Jump to content
FWR Media

ULTIMATE Seo Urls 5 - by FWR Media

Recommended Posts

Base href has nothing to do with it. above is the post that confused me.

 

If base href in osCommerce is made up of: -

 

HTTP_SERVER . DIR_WS_CATALOG

 

Then it is IMPOSSIBLE that base href produces your scenario of h t t p://w w w.mysite.com/index.php/fr

 

Unless . .your configuration files are entirely wrong .. it is not an issue of USU5 in any case which is what this support topic covers. The gaps/whitespace could be the use of an incapable editor .. dreamweaver perhaps.

 

 

The gaps/whitespaces were a TYPO from my part, apologies. My configuration files are correct. My base href is http://www.site.com/ which is correct.

 

I've been trying to tell you Robert, if you could please listen to me, that I really believe this issue is created by USU5Pro because your addon creates directories for languages, when google caches my page it takes the actual foreign language page's url for the TRUE path, it takes http://www.site.com/index.php/fr for TRUE path, it ignores the base href code, so it looks for css, images, etc in the /fr directory, obviously it can't find them there, so it gives a broken page.

 

Please look at my cached page for the french language, I see it all broken, what do you see?


~ Don't mistake my kindness for weakness ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The gaps/whitespaces were a TYPO from my part, apologies. My configuration files are correct. My base href is http://www.site.com/ which is correct.

 

I've been trying to tell you Robert, if you could please listen to me, that I really believe this issue is created by USU5Pro because your addon creates directories for languages, when google caches my page it takes the actual foreign language page's url for the TRUE path, it takes http://www.site.com/index.php/fr for TRUE path, it ignores the base href code, so it looks for css, images, etc in the /fr directory, obviously it can't find them there, so it gives a broken page.

 

Please look at my cached page for the french language, I see it all broken, what do you see?

 

Nope . . the URL is entirely separate from image delivery. The language additions have no effect on images whatsoever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

can you do me a favour and look at the link of my cached page please? does it render correctly to you? to me, it doesn't.

 

in the source code google writes

which is wrong.

~ Don't mistake my kindness for weakness ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

can you do me a favour and look at the link of my cached page please? does it render correctly to you? to me, it doesn't.

 

in the source code google writes which is wrong.

 

Isabella

 

This is a support topic for USU5 PRO.

 

You thought USU5 PRO may have a problem but it doesn't.

 

Please don't fill this thread with personal issues as it will make it hard for others to find support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Isabella

 

This is a support topic for USU5 PRO.

 

You thought USU5 PRO may have a problem but it doesn't.

 

Please don't fill this thread with personal issues as it will make it hard for others to find support.

 

 

Personal issues? are you for real Robert???

 

how can you accuse me of posting personal issues on your thread when all I asked was for you to look at my cached page because it *may* have something to do with the way your addon treats languages?

btw this is not my saying, it's my developer's opinion!

 

Your way of blatantly refusing to even comment on the link I posted is unprofessional and your way of addressing me is frankly rude when I have always been nothing but courteous to you!


~ Don't mistake my kindness for weakness ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personal issues? are you for real Robert???

 

how can you accuse me of posting personal issues on your thread when all I asked was for you to look at my cached page because it *may* have something to do with the way your addon treats languages?

btw this is not my saying, it's my developer's opinion!

 

Your way of blatantly refusing to even comment on the link I posted is unprofessional and your way of addressing me is frankly rude when I have always been nothing but courteous to you!

 

Rude and unprofessional? don't be ridiculous!

 

You asked me to look into a "possible" flaw in USU5 PRO which I happily looked into for you in keeping with this support thread and found no problem with USU5 PRO at all.

 

I therefore stated ..

 

You thought USU5 PRO may have a problem but it doesn't.

 

If you or anyone else identifies an issue with USU5 I will look into it. If there is an issue I will solve it as I want the contribution to be as solid as possible for the users, if not a USU5 issue that's where support here ends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rude and unprofessional? don't be ridiculous!

