From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Randall Lucas <rlucas(at)tercent(dot)net> |
Cc: | josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com, "Mendola Gaetano" <mendola(at)bigfoot(dot)com>, "Achilleus Mantzios" <achill(at)matrix(dot)gatewaynet(dot)com>, pgsql-sql(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org, pgsql-bugs(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [PERFORM] [SQL] Unanswered Questions WAS: An unresolved performance problem. |
Date: | 2003-05-08 04:13:20 |
Message-ID: | 17063.1052367200@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-bugs pgsql-performance pgsql-sql |
Randall Lucas <rlucas(at)tercent(dot)net> writes:
> I suspect that a good number of fairly simple questions aren't being
> answered because they're either misdirected or because the poster
> hasn't included an "answerable" question (one with sufficient
> information to answer).
That's always been a problem, but it does seem to have been getting
worse lately.
> A suggestion to partially counter this, at least for "slow query" type
> questions, has been put forth. If we make it a social norm on the
> pg-lists in general to reply off-list to inadequately descriptive "slow
> query" questions with a canned message of helpful guidance, we may be
> able to up the level of "answerability" of most questions.
The idea of some canned guidance doesn't seem bad, but I'm not sure if
it should be off-list or not. If newbies are corrected off-list then
other newbies who might be lurking, or reading the archives, don't learn
any better and will make the same mistakes in their turn.
How about a standard answer of "you haven't really provided enough info
for us to be helpful, please see this-URL for some hints"? That would
avoid bulking up the list archives with many copies, yet at the same
time the archives would provide evidence of the existence of hints...
> Thoughts? Josh and I have placed a draft at
> http://techdocs.postgresql.org/guides/SlowQueryPostingGuidelines
Looks good, though I concur with Stephan's comment that the table
schemas aren't optional.
It might be worth including a checklist of the standard kinds of errors
(for example, datatype mismatch preventing index usage). Come to think
of it, that starts to make it look like a FAQ list directed towards
performance issues. Maybe we could make this a subsection of the main
FAQ?
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Sean Chittenden | 2003-05-08 04:57:49 | Re: [PERFORM] [SQL] Unanswered Questions WAS: An unresolved performance problem. |
Previous Message | Sean Chittenden | 2003-05-08 03:49:40 | Re: float8 errors in HEAD... |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Sean Chittenden | 2003-05-08 04:57:49 | Re: [PERFORM] [SQL] Unanswered Questions WAS: An unresolved performance problem. |
Previous Message | Manfred Koizar | 2003-05-07 23:54:04 | Re: Hack around lack of CORRESPONDING BY in EXCEPT? |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Sean Chittenden | 2003-05-08 04:57:49 | Re: [PERFORM] [SQL] Unanswered Questions WAS: An unresolved performance problem. |
Previous Message | david | 2003-05-08 03:56:15 | Timestamp index not used |