X-Original-To: pgsql-www-postgresql.org@localhost.postgresql.org Received: from localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADC379DD073 for ; Sat, 25 Mar 2006 14:15:58 -0400 (AST) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (av.hub.org [200.46.204.144]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 90632-04 for ; Sat, 25 Mar 2006 14:15:57 -0400 (AST) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from anchor-post-34.mail.demon.net (anchor-post-34.mail.demon.net [194.217.242.92]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 596529DCF9E for ; Sat, 25 Mar 2006 14:15:56 -0400 (AST) Received: from mailgate.vale-housing.co.uk ([194.217.48.34] helo=vale-housing.co.uk) by anchor-post-34.mail.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 4.42) id 1FNDIp-0004db-G0 for pgsql-www@postgresql.org; Sat, 25 Mar 2006 18:15:55 +0000 Received: from 192.168.1.106 ([192.168.1.106]) by ratbert.vale-housing.co.uk ([192.168.1.106]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Sat, 25 Mar 2006 18:15:55 +0000 From: "Dave Page" To: , Cc: Subject: Re: search.postgresql.org Message-ID: <00df01c65038$28a09415$6a01a8c0@valehousing.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sat, 25 Mar 2006 18:15:46 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Thread-Topic: [pgsql-www] search.postgresql.org thread-index: AcZQLKM8wRoHwWGlSEy/mqM/FpYU0QAC4VkP X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at hub.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=3.531 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.869, MSGID_DOLLARS=2.163, RATWARE_MS_HASH=1.379, RATWARE_OUTLOOK_NONAME=1.861, URI_NOVOWEL=0.997] X-Spam-Score: 3.531 X-Spam-Level: *** X-Archive-Number: 200603/139 X-Sequence-Number: 9729 -----Original Message----- From: "Joshua D. Drake" Sent: 25/03/06 16:53:27 To: "Tom Lane" Cc: "PostgreSQL WWW" Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] search.postgresql.org > It seems to me that archives should be secondly only to=20 > www.postgresql.org.=20 I disagree - the web search is intended to favour factual sites over the = archives which may contain incorrect info. If you want to search the = archives only you still can. > Once the new techdocs is live and we get some solid > content on there, then we can push that up. That is on www so will have the same rating. /D -----Unmodified Original Message----- > Um, what other resources are rated higher? If you'll pardon my > ignorance, what other resources is the search engine considering at = all? Below is the weights. As John said earlier they just decide who's links show up first. It seems to me that archives should be secondly only to=20 www.postgresql.org. Once the new techdocs is live and we get some solid content on there, then we can push that up. Thoughts? SiteWeight http://www.postgresql.org/ 100 SiteWeight http://advocacy.postgresql.org/ 100 SiteWeight http://jdbc.postgresql.org/ 100 SiteWeight http://developer.postgresql.org/ 100 # Authoritiative project site SiteWeight http://gborg.postgresql.org/ 75 SiteWeight http://pgadmin.postgresql.org/ 75 SiteWeight http://phppgadmin.sourceforge.net/ 75 SiteWeight http://pgfoundry.org/ 75 # User contributed stuff SiteWeight http://techdocs.postgresql.org/ 50 SiteWeight http://archives.postgresql.org/ 50 # Outside but reliable SiteWeight http://www.varlena.com/ 25 # And the rest... SiteWeight http://www.postgresql.cl/ 0 SiteWeight http://postgresql.ok.cz/ 0 SiteWeight http://www.postgresql.jp/ 0 SiteWeight http://www.postgresqlfr.org/ 0 SiteWeight http://www.linuxshare.ru/ 0 SiteWeight http://www.postgres.de/ 0 SiteWeight http://www.pgsqldb.org/ 0 SiteWeight http://www.postgresql.org.br/ 0 --=20 =3D=3D=3D The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. = =3D=3D=3D Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240 Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997 http://www.commandprompt.com/ ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 3: Have you checked our extensive FAQ? http://www.postgresql.org/docs/faq