 

You asked me to look into a "possible" flaw in USU5 PRO which I happily looked into for you in keeping with this support thread and found no problem with USU5 PRO at all.

 

I therefore stated ..

 

If you or anyone else identifies an issue with USU5 I will look into it. If there is an issue I will solve it as I want the contribution to be as solid as possible for the users, if not a USU5 issue that's where support here ends.

 

I started posting about this problem on 20th April, eventually you told me

Yes it is the use of base href so this is a valid point.

 

The language needs to be removed from the base href as Google is taking it as a true path.

 

Base href was always a daft idea .. relative paths are all that's needed.

 

 

today you came back saying that I had confused you, that my configuration files must surely be wrong even if you never saw them, and when I begged you to look at my cached page, you jumped on your high horse accusing me of posting personal issues.

 

Anyone reading this thread will see that I have never been ridiculous, confusing, or even personal.

I have posted about a problem which you first acknowledged then refuted.

 

I would have liked to have your opinion on my cached page, but for some odd reason you kept refusing to comment on it, that is fine, it's your right not to reply.

I will make sure not to bother you again.


~ Don't mistake my kindness for weakness ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would have liked to have your opinion on my cached page, but for some odd reason you kept refusing to comment on it, that is fine, it's your right not to reply.

I will make sure not to bother you again.

 

Sighs

 

Originally I thought there may be a valid point with base href then realised that as it does not use tep_href_link() that it cannot be related to USU5 PRO.

 

Your cache page DOES NOT show your site as having: -

 

<base href="http://www.arlisa-bijoux.com/index.php/fr" />

 

It shows your site as having: -

 

<base href="http://www.arlisa-bijoux.com/" />

 

Which is correct.

 

The top one is simply because the google system shows its own DOCTYPE and base href above that of your site.

 

Google sets its own base href as that of the url that was cached.

 

There is no issue related to USU5 PRO that requires my support.

Edited by FWR Media

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sighs

 

 

thank you for explaining!


~ Don't mistake my kindness for weakness ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would have liked to have your opinion on my cached page,

Robert did look at your page and concluded 'Nope'.

He is right.

 

Your cached page:

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:ojg_nymhqRsJ:www.arlisa-bijoux.com/index.php/fr+site:www.arlisa-bijoux.com&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&source=www.google.com

looks fine to me too, today, in the Netherlands.

I see no difference with the original page:

http://www.arlisa-bijoux.com/index.php/fr

As I told you, you must make sure the cache is refreshed before you draw conclusions.

 

Ignoring advice and quarrelling with experts will not help you getting solutions.

 

Now what I think is interesting. (But has nothing to do with USU5.)

It seems Google wraps your HTML page (complete wit doctype and <base href) in a new page, with a new doctype and new <base href.

Page source of your current page, before first <script, original:

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" dir="ltr" lang="fr">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" />
<title>Bijouterie Artisanale Elégante et Colliers - Arlisa Bijoux</title>
<meta name="description" content="Bijouterie Artisanale Elégante et Colliers - Arlisa Bijoux, Créations artisanales exclusives, avec pierres précieuses, argent, perles, verre, fourrure. Vente en ligne.">
<meta name="keywords" content="bijouterie,artisanale,elégante,colliers,arlisa,bijoux,créations,artisanales,exclusives,pierres">
<link rel="canonical" href="http://www.arlisa-bijoux.com/index.php/fr">
<base href="http://www.arlisa-bijoux.com/" />
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="ext/jquery/ui/ui-lightness/jquery-ui-1.8.7.custom.css" />

 

Page source of the page, before first <script, in Goggle cache:

