On 5/27/10 5:42 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
We do not have a problem. The lists are fine the way they are.
+1 ... wasn't the point I thought you were trying to make, but I'm
good with not changing things.
Yeah, that's because I was responding to the
On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 3:44 PM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
On 5/27/10 5:42 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
We do not have a problem. The lists are fine the way they are.
+1 ... wasn't the point I thought you were trying to make, but I'm
good with not
On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 7:38 AM, Marc G. Fournier scra...@hub.org wrote:
most people are not prepared to understand the concept of more than
one list for project...
Apparently you don't use very many large projects ... FreeBSD has 20+ lists,
dedicated to various aspects of both end user and
On Thu, 27 May 2010, Greg Stark wrote:
Sure, if we have distinctions which make sense then having separate
lists makes sense. Linux has separate lists for different drivers,
different parts of the kernel, projects to improve the kernel in
various specific ways (latency, etc). I'm all for having
On 5/27/10 8:38 AM, Greg Stark wrote:
Lists like -ecpg or -odbc
would work fine if the traffic warranted them.
A low-traffic list is a feature, not a bug. Most people don't *like*
subscribing to lists which have 80posts/day.
But some of the lists we have now are 99% overlap with each other
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
On 5/27/10 8:38 AM, Greg Stark wrote:
Mot administration
questions are originally posed as general help questions. If you're
subscribed to these lists you get a random, fairly small, subset of
discussion related these topics.
Only someone who is a
Excerpts from Josh Berkus's message of jue may 27 14:11:51 -0400 2010:
Only someone who is a postgresql developer would consider 15-30
posts/day small. For most of our user base, the level of traffic on
-performance, -sql, and -general is already too high and many people
don't subscribe to
Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com writes:
We do not have a problem. The lists are fine the way they are.
+1 ... wasn't the point I thought you were trying to make, but I'm
good with not changing things.
regards, tom lane
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list
On Sat, 15 May 2010, Jaime Casanova wrote:
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 8:39 AM, Marc G. Fournier scra...@hub.org wrote:
And IMHO, that is as much a fault of the 'old timers' on the lists as the
newbies ... if nobody redirects / loosely enforces the mandates of the
various lists, newbies aren't
Linux has *as many if not more* ... MySQL, if memory servers, has a half
dozen or more ... etc ...
MySQL has a bunch of lists, none of which get much traffic. Honestly,
they should probably be combined.
--
Rob Wultsch
--
Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org)
To
[redirected to -chat]
On Fri, 14 May 2010, Rob Wultsch wrote:
Linux has *as many if not more* ... MySQL, if memory servers, has a half
dozen or more ... etc ...
MySQL has a bunch of lists, none of which get much traffic. Honestly,
they should probably be combined.
Except, when you do
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 11:50 PM, Rob Wultsch wult...@gmail.com wrote:
Linux has *as many if not more* ... MySQL, if memory servers, has a half
dozen or more ... etc ...
MySQL has a bunch of lists, none of which get much traffic. Honestly,
they should probably be combined.
--
Rob Wultsch
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Thu, 13 May 2010, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Excerpts from Yeb Havinga's message of jue may 13 15:06:53 -0400 2010:
My $0.02 - I like the whole 'don't sort, search' (or how did they call
it?) just let the inbox fill up, google is fast enough. What would be
really
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
... is there a reason why, other the fact that we don't do now, that we
can't just put in a restriction against cross posting altogether?
Because that would be shooting ourselves in the foot. Cross-posting
is often desirable. If we had a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
There is no reason why advocacy can't happen on general. Theoretically
www could be on hackers (although I do see the point of a separate
list).
I don't feel as strong about -advocacy being removed, but we certainly
can fold in -sql and
Greg Sabino Mullane g...@turnstep.com wrote:
Would anyone argue against rolling those two (sql and admin) into
-general as a first step?
At the risk of repeating myself, I won't be able to keep up with the
traffic of the combined list; so rather than read 100% of the
messages from a smaller
On Fri, 14 May 2010, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
... is there a reason why, other the fact that we don't do now, that we
can't just put in a restriction against cross posting altogether?
Because that would be shooting ourselves in the
On Fri, 14 May 2010, Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: RIPEMD160
There is no reason why advocacy can't happen on general. Theoretically
www could be on hackers (although I do see the point of a separate
list).
