XF 2.1 Rebuilding Users Is At A Count Larger Than Max Users

⭐ Alex ⭐

Well-known member
So, the forum is rebuilding users. For some reason the count displayed: Rebuilding... Users (6941) is more than my forum contains (4289 users). Did it glitch out or what's going on? The count continues to increase.

If I close the tab and go back into admin panel, I get a warning "There is a manual rebuild job that's not completed".
 
What is the URL of the site so I can check something.

The site isn't accessible from the internet. Is there another way you can help?

Update: I restarted the rebuild user job and now it's over 9000! Haha.

Update: After refreshing the page it sent me back to the ACP and said rebuild users complete. So it seems there's a UI bug in running the job through the browser.
 
Last edited:
The number displayed is the user ID of the last user rebuilt, which does not necessarily correspond to the count. Especially if you're comparing it with the count displayed in the statistics widget, which only counts valid users.
 
The number displayed is the user ID of the last user rebuilt, which does not necessarily correspond to the count. Especially if you're comparing it with the count displayed in the statistics widget, which only counts valid users.

Wow thanks, that is very useful to know and makes complete sense now. Thanks for helping figure that out.
 
How does this unavailable installation relate to your licensed site?

The highest member ID on that site is 1,477.

Yet the site you are referring to has 4,289 (or more) members.
 
How does this unavailable installation relate to your licensed site?

The highest member ID on that site is 1,477.

Yet the site you are referring to has 4,289 (or more) members.

I knew your post sounded suspicious. It is a test installation which the license agreement states is allowed as long as it's obvious. I'm using a different data set than that of the public version, which is why it has more users.
 
That's what I was trying to determine.

If you had clarified that in your original post then it would have been clear what the issue was.
 
Top Bottom