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<base href="http://www.arlisa-bijoux.com/index.php/fr"><div style="margin:-1px -1px 0;padding:0;border:1px solid #999;background:#fff"><div style="margin:12px;padding:8px;border:1px solid #999;background:#ddd;font:13px arial,sans-serif;color:#000;font-weight:normal;text-align:left">This is Google's cache of <a href="http://www.arlisa-bijoux.com/index.php/fr" style="text-decoration:underline;color:#00c">http://www.arlisa-bijoux.com/index.php/fr</a>. It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on 29 Apr 2011 19:48:00 GMT. The <a href="http://www.arlisa-bijoux.com/index.php/fr" style="text-decoration:underline;color:#00c">current page</a> could have changed in the meantime. <a href="http://www.google.com/intl/en/help/features_list.html#cached" style="text-decoration:underline;color:#00c">Learn more</a><br><br><div style="float:right"><a href="http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:ojg_nymhqRsJ:www.arlisa-bijoux.com/index.php/fr+site:www.arlisa-bijoux.com&hl=en&strip=1" style="text-decoration:underline;color:#00c">Text-only version</a></div>
<div> </div></div></div><div style="position:relative">
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" dir="ltr" lang="fr">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" />
<title>Bijouterie Artisanale Elégante et Colliers - Arlisa Bijoux</title>

<meta name="description" content="Bijouterie Artisanale Elégante et Colliers - Arlisa Bijoux, Créations artisanales exclusives, avec pierres précieuses, argent, perles, verre, fourrure. Vente en ligne.">
<meta name="keywords" content="bijouterie,artisanale,elégante,colliers,arlisa,bijoux,créations,artisanales,exclusives,pierres">
<link rel="canonical" href="http://www.arlisa-bijoux.com/index.php/fr">
<base href="http://www.arlisa-bijoux.com/" />
<link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="ext/jquery/ui/ui-lightness/jquery-ui-1.8.7.custom.css" />

 

edit: it seems Robert answered while I was writing.

Very nice of him. And we draw the same conclusion. Thanks, feels good!

 

Eveline

Edited by Denkster

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Haha, of course, I'm the bad ungrateful dummy that quarrels with the experts, sure, a classic.

 

The fact that I had to explain to you the difference between a browser's cache and the google cached pages says it all on your knowledge.

 

Lastly, please stop copying what is being said on other threads, will you. For your information, I have always seen, and still see, a broken cached page both on FF and IE, here today in Switzerland.


~ Don't mistake my kindness for weakness ~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello to this happy thread and,

Hey Rob, and all,

I'm wondering if I have issues with the memcache cache system.

My observation tool has been http://pecl.php.net/package/memcache

I started off (about 2 1/2 months ago) prepopulating the cache getting about 2/3 misses to 1/3 hits then I restarted without the wget robot and got the same result. No matter what happens that's always the result; two misses to one hit.

My thinking right along had been expecting much better hit to miss ratio.

I'm currently reporting

request rate (hits. misses) = .21 cache requests/second

hit rate = .09 cache requests/second

miss rate= .13 cache requests/second

set rate = .13 cache requests/second

 

Cache used = 43.2MBytes

Cache size = 64MBytes

 

Clicking on "variables" it lists by slab;

Item count, Age, Evicted.

I find 21 slabs which vary from item counts of 1 to as many as 12000.

Also quite random is the age, anywhere from a day to multiple weeks. (current uptime is 2 weeks).

Every slab has "No" for evicted.

 

Any thoughts on this Rob?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

 

since a few days, I'm a happy user of Ultimate SEO URLS.

 

BUT - I just noticed that if the product name contains an "isolated" P - which some of my more important products do - the rewrite rules reduce an USU-produced link like

 

../vollautomatischer-pelletkessel-atmos-p-21-p-533.html

 

to

 

../-p-21.html.

 

I have now worked around this problem by renaming products containing an isolated "P", e.g., the pellet stove P 21 mentioned above is now renamed P21 - but this is not a solution, as most customers will search for the correct product name.

 

Anyone any idea?

 

Thx,

Oliver

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

 

since a few days, I'm a happy user of Ultimate SEO URLS.

 

BUT - I just noticed that if the product name contains an "isolated" P - which some of my more important products do - the rewrite rules reduce an USU-produced link like

 

../vollautomatischer-pelletkessel-atmos-p-21-p-533.html

 

to

 

../-p-21.html.

