Greg Smith writes:
> Craig James wrote:
>> By using "current" and encouraging people to link to that, we could
>> quickly change the Google pagerank so that a search for Postgres would
>> turn up the most-recent version of documentation.
>
> How do you propose to encourage people to do that?
Wh
On 7/24/10 5:57 AM, Torsten Zühlsdorff wrote:
Craig James schrieb:
The problem is that Google ranks pages based on inbound links, so
older versions of Postgres *always* come up before the latest version
in page ranking.
Since 2009 you can deal with this by defining the canonical-version.
(htt
Craig James schrieb:
The problem is that Google ranks pages based on inbound links, so
older versions of Postgres *always* come up before the latest version
in page ranking.
Since 2009 you can deal with this by defining the canonical-version.
(http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2009/02
On 7/23/10 2:22 AM, Torsten Zühlsdorff wrote:
Craig James schrieb:
A useful trick to know is that if you replace the version number
with "current", you'll get to the latest version most of the time
(sometimes the name of the page is changed between versions, too, but
this isn't that frequent).
Craig James schrieb:
A useful trick to know is that if you replace the version number
with "current", you'll get to the latest version most of the time
(sometimes the name of the page is changed between versions, too, but
this isn't that frequent).
The docs pages could perhaps benefit from a
On 7/21/10 6:47 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
Craig James wrote:
By using "current" and encouraging people to link to that, we could
quickly change the Google pagerank so that a search for Postgres would
turn up the most-recent version of documentation.
How do you propose to encourage people to do tha
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 1:35 AM, Richard Huxton wrote:
> On 22/07/10 03:27, Greg Smith wrote:
>
>> Steve Atkins wrote:
>>
>>> If http://postgresql.org/docs/9.0/* were to 302 redirect to
>>> http://postgresql.org/docs/current/* while 9.0 is the current release
>>> (and similarly for 9.1 and so on)
On 22/07/10 03:27, Greg Smith wrote:
Steve Atkins wrote:
If http://postgresql.org/docs/9.0/* were to 302 redirect to
http://postgresql.org/docs/current/* while 9.0 is the current release
(and similarly for 9.1 and so on) I suspect we'd find many more links
to current and fewer links to specific
On Jul 21, 2010, at 7:27 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> Steve Atkins wrote:
>> If http://postgresql.org/docs/9.0/* were to 302 redirect to
>> http://postgresql.org/docs/current/* while 9.0 is the current release (and
>> similarly for 9.1 and so on) I suspect we'd find many more links to current
>> an
Steve Atkins wrote:
If http://postgresql.org/docs/9.0/* were to 302 redirect to
http://postgresql.org/docs/current/* while 9.0 is the current release (and
similarly for 9.1 and so on) I suspect we'd find many more links to current and
fewer links to specific versions after a year or two.
On Jul 21, 2010, at 6:47 PM, Greg Smith wrote:
> Craig James wrote:
>> By using "current" and encouraging people to link to that, we could quickly
>> change the Google pagerank so that a search for Postgres would turn up the
>> most-recent version of documentation.
>
> How do you propose to en
Craig James wrote:
By using "current" and encouraging people to link to that, we could
quickly change the Google pagerank so that a search for Postgres would
turn up the most-recent version of documentation.
How do you propose to encourage people to do that? If I had a good
answer to that qu
On 7/21/10 5:47 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
On 21/07/10 22:59, Greg Smith wrote:
A useful trick to know is that if you replace the version number
with "current", you'll get to the latest version most of the time
(sometimes the name of the page is changed between versions, too, but
this isn't that
On 21/07/10 22:59, Greg Smith wrote:
> A useful trick to know is that if you replace the version number
> with "current", you'll get to the latest version most of the time
> (sometimes the name of the page is changed between versions, too, but
> this isn't that frequent).
The docs pages could pe
Elias Ghanem wrote:
I red that in PG a query can not use more than one index per table: "a
query or data manipulation command can use at most one index per table".
You'll find that at the very end of
http://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.4/static/indexes.html and
http://www.postgresql.org/docs
On 7/21/2010 2:31 AM, Elias Ghanem wrote:
Hi,
I have a question concerning the uses of indexes in Postgresql.
I red that in PG a query can not use more than one index per table: "a
query or data manipulation command can use at most one index per table".
Actually I found this a little weird and un
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 1:58 AM, Rob Wultsch wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 12:53 AM, A. Kretschmer
> wrote:
>>
>> In response to Elias Ghanem :
>> > Hi,
>> > I have a question concerning the uses of indexes in Postgresql.
>> > I red that in PG a query can not use more than one index per table:
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 1:31 AM, Elias Ghanem wrote:
> Hi,
> I have a question concerning the uses of indexes in Postgresql.
> I red that in PG a query can not use more than one index per table: "a query
> or data manipulation command can use at most one index per table".
> Actually I found this a
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 12:53 AM, A. Kretschmer <
andreas.kretsch...@schollglas.com> wrote:
> In response to Elias Ghanem :
> > Hi,
> > I have a question concerning the uses of indexes in Postgresql.
> > I red that in PG a query can not use more than one index per table: "a
> query or
> > data man
In response to Elias Ghanem :
> Hi,
> I have a question concerning the uses of indexes in Postgresql.
> I red that in PG a query can not use more than one index per table: "a query
> or
> data manipulation command can use at most one index per table".
That's not true, but it's true for MySQL, afa
Hi,
I have a question concerning the uses of indexes in Postgresql.
I red that in PG a query can not use more than one index per table: "a
query or data manipulation command can use at most one index per table".
Actually I found this a little weird and unfortunately I could not find
further expl
21 matches
Mail list logo
