On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 18:35, Matteo Beccati <p...@beccati.com> wrote: > Il 18/01/2010 16:19, Dimitri Fontaine ha scritto: >> >> Magnus Hagander<mag...@hagander.net> writes: >>> >>> Also, I tink one of the main issues with the archives today that >>> people bring up is the inability to have threads cross months. I think >>> that should be fixed. Basically, get rid of the grouping by month for >>> a more dynamic way to browse. >> >> Clic a mail in a thread within more than one given month. See the Thread >> index for this email. It's complete, for both the month. Example here: >> >> http://archives.beccati.org/pgsql-hackers-history/message/191438.html >> http://archives.beccati.org/pgsql-hackers-history/message/191334.html > > Thanks Dimitri, you beat me to it ;) > > >> That said, the month boundary is artificial, so maybe having a X >> messages per page instead would be better? > > Not sure. Having date based pages helps out reducing the set of messages > that need to be scanned and sorted, increasing the likeliness of an index > scan. But I'm happy to examine other alternatives too.
I think we need to get rid of the months based pages. We can keep them as an option, but they're not a good root thing. I'd rather have something where you start at a certain point and see <n> before and <n> after, so we keep the page to a reasonably short time. Keeping "30 days" there somewhere may make sense, but arbitrarily splitting at the 1st of each month doesn't follow the flow of discussions very well. I think the first step has to be to figure out how we'd like it presented. Only after that should we consider how to implement it to get fast scans in the database... -- Magnus Hagander Me: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/ -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
