I'm pro-1 as well, but is space really an issue? Or are you thinking ahead to "Natter 57 Varieties of Saying Nothing"?
If every vampire who said he was at the crucifixion was actually there, it would have been like Woodstock.
Spike ,'Same Time, Same Place'
Buffistas Building a Better Board
Do you have problems, concerns or recommendations about the technical side of the Phoenix? Air them here. Compliments also welcome.
Jon B. - Feb 24, 2003 9:40:20 am PST #3177 of 10000
A turkey in every toilet -- only in America!
DXMachina - Feb 24, 2003 9:40:57 am PST #3178 of 10000
You always do this. We get tipsy, and you take advantage of my love of the scientific method.
I have to say that being able to search the entire archive can be very useful at times, especially if you're trying to find an old discussion, and aren't quite sure when it occurred. I've done this a lot over at the WX Attic. I'm for the second database. Taking the older threads out of the active database will cut the number of hits for casual searches on a user name (which may have been a contributing cause of the crash) down a lot. The kind of search I mean is of the sort, "Has DX posted today? I'll search on his User Name and check." Or searches to see if someone has asked about you. These are really only looking for recent posts, but right now they search the archived threads as well, so you wind up with every post the user has ever made. For some posters, this is almost equivalent to a full threadsuck.
Putting the archives into a different database would mitigate that somewhat, because usually searches of the archives are more specific, so fewer posts returned per search, and probably less common.
Options 2 and 3 don't significantly reduce the total amount of space we're taking up.
No, but is that the main problem? I thought we were more worried about server load. Also, did we figure out what is taking up all the extra space? When I added of the sizes of the database, filk, and archives, I didn't get the same number that they mentioned to you.
Jon B. - Feb 24, 2003 9:45:02 am PST #3179 of 10000
A turkey in every toilet -- only in America!
These are really only looking for recent posts, but right now they search the archived threads as well, so you wind up with every post the user has ever made.
I almost always use the "seached subscribed threads" option but I realize that many folks might not think to do that. t edit Nor might many folks think to unsubscribe from closed threads.
Also, did we figure out what is taking up all the extra space?
Right, I forgot about that. From WX:
Your database is 324MB in size, and your home directory is 262MB in size. Your plan includes 350MB of storage. You are over by 236MB.
I don't get this ita. What's taking up 262MB of space if not the database?
[and DX replied]
At least some of it (40 MB or so) is the archived TT and WX threads, and the filk site.
§ ita § - Feb 24, 2003 9:46:18 am PST #3180 of 10000
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
is that the main problem?
It isn't yet, but it will be. I'd hate to have to react to that in a panic, the same way as we're having to react to the server load issue.
As for load, keeping them in the database in a different table offsets them from being part of the day-to-day processing, but I have a suspicion that since the database will still have the same number of records, with the overhead of having more tables that it will still drag it down. Much less, but it will still be a factor.
§ ita § - Feb 24, 2003 9:46:42 am PST #3181 of 10000
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
I don't get this ita. What's taking up 262MB of space if not the database?
I will check with support.
Jon B. - Feb 24, 2003 9:52:28 am PST #3182 of 10000
A turkey in every toilet -- only in America!
since the database will still have the same number of records, with the overhead of having more tables that it will still drag it down.
So the archives couldn't live in a completely separate database from the active threads?
Oh, wait, I get it - It would still have to be connected to the user table, and maybe others. Is that it?
§ ita § - Feb 24, 2003 9:55:37 am PST #3183 of 10000
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
It would still have to be connected to the user table, and maybe others. Is that it?
Yupped. The sucking options take care of that, since info is embedded. But the separate database would still be quasi-live, and reflecting stuff like a user changing their tagline, etc.
Michele T. - Feb 24, 2003 9:57:32 am PST #3184 of 10000
with a gleam in my eye, and an almost airtight alibi
Can we set the search default to be subscribed threads? Or is that less usable, you think?
DXMachina - Feb 24, 2003 9:57:33 am PST #3185 of 10000
You always do this. We get tipsy, and you take advantage of my love of the scientific method.
Yupped. The sucking options take care of that, since info is embedded. But the separate database would still be quasi-live, and reflecting stuff like a user changing their tagline, etc.
Right. It would be like the Attic at WX. Rats, I'd hate to lose that functionality. Searching for something thread by thread is a huge pain.
DXMachina - Feb 24, 2003 9:59:57 am PST #3186 of 10000
You always do this. We get tipsy, and you take advantage of my love of the scientific method.
Can we set the search default to be subscribed threads? Or is that less usable, you think?
I'm still subscribed to every Natter thread. Just never bothered to unsubscribe because the fall to the bottom of the list anyway. I can't be the only one who does that.