 

I have now worked around this problem by renaming products containing an isolated "P", e.g., the pellet stove P 21 mentioned above is now renamed P21 - but this is not a solution, as most customers will search for the correct product name.

 

Anyone any idea?

 

Thx,

Oliver

 

Any single letter stands a chance of creating problems in Ultimate Seo Urls any version simply because they are used as markers in the URI.

 

-p- represents products_id in the standard osCommerce structure for product_info.php which is product_info.php?products_id=533.

 

You can change the -p- very easily in USU5 PRO but I just wonder if you might run into further single letter issues.

 

To change -p- e.g. to -d- you only need change two files.

 

1) The catalog/.htaccess .. find ..

 RewriteRule ^([a-z0-9/-]+)-p-([0-9]+).html$ product_info.php [NC,L,QSA]

 

Change to ..

 

  RewriteRule ^([a-z0-9/-]+)-d-([0-9]+).html$ product_info.php [NC,L,QSA]

 

Then open file catalog/includes/modules/ultimate_seo_urls5/page_modules/product_info.php

 

Find ..

protected $dependencies = array( 'products_id' => array( 'marker' 	=> '-p-',

 

Change to ..

 

	protected $dependencies = array( 'products_id' => array( 'marker' 	=> '-d-',

 

Then ensure to reset the cache.

Edited by FWR Media

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello to this happy thread and,

Hey Rob, and all,

I'm wondering if I have issues with the memcache cache system.

 

Any thoughts on this Rob?

 

You don't just use memcache for USU5 then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, have used ultimate SEO URLs for a while and thought I'd try this pro version (looks good).

 

I have used a completely fresh copy of oscommerce 2.2 on my server, and have tried both methods - Copy over and manual install. Although it appears to install properly (I see the rewritten urls on the links and the options are all available in the admin section). However, when I click on the link, the page does not redirect. This is what I have tried so far;

 

Upgraded my PHP to 5.3.6 and MySQL to 5.1.56 (which was a nightmare in itself!!).

Tried all the uri formats (which surely eliminates a problem with the htaccess file?)

Set the permissions on the two cache folders to 0777.

Reset the cache in admin.

Have checked and double checked the file changes according to the manual.

 

Has anybody got any ideas what I can check next??


My latest osCommerce work in progress

 

no outside links in signatures allowed, see PM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anybody got any ideas what I can check next??

 

Well you posted a lot of info but you've missed out posting what I need.

 

This link(s) you click on what does it look like please post one.

 

However, when I click on the link, the page does not redirect.

 

So what does it do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the quick reply.

 

Am using the domain below as a test server;

 

My Test Server


My latest osCommerce work in progress

 

no outside links in signatures allowed, see PM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the quick reply.

 

Am using the domain below as a test server;

 

My Test Server

 

Nothing to do with USU5, your configuration files are wrong. Sort those out and it will work.

 

if you need help with the configuration files then post asking for help in the general forums.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't just use memcache for USU5 then?

Yep, USU5-pro is the only thing using memcache at this point.

I restarted a few hours ago, it's currently about 29% hits to 71% misses. Of course it makes sense that it would take awhile to hit everything and hits would slowly gain and overtake the misses, but that doesn't seem to happen. Based on our experience so far we'll slowly ramp up to about 33% and it never gets any better.

So it seems whatever routines are adding items to the cache, and checking the cache are not finding a match in the cache about 66% of the time.

Digging through the raw data I find; (this is current - running about 3 hrs)

Slab 2

Item count: 7

Age: 2 hours and 40 minutes

Evicted:No

 

item

key = usu_2321d6b3fd61e63b261cf865a1fffe97

value = S7QysKquBQA=

size = 12.0 bytes

 

item

key = usu_c1d8d65430653991c36bf2e944d786f0

value = ->this is just blank<-

size = 0.0 bytes

 

Results like these are typical. Some items have much longer keys or hugely larger values, the ones with no value and 0 size appear to be a concern.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing to do with USU5, your configuration files are wrong. Sort those out and it will work.

 

if you need help with the configuration files then post asking for help in the general forums.

