500 Internal Server Error when deleting hidden posts


(Multicam) #1

I am getting consistent 500 Internal server error on ‘DELETE’ posts.

If this can help – from the browser console:

DELETE http://forum.thegraphicdesignschool.com/posts/destroy_many 500

I am running a docker install on a Digital Ocean server.

Is there something I should allow on the server? I am a bit of a newbie with server admin :wink:

Kind regards,
JM


(Jeff Atwood) #2

Need more info, what version, what are repro steps, does it happen for admins and for users doing a self delete, etc.


(Multicam) #3

Thanks for the quick reply.

Version :: 1.3.0.beta4.

Doing some setup & tests with the default install.

We created 1 moderator, and she has added 4 replies to the Welcome topic.

I tried to delete them from her account and from the admin account – getting the same error message.

Kind regards,
JM


(Jeff Atwood) #4

Anything in forum.example.com/logs ?


(Multicam) #5

Sure, here you are:

From the log:

Discourse::InvalidParameters (post_ids)

Env:

HTTP_HOST: forum.thegraphicdesignschool.com
REQUEST_URI: /posts/destroy_many
REQUEST_METHOD: DELETE
HTTP_USER_AGENT: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_10_2) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/41.0.2272.118 Safari/537.36
HTTP_ACCEPT: /
HTTP_REFERER: Forum | The Graphic Design School
HTTP_X_FORWARDED_FOR: x.x.x.x
HTTP_X_REAL_IP: x.x.x.x
username: webmaster

params:
post_ids: 16,17,18,19

Did I mention that those posts are hidden? Also we can’t find a way to un-hide them.

Kind regards,
JM


(Multicam) #6

If that can help: we have undeleted those posts, and move them to a ‘purgatory’ topic, so they won’t appear in the post under consideration – Not sure if it’s that legit, but we can move along.


(Jeff Atwood) #7

I believe you can use the post level staff wrench button to unhide them.


(Multicam) #8

That’s what we did – Thanks
I guess we need to get our heads around that delete/hide feature better.

Thanks a lot for your support.


(Jeff Atwood) #9

There might still be a bug here around this scenario, though.