The whole point of the update server lockout (where it tells you that you have to wait a week to re-download the updates) is to prevent the wasting of bandwidth by people who constantly recreate their databases. Right now it will allow the same query to run 4 times before the lockout is triggered and someone running the updates the way it was intended should never have a problem. However, since it seems quite a few people are having a problem, what do you think the lockout should be?

If bandwidth is an issue, keep it at a week. I had to wait a week to setup one of my servers because of the lockout. It was not a big deal to me at this stage.
It should be mentioned in a sticky, the wiki, or in some setup instructions to backup the database when it's first set up.

Maybe an alternative should be given like the latest database is backed up and downloadable on the main site or something.

I have no problem with the week re download limit but can you post a configuration file settings I should use so It won't count against my download limit?
Also I have a very fast internet connection and would be more than happy to help host updates / sql dumps of the updates.

Why not have people just backup their own databases before they blow it up?

I think 4 update attempts in a week period is great. I vote for a limit being in a week. Now if/while we have more band width it would always be nice to have a shorter reset period

Aaden wrote:Why not have people just backup their own databases before they blow it up?

Agreed. I cannot comprehend why this is such a big issue.
Leave it as-is, but maybe give your database guys the ability to toggle an account for you. Just to help out.

One week...should be plenty...I agree that people should backup their downloads before attempting to modify them.

I can't vote for 30 minutes so I went with the next closest thing, 1 week.