 

 

Thanks for the advice. Found a silly little full stop in the config file - working great now.

 

Thanks again


My latest osCommerce work in progress

 

no outside links in signatures allowed, see PM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

My site currently uses:

  • HeaderTags_SEO-3.2.5
  • Ultimate_SEO_URLS v22d_11
  • ArticlesManager-1.57.6
  • LinksManager_II-1.29

When I upgraded to osC 2.3.x I replaced Ultimate_SEO_URLS v22d_11 with Ultimate_Seo_Urls_5_PRO_r205.

That change broke HeaderTags_SEO-3.2.5. If I disable USU5 then Header Tags works; if I enable USU5 then Header Tags stops writing the correct tags.

USU5 appears to be working fine using Standard mode.

Jack said that he thought there was a configuration that allows these contributions to work together.

I have "rewrite" uris and am using the .htaccess file that worked with Ultimate_SEO_URLS v22d_11.

Can you please offer any suggestions to allow USU5 to work with Header Tags?

Thanks,

Ralph

Edited by yulem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

My site currently uses:

  • HeaderTags_SEO-3.2.5
  • Ultimate_SEO_URLS v22d_11
  • ArticlesManager-1.57.6
  • LinksManager_II-1.29

When I upgraded to osC 2.3.x I replaced Ultimate_SEO_URLS v22d_11 with Ultimate_Seo_Urls_5_PRO_r205.

That change broke HeaderTags_SEO-3.2.5. If I disable USU5 then Header Tags works; if I enable USU5 then Header Tags stops writing the correct tags.

USU5 appears to be working fine using Standard mode.

Jack said that he thought there was a configuration that allows these contributions to work together.

I have "rewrite" uris and am using the .htaccess file that worked with Ultimate_SEO_URLS v22d_11.

Can you please offer any suggestions to allow USU5 to work with Header Tags?

Thanks,

Ralph

 

Hi

 

The problem with header tags simply is that it can't handle path based URIs.

 

In admin just change the URI type to rewrite, this will change the URLs to exact replicas of the old Ultimate SEO URLs.

 

You will also need the .htaccess in extras/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi

 

The problem with header tags simply is that it can't handle path based URIs.

 

In admin just change the URI type to rewrite, this will change the URLs to exact replicas of the old Ultimate SEO URLs.

 

You will also need the .htaccess in extras/

 

The .htaccess you provided in extras/ solved the problem. Sorry I missed it.

Ralph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

QUESTION 1

 

Hi, I have the "Choose uri format" in admin set to "path_standard", however, only the product name is shown in the seo url.

 

Does "path_standard" stand for

 

"category/subcategory + product"

 

OR for

 

"brand + product"

 

As I personally understand it (it is not explained anywhere), "path_standard" stands for category/subcategory + product, but the path to the product isn't being generated in the seo url. HOWEVER, if it stands for "brand + product" then there is nothing wrong, as I don't have set a brand name to my products.

 

 

QUESTION 2

 

I also tried setting the "Choose the uri format" to "rewrite", and I made the changes to the .htaccess file. It does redirect properly but don't load and then returns a 404 error. When you pass your mouse over a product link, the address displayed is, for example, www.mysite.com/catalog/computer-p-1.html. This I suppose means the .htaccess was set properly...? When you click, it returns a 404 error. What may be causing this?

 

"edit", well I don't even posted...

 

I just tested the old .htaccess file without the changes, using the "Choose the uri format" to "rewrite" (as above...), and the link is also show as www.mysite.com/catalog/computer-p-1.html so I guess the problem is with my .htaccess file not redirecting properly. My Server API is CGI, not that this makes a difference I guess...

 

Any idea?

 

 

QUESTION 3

 

The directories:

 

catalog/includes/modules/ultimate_seo_urls5/cache_system/cache/

catalog/includes/modules/ultimate_seo_urls5/cache_system/sqlite/

 

Are chmod to 755. Only the owner can write. Do I have to chmod them to 777, meaning the users should also be able to write on these folders? Thanks.

Edited by here2learn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×