X-Original-To: pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org Received: from spampd.localdomain (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E868475B8E; Thu, 8 May 2003 00:13:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sss.pgh.pa.us (unknown [192.204.191.242]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4FC14764A7; Thu, 8 May 2003 00:13:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from sss2.sss.pgh.pa.us (tgl@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by sss.pgh.pa.us (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h484DKU6017064; Thu, 8 May 2003 00:13:21 -0400 (EDT) To: Randall Lucas Cc: josh@agliodbs.com, "Mendola Gaetano" , "Achilleus Mantzios" , pgsql-sql@postgresql.org, pgsql-performance@postgresql.org, pgsql-bugs@postgresql.org Subject: Re: [PERFORM] [SQL] Unanswered Questions WAS: An unresolved performance problem. In-reply-to: References: Comments: In-reply-to Randall Lucas message dated "Wed, 07 May 2003 19:52:30 -0400" Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 00:13:20 -0400 Message-ID: <17063.1052367200@sss.pgh.pa.us> From: Tom Lane X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-32.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_01,EMAIL_ATTRIBUTION,IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT, REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES version=2.50 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.50 (1.173-2003-02-20-exp) X-Archive-Number: 200305/26 X-Sequence-Number: 5987 Randall Lucas writes: > I suspect that a good number of fairly simple questions aren't being > answered because they're either misdirected or because the poster > hasn't included an "answerable" question (one with sufficient > information to answer). That's always been a problem, but it does seem to have been getting worse lately. > A suggestion to partially counter this, at least for "slow query" type > questions, has been put forth. If we make it a social norm on the > pg-lists in general to reply off-list to inadequately descriptive "slow > query" questions with a canned message of helpful guidance, we may be > able to up the level of "answerability" of most questions. The idea of some canned guidance doesn't seem bad, but I'm not sure if it should be off-list or not. If newbies are corrected off-list then other newbies who might be lurking, or reading the archives, don't learn any better and will make the same mistakes in their turn. How about a standard answer of "you haven't really provided enough info for us to be helpful, please see this-URL for some hints"? That would avoid bulking up the list archives with many copies, yet at the same time the archives would provide evidence of the existence of hints... > Thoughts? Josh and I have placed a draft at > http://techdocs.postgresql.org/guides/SlowQueryPostingGuidelines Looks good, though I concur with Stephan's comment that the table schemas aren't optional. It might be worth including a checklist of the standard kinds of errors (for example, datatype mismatch preventing index usage). Come to think of it, that starts to make it look like a FAQ list directed towards performance issues. Maybe we could make this a subsection of the main FAQ? regards, tom lane