[Theforum] Re: Article cleanup issue

[Morgan Kelsey]

> > since database performance is the issue that got all this started,
> > maybe it makes sense to move archived content to a second,
> > parallel DB (especially if we stick with oracle).
>
> i am reminded once again of the patient who visits the doctor
> http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/jargon/html/entry/Don't-do-that-then!.html
>
> you new guys, who were all so quick to vote +1/-1 on archiving articles
> (must. resist. urge. to. make. sarcastic. remark. about. voting.), perhaps
> do not fully appreciate what jeff is wrestling with here
>
> but making the database more complex does not really address the
> performance problem
>

as one of the 'guys' here who has actually given the source code a good
read, i think i do know what jeff is up against here.
the queries we're running really aren't all *that* complex, and the kind of
performance jeff has been reporting (+8000-10,000 ms) is truly atrocious.
the real problem here, appears to be oracle in this configuration.

> yes, the poor performance of an already complex query can be "improved" by
> "removing" articles -- but hey, reductio ad absurdum, the performance
would
> **fly** if every article were automatically archived after a week or two
> (yeah, dumb example, so sue me)
>

ok, i agree, two databases certainly isn't the best of ideas. but we already
seem to have a DB thats not exactly suited for what we're doing to it (no
offence to anyone)
again, i don't think the queries are really the problem, but i've been wrong
before, heh.


> jeff, your comment "the content group should definitely come up with some
> criteria for archiving articles and then aggressively attack the old ones
> to get them out of the homepage and category queries/results" is begging
> the question (it assumes that archiving is the solution to the performance
> problem)
>
> and it should not be the content group making that type of decision --
> don't yell at me, it's just my opinion, and i'm trying hard to keep up
with
> who's responsible for what -- maybe content can carry out the archiving
> rules once they're set, but they should not decide stuff that will have a
> major impact on evolt site visitor experience (like "where did my articles
> go?")

i think theforum should make the criteria.
so, +sorta
:p


nagrom