From: Marc G. Fournier <scrappy@hub.org>
To: Greg Stark <gsstark@mit.edu>
Cc: Jaime Casanova <jaime@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Greg Smith <greg@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: jd@commandprompt.com, Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>
Cc: Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
Cc: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: List traffic
Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 12:52:28 -0300 (ADT)
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1005271249010.75550@hub.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimEmSQiSPXRmH1aFqvBIwFgaGuxb8C_Fb5v6oS_@mail.gmail.com>
References: <201005111350.o4BDo4x27597@momjian.us>
<AANLkTimYX6OKsUxXZistxB62wMqDztejhK45HcnjBrPA@mail.gmail.com>
<alpine.BSF.2.00.1005131740270.22297@hub.org>
<20506.1273785548@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<alpine.BSF.2.00.1005131912160.22297@hub.org>
<1273790358.8624.3132.camel@jd-desktop.unknown.charter.com>
<4913.1273790764@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<4BECC5E5.1000901@2ndquadrant.com>
<AANLkTin4XpFVH0pTCwaRywGseIeVLVlNLcAJ6T_2ggzr@mail.gmail.com>
<alpine.BSF.2.00.1005141035290.22297@hub.org>
<AANLkTimcf9sCu5hBdiDdpXbOQDZPsPa_uNec_SMtro47@mail.gmail.com>
<alpine.BSF.2.00.1005150337140.22297@hub.org>
<AANLkTimEmSQiSPXRmH1aFqvBIwFgaGuxb8C_Fb5v6oS_@mail.gmail.com>
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 a list
> dedicated to infrastructure (oddly named -www here)
Actually, infrastructure is appropriately discussed on -sysadmins ... web
is on -www ... tends to be a bit of overlap since -sysadmins was added
later, and prior to that we did discuss on -www ...
> since those topics are usually well defined. Lists like -ecpg or -odbc
> would work fine if the traffic warranted them.
I don't agree with the comment about 'if traffic warranted them' though
... the fact that there is very little traffic should be what makes them
attractive / useful ... you don't have to weed through alot of posts to
find the odbc/ecpg related ones ...
> Perhaps what I'm looking for is a more sensible division that allows
> most of the traffic related to the subtopics to actually go there. It
> would have to be a division so clearcut that anyone who doesn't follow
> could reasonably be blamed for not following etiquette. That's simply
> not true with the current divisions.
how about something -sql vs -tuning ... ? -tuning replacing -performance,
which I do agree could be sql *or* server ... where -tuning would be more
obviously server related ...
----
Marc G. Fournier Hub.Org Hosting Solutions S.A.
scrappy@hub.org http://www.hub.org
Yahoo:yscrappy Skype: hub.org ICQ:7615664 MSN:scrappy@hub.org
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: scrappy@hub.org, gsstark@mit.edu, jaime@2ndquadrant.com, greg@2ndquadrant.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, magnus@hagander.net, robertmhaas@gmail.com, alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org, bruce@momjian.us, simon@2ndquadrant.com, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: List traffic
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1005271249010.75550@hub.org>
* 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