On 03/08/11 03:05, Rob Weir wrote:
On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 9:24 PM, TerryE<[email protected]> wrote:
On 02/08/11 23:28, Rob Weir wrote:
... But right now I see almost no activity on the wiki ...
... We've discussed the update access reasons and issues previously. As you
can see from the Apache logs, the read volumes are still pretty high though
they have fallen off by almost a factor of two since the Apache
announcement ...
... Read volumes are pretty much irrelevant when
discussing a policy for editing. Or are you suggesting that this is
related to caching policy? If so, that is a reasonable point. With
only 5 people editing, with a very low rate of changes, and many
people reading, caching should be very effective, at least on the most
frequently-read pages.
Rob, my point was that updates are only one measure of "activity on the
wiki". It's there to used and so read rates can't be ignored.
Once you've got to grips with OOo and have been through a release cycle
then you will come to understand the basic rhythm of update activity.
Whilst scoping the content of a new version and the dev releases there
is an upturn in R/W activity as members reflect this in the wiki and use
the wiki to collaborate on ideas.. Following the release, there is a
hump in end-user demand both to learn about new features or because this
has triggered rework of macros, etc. A good way to kill the update
rates and drop the read rates is to stall the upgrade cycle as happened
back in April. This is the main cause of the read and update trends
that we are discussing.
//Terry
