 7z available.

file.php?id=123176

Attachments

Reply 6 of 72, by konc

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

Not really a solution to the attachment size limit, but you can always host larger files elsewhere. Like google drive for example which is not some shady file hoster and doesn't regularly purge files if they haven't been downloaded for x days. Just an idea to consider for when the forum's attachments can't cover your needs.

Reply 7 of 72, by retardware

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
Dominus wrote on 2021-11-07, 19:39:

I think the problem is the same as with building more streets to have less traffic on the streets -> this leads to more traffic...

I think so, too...
5MB is a good size for photos that are detailed enough for identification and analysis.
And there is few DOS utilities/drivers stuff that doesn't fit into this.

konc wrote on 2021-11-07, 21:22:

Not really a solution to the attachment size limit, but you can always host larger files elsewhere. Like google drive for example...

Seconded. No idea why OP does not use google drive... it is cheap and reliable.

Reply 8 of 72, by Caluser2000

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

What is wrong with 7z? It recognize more compression formats than WinZip

There's a glitch in the matrix.
A founding member of the 286 appreciation society.
Apparently 32-bit is dead and nobody likes P4s.
Of course, as always, I'm open to correction...😉

Reply 9 of 72, by pan069

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie

I think the main problem with using external services, be it for images or zips, is that they have a tendency to disappear over time. There a loads of threads with posts that have images in them but the links are broken.

The reason I personally prefer to use attachments here is that the source will stay around for as long as Vogons is around, or at least, its less likely to end up in broken links.

Reply 10 of 72, by red-ray

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
red-ray wrote on 2021-11-07, 20:42:

AFAIK you can't by default use explorer to extract the files from .7z

Caluser2000 wrote on 2021-11-08, 01:56:

What is wrong with 7z? It recognize more compression formats than WinZip

As I specified my concern is that you have to install 7z whereas with zip files explorer can be used to extract the files.

Reply 12 of 72, by Dominus

User metadata
Rank DOSBox Moderator
Rank
DOSBox Moderator
robertmo wrote on 2021-11-08, 15:03:

i think you can use auto extracting executables with 7z

But that would kind of be a dick move for pictures in this forum 🤣

Windows 3.1x guide for DOSBox
60 seconds guide to DOSBox
DOSBox SVN snapshot for macOS (10.4-11.x ppc/intel 32/64bit) notarized for gatekeeper

Reply 13 of 72, by BitWrangler

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

We're vintage though, should be using Lhz, Lha, arj etc. 🤣

edit: or is that lzh or am I getting confused with lzw IDK

Unicorn herding operations are proceeding, but all the totes of hens teeth and barrels of rocking horse poop give them plenty of hiding spots.

Reply 14 of 72, by red-ray

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
BitWrangler wrote on 2021-11-08, 15:53:

We're vintage though, should be using Lhz, Lha, arj etc. 🤣

edit: or is that lzh or am I getting confused with lzw IDK

Please don't make off topic posts, if you wish to discus this I feel you should start a new thread.

Reply 15 of 72, by BitWrangler

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

Okay then, increasing the limit is stupid because someone will always have a problem with the new limit, can't fit a full LS-120... CD... DVD... DVD-DL... BDROM. Given the questionable amount of extra information given in high megapixel camera images, look at some of them, it's all blur and pixellation, forcing a reasonable low limit probably saves quadruple the storage and bandwidth, because it won't be for the "few" larger files, ppl will just be lazy about making sure their images are well cropped and sized. Since parting the files, using alternate compression or hosting elsewhere is unacceptable are you saying you have more right to be lazy than people who want to post images straight from whatever pointless resolution their camera produces?

Unicorn herding operations are proceeding, but all the totes of hens teeth and barrels of rocking horse poop give them plenty of hiding spots.

Reply 16 of 72, by rmay635703

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
BitWrangler wrote on 2021-11-08, 16:32:

Okay then, increasing the limit is stupid because someone will always have a problem with the new limit, can't fit a full LS-120... CD... DVD... DVD-DL... BDROM. Given the questionable amount of extra information given in high megapixel camera images, look at some of them, it's all blur and pixellation, forcing a reasonable low limit probably saves quadruple the storage and bandwidth, because it won't be for the "few" larger files, ppl will just be lazy about making sure their images are well cropped and sized. Since parting the files, using alternate compression or hosting elsewhere is unacceptable are you saying you have more right to be lazy than people who want to post images straight from whatever pointless resolution their camera produces?

One of my “other” forums automatically resizes/compresses photos that exceed the forum limit.
Owner says it increased server load under 1% and was well worth it to stop the noise.

Also worth noting some folks use locked down devices that prevent certified accounts and 3rd party apps making it difficult to control image sizes in certain ecosystems without extreme prejudice.

In terms of increasing file sizes being stupid because someone will get mad they can’t dump a CD,
at the rate we are going a web page will likely be CD-ROM sized in another 5 or 10 years making that an insignificant amount of data and a poorly aged reference.
(I have already encountered a slow loading not very impressive web page that was around 100mb of traffic to access, so don’t laugh)

Mark my words they will find ways to make short text files take up a gig of space.

Reply 17 of 72, by Dominus

User metadata
Rank DOSBox Moderator
Rank
DOSBox Moderator

Since the new forum software and mote excessive allowance of quantity and size of attachments, the forum’s disk quota is filling up faster (if I remember correctly). So I don‘t think the file size will get upped soon.

That was what I hinted at with the streets analogy earlier

Windows 3.1x guide for DOSBox
60 seconds guide to DOSBox
DOSBox SVN snapshot for macOS (10.4-11.x ppc/intel 32/64bit) notarized for gatekeeper

Reply 18 of 72, by red-ray

User metadata
Rank Oldbie
Rank
Oldbie
BitWrangler wrote on 2021-11-08, 16:32:

Okay then, increasing the limit is stupid because someone will always have a problem with the new limit, can't fit a full LS-120... CD... DVD... DVD-DL... BDROM. Given the questionable amount of extra information given in high megapixel camera images, look at some of them, it's all blur and pixellation, forcing a reasonable low limit probably saves quadruple the storage and bandwidth, because it won't be for the "few" larger files, ppl will just be lazy about making sure their images are well cropped and sized. Since parting the files, using alternate compression or hosting elsewhere is unacceptable are you saying you have more right to be lazy than people who want to post images straight from whatever pointless resolution their camera produces?

What's stupid is talking about images when I said SIV support for 386/486/586 class CPUs and 3Dfx + Matrox GPUs you should see my largest attachment is 4.96 MiB and does not contain any large images. There are lots of CPU/Chipset logos in SIVRES.dll, but they are all tiny

Over the past two years it's slowly grown from about 4.50 MiB to 4.96 MiB and if the limit could be increased to 5.50 MiB all would be great for another two years.

Your statement "have more right to be lazy than people who want to post images" is as best garbage as I have made it clear that I am trying to make to easy for others to download the SIVs.

Clearly you need to get the facts correct

Reply 19 of 72, by Caluser2000

User metadata
Rank l33t
Rank
l33t

Current attachment size limit is just fine for what it is mainly used for. I don't see any one else moaning about it either.

There's a glitch in the matrix.
A founding member of the 286 appreciation society.
Apparently 32-bit is dead and nobody likes P4s.
Of course, as always, I'm open to correction...😉