Received: from maia.hub.org (maia-5.hub.org [200.46.204.29]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 33CE16325E1 for ; Thu, 27 May 2010 17:09:05 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by maia.hub.org (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.29]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 20321-09 for ; Thu, 27 May 2010 20:08:58 +0000 (UTC) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (sss.pgh.pa.us [66.207.139.130]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7ABC6325E4 for ; Thu, 27 May 2010 17:08:57 -0300 (ADT) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id o4RK8Y3Z007192; Thu, 27 May 2010 16:08:34 -0400 (EDT) To: Josh Berkus cc: Greg Stark , "Marc G. Fournier" , Jaime Casanova , Greg Smith , jd@commandprompt.com, Magnus Hagander , Robert Haas , Alvaro Herrera , Bruce Momjian , Simon Riggs , pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org Subject: Re: List traffic In-reply-to: <4BFEB5E7.6080504@agliodbs.com> References: <201005111350.o4BDo4x27597@momjian.us> <20506.1273785548@sss.pgh.pa.us> <1273790358.8624.3132.camel@jd-desktop.unknown.charter.com> <4913.1273790764@sss.pgh.pa.us> <4BECC5E5.1000901@2ndquadrant.com> <4BFEB5E7.6080504@agliodbs.com> Comments: In-reply-to Josh Berkus message dated "Thu, 27 May 2010 11:11:51 -0700" Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 16:08:34 -0400 Message-ID: <7191.1274990914@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-1.91 tagged_above=-5 required=5 tests=BAYES_00=-1.9, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 201005/1708 X-Sequence-Number: 163371 Josh Berkus 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 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 these lists because it is too high. I get complaints > -- and people personal-sending me questions because they don't want to > subscribe -- all the time. > Having fewer posts on any particular list is *desireable*. It's a good > thing. It's *only* a problem when a bug report or user question goes > unanswered because the list is unattended. And so far, I've only seen > one report of that. Well, there's no free lunch. If we have a whole lot of "small" lists there are going to be two big downsides: fewer people reading each list (hence fewer answers), and many more arguably-misclassified postings, thus diluting the theoretical targetedness of the lists. If you want good answers to questions you need to post them in a forum where there are enough people to ensure someone will know the answer (and have the time/interest to respond). People who want answers and don't want to have to read other discussions should consider obtaining commercial support. regards, tom lane