I don't feel as strong about -advocacy being
On Fri, 14 May 2010, Kevin Grittner wrote:
Greg Sabino Mullane g...@turnstep.com wrote:
Would anyone argue against rolling those two (sql and admin) into
-general as a first step?
At the risk of repeating myself, I won't be able to keep up with the
traffic of the combined list; so rather
Marc G. Fournier scra...@hub.org wrote:
-sql : how to write a query
-performance : how to improve performance of my queries
-admin : how to admin the server
-novice : I'm a new user
-odbc : how to use ...
-php : php related interface questions
-interfaces : more general then -odbc
why
Marc G. Fournier scra...@hub.org writes:
why not close down -general so that ppl *have* to use better pick where to
post their question ...
I can't imagine that there's not going to need to be a catchall list
for problems that don't fit into any of the subcategories.
More generally, we
On Fri, 14 May 2010, Yeb Havinga wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Thu, 13 May 2010, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Excerpts from Yeb Havinga's message of jue may 13 15:06:53 -0400 2010:
My $0.02 - I like the whole 'don't sort, search' (or how did they call
it?) just let the inbox fill up, google
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I can't imagine that there's not going to need to be a catchall
list for problems that don't fit into any of the subcategories.
More generally, we already have most of the lists that you
suggest, and we already know that people frequently don't find the
There is no reason why advocacy can't happen on general. Theoretically
www could be on hackers (although I do see the point of a separate
list).
First off, this is absolutely the wrong list to be discussing management
of PostgreSQL lists. That belongs on pgsql-www. And, I'll point out,
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Fri, 14 May 2010, Yeb Havinga wrote:
Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Thu, 13 May 2010, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Excerpts from Yeb Havinga's message of jue may 13 15:06:53 -0400 2010:
My $0.02 - I like the whole 'don't sort, search' (or how did they
call
it?) just let
On Fri, 14 May 2010, Kevin Grittner wrote:
Well, redoubling our current efforts to direct people to more
specific lists would accomplish nothing, since doubling zero leaves
you with zero. The description of -general includes:
Agreed ...
Given that, the fact that -admin, -novice, -sql, and
On Fri, 14 May 2010, Josh Berkus wrote:
First off, this is absolutely the wrong list to be discussing management of
PostgreSQL lists. That belongs on pgsql-www.
Actually, this is as good a list as any ... -www is for WWW related
issues, not mailing list ... be as inappropriate there as it
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Josh Berkus j...@agliodbs.com wrote:
Second, regarding advocacy: no, absolutely not. -advocacy is a working list
and not a virtual water cooler.
+1. I would find it very difficult to manage having -advocacy thrown
into -general.
If folks think that
Kevin Grittner wrote:
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
I can't imagine that there's not going to need to be a catchall
list for problems that don't fit into any of the subcategories.
More generally, we already have most of the lists that you
suggest, and we already know that
On Fri, 14 May 2010, Bruce Momjian wrote:
FYI, I usually email new people privately that cross-posting a question
can cause the question to be ignored. They usually respond positively
and avoid it in the future.
We all have our own methods ... for instance, I just CC'd this to -chat
with a
Tom Lane wrote:
I can see the need for small tightly-focused special lists.
How about a list devoted to discussions about reorganizing the lists?
It would get plenty of traffic, and then I could not subscribe to that
and have that many less messages to read.
There is only one viable
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 4:39 AM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Is it
helpful to novices that they can subscribe to a list when they won't be
overwhelmed by traffic, and can ask questions without being too concerned
about being harassed for being newbies? Probably.
Only if they
On Fri, 14 May 2010, Greg Stark wrote:
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 4:39 AM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
Is it
helpful to novices that they can subscribe to a list when they won't be
overwhelmed by traffic, and can ask questions without being too concerned
about being harassed for being
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 11:39 PM, Greg Smith g...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
The only real argument to keep some more targeted lists is for the benefit
of the people who subscribe to them, not we the faithful, so that they can
have something that isn't a firehose of messages to sort through. Is it
Greg Stark gsst...@mit.edu wrote:
If they're interested in performance topics and they're not
subscribed to -general then they're missing *most* of what they're
interested in which doesn't take place on -performance.
