From: Yeb Havinga <yebhavinga@gmail.com>
To: Marc G. Fournier <scrappy@hub.org>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Cc: Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: List traffic
Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 09:13:17 +0200
Message-ID: <4BECF80D.7020806@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1005131806470.22297@hub.org>
References: <201005111350.o4BDo4x27597@momjian.us>
<alpine.BSF.2.00.1005111054340.85296@hub.org>
<1273598624-sup-3654@alvh.no-ip.org>
<alpine.BSF.2.00.1005111431310.85296@hub.org>
<AANLkTikMGofzZhcnIvcKPTjXepMKUVAaU1IQDxRHkDuk@mail.gmail.com>
<AANLkTilm5weCupZ6WPTixnJynS_djM_qRJfpGK6ZC6f3@mail.gmail.com>
<4BEC4DCD.3050602@gmail.com>
<1273783373-sup-1781@alvh.no-ip.org>
<alpine.BSF.2.00.1005131806470.22297@hub.org>
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 interesting is to have some extra 'tags/headers' added to the
>>> emails (document classification with e.g. self organizing map/kohonen),
>>> so my local filters could make labels based on that, instead of perhaps
>>> badly spelled keywords in subjects or message body.
>
> I missed this when I read it the first time .. all list email does
> have an X-Mailing-List header added so that you can label based on
> list itself ... is that what you mean, or are you thinking of
> something else entirely?
Something else: if automatic classification of articles was in place,
there would be need of fewer mailing lists, depending on the quality of
the classification.
IMHO the problem of handling the big volume of the lists is not solved
by splitting into more, since it does not decrease the amount of posts
that are interesting from the subscribers perspective. It would only
mean that posters are more likely to make mistakes, a possible increase
in crossposts or 'my question was not answered there so now I try here'
on the sender part, and at the subscriber side bigger chance to miss
interesting articles. That my current mailing list setup works for me
supports this claim; I did not subscribe to less lists, but managed to
decrease the ms spent at 'handling' to an amount that became workable.
Though I do not believe algorithmic article classification/ranking to
provide a 100% fool proof filter, it might help decreasing the "ms spent
per article" more. Take a look at how "carrot2" clusters results from
the query "postgresql prepared transactions site:postgresql.org" -
http://search.carrot2.org/stable/search?source=web&view=tree&skin=fancy-compact&query=po...
I wonder if a cluster algorithm could tag articles with (multiple)
keywords, e.g. 'hackers','prepared transaction','dba' etc etc. I could
then make filters or ranking on: hackers AND optimizer -> +10.
regards,
Yeb Havinga
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-admin@postgresql.org
Cc: yebhavinga@gmail.com, scrappy@hub.org, alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org, gsstark@mit.edu, robertmhaas@gmail.com, bruce@momjian.us, simon@2ndquadrant.com, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: List traffic
In-Reply-To: <4BECF80D.7020806@gmail.com>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox