Yes, just insert the data while specifying all information. That way 1001 arrives later and just slides into the hole. What I meant with the quadratically increasing formula was to do it in code, but a master assigning numbers is better.
Latency hiding over the Internet requires temporary inconsistency. As long as it eventually gets there, don't worry about how long it takes. It breaks the "unseen posts are on top" mantra unless you order by arrival time, which I feel is acceptable. I think it would be better to get this working for anything before you try to make it work for Futaba /b/ traffic. How do they do it? A bunch of locally networked computers?
>>19
That's true for most boards, but in this case the other table would have around 0-20 rows as opposed to the hundreds or thousands in the main table.
Anyway, the proposed profiling effort will highlight whether it is necessary, or worthwhile compared to an index. I just don't want to take the hours of computer time necessary to do it.
After thinking about it some more, the most probable source of lag for me is point (5). Your numbering scheme of 1.html for the newest posts is better and simpler for boards with turnover, but it's death for boards that do not delete posts regularly. That's a personal tweak I'll have to make.