Well, I for one can't currently suck the end of the fire hose which
is
[moved to -chat]
On Fri, 14 May 2010, Kevin Grittner wrote:
I think that's exactly backwards -- we shouldn't have any traffic on
-general for issues which could reasonably happen in another list. You
can always configure your email to combine lists into a common folder
upon receipt.
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 8:39 AM, Marc G. Fournier scra...@hub.org wrote:
And IMHO, that is as much a fault of the 'old timers' on the lists as the
newbies ... if nobody redirects / loosely enforces the mandates of the
various lists, newbies aren't going to learn to post to more appropriate
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 2:04 AM, Marc G. Fournier scra...@hub.org wrote:
On Wed, 12 May 2010, Greg Stark wrote:
I'm thinking I'll move -general (and the useless -novice) to another folder.
But I'm left wondering what to do with -admin and -performance. They're a
random mix of user content
On Thu, 13 May 2010, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 2:04 AM, Marc G. Fournier scra...@hub.org wrote:
On Wed, 12 May 2010, Greg Stark wrote:
I'm thinking I'll move -general (and the useless -novice) to another folder.
But I'm left wondering what to do with -admin and
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Marc G. Fournier scra...@hub.org wrote:
On Thu, 13 May 2010, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 2:04 AM, Marc G. Fournier scra...@hub.org wrote:
On Wed, 12 May 2010, Greg Stark wrote:
I'm thinking I'll move -general (and the useless -novice) to
Le 11/05/2010 19:24, Alvaro Herrera a écrit :
Excerpts from Marc G. Fournier's message of mar may 11 09:58:34 -0400 2010:
If list traffic, especially on -hackers, is getting so large, should we
look at maybe splitting it? I could easily enough split things such that
I duplicate the
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
The difference between discussing a patch and discussing an idea that
might lead to a patch is fairly fine.
And importantly -- who would be able to subscribe to one and not the
other? If you have to subscribe to both to
My thought had been a split along the lines of major components of the
server ... for instance, a totally seperate list for HS related issues, so
that, if nothing else, those 'lurkers' that are only interested in
developments on that front could be there but not on the main stream
-hackers
Greg Stark wrote:
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 5:24 PM, Robert Haas robertmh...@gmail.com wrote:
The difference between discussing a patch and discussing an idea that
might lead to a patch is fairly fine.
And importantly -- who would be able to subscribe to one and not the
other? If you
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 8:05 PM, Marc G. Fournier scra...@hub.org wrote:
My thought had been a split along the lines of major components of the server
... for instance, a totally seperate list for HS related issues, so that, if
nothing else, those 'lurkers' that are only interested in
On Thu, 13 May 2010, Magnus Hagander wrote:
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 8:05 PM, Marc G. Fournier scra...@hub.org wrote:
My thought had been a split along the lines of major components of the server
... for instance, a totally seperate list for HS related issues, so that, if
nothing else, those
Excerpts from Yeb Havinga's message of jue may 13 15:06:53 -0400 2010:
Now I made a new gmail account, subscribed to all lists with some volume
and let it all message per message come into the inbox. Together with
thunderbird/imap this works quite nicely. With filters it's possible to
tag
On Thu, 13 May 2010, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Excerpts from Yeb Havinga's message of jue may 13 15:06:53 -0400 2010:
My $0.02 - I like the whole 'don't sort, search' (or how did they call
it?) just let the inbox fill up, google is fast enough. What would be
really interesting is to have some
Marc G. Fournier scra...@hub.org writes:
On Thu, 13 May 2010, Magnus Hagander wrote:
We tried that with pgsql-hackers-win32 and iirc also
pgsql-hackers-pitr, and it was a big failure...
But, we are doing that now with pgsql-cluster-hackers and it looks to be
working quite well from what I
Alvaro Herrera alvhe...@alvh.no-ip.org writes:
Excerpts from Yeb Havinga's message of jue may 13 15:06:53 -0400 2010:
Now I made a new gmail account
Yeah, this approach is interesting. A few days ago I started using Sup
( http://sup.rubyforge.org/ ) to manage my email
Feature wise, I think
On Thu, 13 May 2010, Tom Lane wrote:
Marc G. Fournier scra...@hub.org writes:
On Thu, 13 May 2010, Magnus Hagander wrote:
We tried that with pgsql-hackers-win32 and iirc also
pgsql-hackers-pitr, and it was a big failure...
