What sort of time frame are you looking at to say fix the FHG dumps?

Also can I ask why the actual interface was changed so much?

Excellent! Great to hear.

Hopefully all the other v4 progs will make sure the referrers are nice and long.

First thing to check would be KEY's and INDEX's and if common sense is used in the tables, next thing is to check your BIN LOGS (turn them on if they are off) to see the common queries and then have someone analyze it for you in case you are not able to do it yourself.

I don't know about CARMA, but haven't seen anything alarming on NATS before, spending hundreds of hours on debugging databases and queries seems somewhat high for the complexity TMM usually use in their databases , I hope your host didn't bill your per hour for that because then your where paying for someone to learn not to fix :)

here is my take on NATS v4 , nothing that I haven't spoken with John or many of his staff about.

1. it's DB structure is far, far superior. If you run a big program on a non-custom SQL structure and have issues with NATS v3, V4 is your answer.

2. I've noticed while some things are nicer to admin with, most of the admin experience in v3 is nicer ( This could be just being used to one thing, but thats make take with over 20 installs. )

3. with some things not yet compatible ( more to say, clients custom script / addons ) one thing about v4 that isn't addressed and isn't really NATS fault, is the roll out. You're talking about re-making alot of stuff that has been done and potentially having to pay developers a hefty ransom for them to upgrade it, since they know you need it.

4. i think NATS needs to just be broken into two forks. IMO, nats v3 is still a great option for alot of us, many companies have put alot of blood sweat and tears into v3 alongside nats techs and that is alot of stuff to just turn away from. If this isn't agreeable to NATS as is, maybe a group of us could pitch in some amount of money in extra development support to continue this way. As I think saying no more tool dev on v3 makes sense for NATS, it's not exactly what every program wants to hear.

5. NATS needs to address alot of the affiliate concerns ( i'm sure they are ) but I say this b/c as a program, no one is looking to move into something people don't like. that's a fact.

we love NATS, as in love it, beyond any other backend, even custom ones we've seen, for adult, its the best possible option out there.

As an affiliate I cannot even enter my payee name in the second screen while signing up with a new sponsor because of a dot and a a hyphen in the name. I don't understand the need to restrict characters in the Payee name - this is one field that most people will be extra careful to enter accurately so the validation is counter productive.

This situation reminds me to windowsxp/windows vista situation-they should start working on nats5 which will be fast as nats3 and have features like nats4.

Good points.

1) It's true, the DB structures (and queries) of NATS3 and CARMA were / are fairly - very unoptimised. From the code snippets I've seen of both, there was / is a huge room for improvement in both coding structures and techniques.. hopefully 4 has addressed those.

I'd say that NATs3 development is coming to the end of its development cycle, simply because of its coding framework (or lack thereof) - so I'm assuming that was the purpose of 4.

4) It's very true - I know just between your programs and ours, we'd have thousands upon thousands of lines of code that are built off / extending NATs3 / CARMA.

I personally wouldn't move anything onto 4 for at least 12-18 months, until it reaches maturity.

John, Do you guys still sell V3 ? I have a client who wants to buy it this month to take advantage of your free install / free training offer but after reading all this i like them to go with v3

Jay

Bad management. :2 cents: