Received: from localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F4F99FB2F9 for ; Mon, 9 Oct 2006 23:18:28 -0300 (ADT) Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.251]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 86013-02 for ; Mon, 9 Oct 2006 23:18:22 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey- Received: from n034.sc1.cp.net (smtpout1482.sc1.he.tucows.com [64.97.157.182]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57FC99FB2F4 for ; Mon, 9 Oct 2006 23:18:22 -0300 (ADT) Received: from [192.168.0.12] (68.34.49.125) by n034.sc1.cp.net (7.2.069.1) (authenticated as rob@treat.com) id 45244BE300151092; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 02:18:16 +0000 From: Robert Treat To: pgsql-www@postgresql.org Subject: Re: About docbot Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2006 22:17:11 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 Cc: "Dave Page" , "Andreas 'ads' Scherbaum" , "Magnus Hagander" , david@fetter.org, gmr@ehpg.net, jd@commandprompt.com, ads@pgug.de References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200610092217.11804.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net> X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.743 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL, FORGED_RCVD_HELO, RCVD_IN_BL_SPAMCOP_NET X-Spam-Level: * X-Archive-Number: 200610/16 X-Sequence-Number: 10805 On Monday 09 October 2006 03:28, Dave Page wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: pgsql-www-owner@postgresql.org > > [mailto:pgsql-www-owner@postgresql.org] On Behalf Of Andreas > > 'ads' Scherbaum > > Sent: 09 October 2006 00:44 > > To: Magnus Hagander > > Cc: david@fetter.org; gmr@ehpg.net; jd@commandprompt.com; > > ads@pgug.de; pgsql-www@postgresql.org > > Subject: Re: [pgsql-www] About docbot > > > > > I'd really like to hear the input from some of the others on the web > > > team as well :-) I think it sounds like a good idea in > > > > principle, but > > > > > there are others... ,) > > > > ok, what about this topic? > > The consens sounded to me like using slony to replicate the bot db > > to the website and display a prominent result set on top of the search > > site. > > > > Any intentions to move forward? > > Yes, I think so - but it's not going to happen overnight as the search > engine needs to be rewritten first. This is progressing very well, but > isn't there just yet. > Dave, whats your opinion on moving the database completly onto the postgresql.org server and doing away with the slony replication bit (which seems like overkill imho) We could then grant access to bots that need it or provide a full fledged web api to people who want to interface with it. The one thing I am wondering is that this would in theory be a higher load than the current website gives, since all requests would run through the db. -- Robert Treat Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL