SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
SI - Site Forums : Silicon Investor - Welcome New SI Members!
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Green Receipt who wrote (18918)6/26/2003 10:04:38 PM
From: David Lawrence  Read Replies (1) of 32873
 
>>Yeah having something else 'indexing' them off line would save a lot of time for the 'end user' who in turn accesses the 'index' but i suspect if you wanted it even faster you could have multiple servers that distribute the request to perhaps (different partitions).

I made a similar suggestion a couple of weeks ago. "Older" parts of the message table are static, so those DBs can be compressed and optimized since there is no chance of record insertions or data changes. It can be partitioned into period oriented subsets, which would be very beneficial if date ranges are allowed in the search criteria.

Also, as I put it to Bob, moving the static search indexes onto other box(es) will keep the cache from getting wiped out on the production machine every time some archaeologist goes searching through ancient posts.

With the above structure, there is no practical reason that the entire message database couldn't be indexed for searching.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News