But, we are doing that now with pgsql-cluster-hackers and it looks
On Thu, 2010-05-13 at 19:13 -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
On Thu, 13 May 2010, Tom Lane wrote:
Marc G. Fournier scra...@hub.org writes:
On Thu, 13 May 2010, Magnus Hagander wrote:
We tried that with pgsql-hackers-win32 and iirc also
pgsql-hackers-pitr, and it was a big failure...
Joshua D. Drake j...@commandprompt.com writes:
On Thu, 2010-05-13 at 19:13 -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
But that, IMHO, is the point of the smaller list ... it allows the group
on that list to hash out their ideas, and, hopefully, deal with both
arguments and counter arguments so that when
On Thu, 13 May 2010, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Between labels, filters, watch lists and all the other goodies any MUA
will give you, I see no reason to have this all broken out anymore.
So, if one merges all the lists into one (not arguing for / against that),
how do you filter? Based on what?
Excerpts from Marc G. Fournier's message of jue may 13 23:11:40 -0400 2010:
On Thu, 13 May 2010, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Between labels, filters, watch lists and all the other goodies any MUA
will give you, I see no reason to have this all broken out anymore.
So, if one merges all the
On Thu, 13 May 2010, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
If most of the questions are badly categorized or cross posted to more
than one list, how useful a label is the X-Mailing-List header? How
useful is to filter on the pgsql-general label?
That is a point, but, IMHO, that is one of our key issues ...
On Tue, 11 May 2010, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Excerpts from Marc G. Fournier's message of mar may 11 09:58:34 -0400 2010:
If list traffic, especially on -hackers, is getting so large, should we
look at maybe splitting it? I could easily enough split things such that
I duplicate the subscriber
Excerpts from Marc G. Fournier's message of mar may 11 09:58:34 -0400 2010:
If list traffic, especially on -hackers, is getting so large, should we
look at maybe splitting it? I could easily enough split things such that
I duplicate the subscriber list, so nobody would have to subscribe,
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Marc G. Fournier scra...@hub.org wrote:
On Tue, 11 May 2010, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
Excerpts from Marc G. Fournier's message of mar may 11 09:58:34 -0400
2010:
If list traffic, especially on -hackers, is getting so large, should we
look at maybe splitting it?
On Wed, 12 May 2010, Greg Stark wrote:
I'm thinking I'll move -general (and the useless -novice) to another
folder. But I'm left wondering what to do with -admin and -performance.
They're a random mix of user content and developer content. I'll
probably move them along with -general but that
Simon Riggs wrote:
Traffic on the PostgreSQL lists is very high now and I freely admit that
reading every email is simply not possible for me, even the ones that
mention topics that keyword searches tell me are of potential interest.
If anybody knows of a bug or suspected bug in my code, I
On Tue, 11 May 2010, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
Traffic on the PostgreSQL lists is very high now and I freely admit that
reading every email is simply not possible for me, even the ones that
mention topics that keyword searches tell me are of potential interest.
If anybody knows
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Marc G. Fournier scra...@hub.org wrote:
On Tue, 11 May 2010, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
Traffic on the PostgreSQL lists is very high now and I freely admit that
reading every email is simply not possible for me, even the ones that
mention topics
On Tue, 2010-05-11 at 09:50 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
Traffic on the PostgreSQL lists is very high now and I freely admit that
reading every email is simply not possible for me, even the ones that
mention topics that keyword searches tell me are of potential
Simon Riggs wrote:
On Tue, 2010-05-11 at 09:50 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Simon Riggs wrote:
Traffic on the PostgreSQL lists is very high now and I freely admit that
reading every email is simply not possible for me, even the ones that
mention topics that keyword searches tell me
Magnus Hagander mag...@hagander.net writes:
On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Marc G. Fournier scra...@hub.org wrote:
Not sure where the split would be, mind you ... almost thinking about patch
review / discussions vs hashing out new features or something like that ...
We just *discontinued*
On Tue, 2010-05-11 at 10:23 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
Sure. You did a huge job of getting HS done and I will try to help
where I can, and I know you have a business to run
(http://www.2ndquadrant.com/).
2ndQuadrant is in the end the main and final reason Hot Standby exists
and has now
67 matches
Mail list logo
