John, thanks for spending time on this.  Any chance we can get a lift on the
follow limits for a temporary time so I can catch up a few users that were
affected by this?  Or, if you want to do it on a per-user basis I can send
you the names of the users.

Jesse

On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 7:55 AM, John Kalucki <jkalu...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Thanks to the efforts of many working late into a Friday night, we
> deployed a fix for this issue starting at about 11pm PDT. The fix was
> verified as working in production at about 12:05am PDT.
>
> -John Kalucki
> http://twitter.com/jkalucki
> Services, Twitter Inc.
>
> On Sep 5, 5:36 am, Dewald Pretorius <dpr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > John,
> >
> > Just so we know, is this 5,000 thing going to be fixed over the
> > weekend, or will we have to wait until Tuesday?
> >
> > Dewald
> >
> > On Sep 5, 12:35 am, John Kalucki <jkalu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > We're aware of the problem with the following API not returning more
> > > than 5,000 followers. Apparently this call has recently been
> > > unreliable was often timing out and returning 503s. A change to fix
> > > the 503s limited the results to 5000 followers prematurely. We're
> > > going to get this back to the >5000 followers, but with 503's state as
> > > soon as we can, but we're fighting several fires at once tonight.
> >
> > > More in a few minutes.
> >
> > > -John
> >
> > > On Sep 4, 7:56 pm, Dewald Pretorius <dpr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > > Not only do the social graph calls now suddenly, without any prior
> > > > warning of announcement, return only 5,000 ids, it is messed up even
> > > > when you do the paging as per the API documentation.
> >
> > > > Case in point. @socialoomph has 16,598 followers. If you page through
> > > > the follower ids with &page, you get only 12,017 entries.
> >
> > > > This is highly frustrating, and it has now completely screwed up my
> > > > follower processing. It does not help that Twitter has rolled out
> > > > something into production without any kind of testing, right before a
> > > > weekend.
> >
> > > > Dewald
>

Reply via email to