Timeline for Where can I ask about how to handle certain load?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
17 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:43 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://dba.stackexchange.com/ with https://dba.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Oct 2, 2015 at 4:50 | comment | added | Paul White Mod | Please mark one of the answers as accepted, or add your own and accept that. | |
| Oct 1, 2015 at 15:27 | comment | added | Michael Green | I was one of the voters. At work we set up a new server about once a quarter, have a well documented process and deal with familiar applications. It still takes several days to sign off a non-standard spec. I saw no prospect of Q&A answering this with the information available. @Eric's answer summarises many of my thoughts. Perhaps too broad or too localised would have been better votes? I foresaw a heated discussion on SSD versus 1TB of RAM and choose shopping, however. | |
| Oct 1, 2015 at 14:48 | answer | added | Erik | timeline score: 11 | |
| Oct 1, 2015 at 14:45 | answer | added | Paul WhiteMod | timeline score: 10 | |
| Oct 1, 2015 at 14:14 | comment | added | F.C. | @ErwinBrandstetter I did put some effort, maybe it was not enough for you but others asked for more information and I added it. This sites are great and I always appreciate the help I get but also remember that questions are a vital part of this | |
| Oct 1, 2015 at 14:10 | comment | added | Shanky |
@FC: It would really be difficult to tell you about hardware specs by just knowing the table definition and that there would be many connections. Actually you can reach to correct hardware specs after round of testing and specifically testing I/O responses. You also need to know number of connections and concurrent users. I have worked VERY LTTLE with Postgresql but the method holds same for all RDBMS
|
|
| Oct 1, 2015 at 14:06 | comment | added | Erwin Brandstetter | @F.C.: It would also have been more helpful if you had put some effort into your question to begin with. We are kind people helping for free, remember? | |
| Oct 1, 2015 at 14:06 | comment | added | ypercubeᵀᴹ | @F.C. we have found (from experience) that closing a question that has not enough information (and asking in comments) is often a far more effective way of getting that info than making questions in comments. Questions can be easily reopened (as easily closed). | |
| Oct 1, 2015 at 14:05 | comment | added | F.C. | @ErwinBrandstetter you are right but it would have been more helpful to ask for more details in a comment instead of just voting to remove the question as if it can not be improved | |
| Oct 1, 2015 at 13:56 | comment | added | Erwin Brandstetter | Also for the record: I closed it as "unclear what you are asking" before you added a table definition. The close reason you see ("Shopping list question") is the majority vote - which had some justification, too, given the missing details, but I wouldn't have closed it for that. I downvoted this question here because you make it seem like you had an "accurate description of the table" all along, which is (was) not the case. | |
| Oct 1, 2015 at 13:39 | history | edited | Paul WhiteMod | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 62 characters in body
|
| Oct 1, 2015 at 13:37 | comment | added | Paul White Mod | I'm just going to undelete it. Seems simpler all round. It will stay on hold though. | |
| Oct 1, 2015 at 13:37 | comment | added | F.C. | @ypercube should I ask again? I deleted it because it was flagged so fast that I think it was not the kind of question expected here | |
| Oct 1, 2015 at 13:35 | history | edited | F.C. | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1116 characters in body
|
| Oct 1, 2015 at 13:33 | comment | added | ypercubeᵀᴹ | For the record, the description of the table was added after the question was closed as off-topic. And it had 1 or 2 re-open votes after that addition (and before it was deleted.) | |
| Oct 1, 2015 at 13:12 | history | asked | F.C. | CC BY-SA 3.0 |