It strikes me that some of our nice "extra" features, like Most Wanted, are slow and could also be just as useful (or nearly so) if they were not generated 'realtime', but rather if they were generated only once per day.
Jimmy Wales wrote:
It strikes me that some of our nice "extra" features, like Most Wanted, are slow and could also be just as useful (or nearly so) if they were not generated 'realtime', but rather if they were generated only once per day.
"Most Wanted" is already cached when invoked, and the cache is used in "miser mode". That works good for Most Wanted, as the order of articles doesn't change very fast, and created articles are clearly visible.
This will work less well on other "extra" features like "Orphaned Pages". If one de-orphaned a page, it will still show on the cached version.
Magnus
On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 05:51:23AM -0800, Jimmy Wales wrote:
It strikes me that some of our nice "extra" features, like Most Wanted, are slow and could also be just as useful (or nearly so) if they were not generated 'realtime', but rather if they were generated only once per day.
There's really still a lot we can do in terms of database optimization. I have just installed Wikipedia at home again, and still have access with my Sourceforge account (I think), so if Brion wants me to I could actually start making my hands dirty again. :-) But when messing with the database good coordination is extra important, so it should be very clear who is working on what.
-- Jan Hidders
On Mon, Feb 03, 2003 at 05:51:23AM -0800, Jimmy Wales wrote:
It strikes me that some of our nice "extra" features, like Most Wanted, are slow and could also be just as useful (or nearly so) if they were not generated 'realtime', but rather if they were generated only once per day.
There's really still a lot we can do in terms of database optimization. I have just installed Wikipedia at home again, and still have access with my Sourceforge account (I think), so if Brion wants me to I could actually start making my hands dirty again. :-) But when messing with the database good coordination is extra important, so it should be very clear who is working on what.
If you have a good connection, I suggest you import both the CUR and OLD tables of the English Wikipedia. Some of the queries are dog slow even when locally run. http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia%3ADatabase_download
Regarding coordination, you mostly need to check with Brion. Us others primarily work on creating new problems ;-)
Thanks for helping out,
Erik
On Tue, Feb 04, 2003 at 11:40:00PM +0100, Erik Moeller wrote:
If you have a good connection, I suggest you import both the CUR and OLD tables of the English Wikipedia. Some of the queries are dog slow even when locally run. http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia%3ADatabase_download
They are being downloaded as I type this, and yes, I have a fast connection. :-) Thanks for the URL. Now let's hope my ISP doesn't think I'm downloading DVDs. :-)
-- Jan Hidders
This is very interesting when there is a wikipedia server manteinance operation and the user cannot save it.
Regards.
On mar, 2003-02-04 at 18:56, Pedro M.V. wrote:
This is very interesting when there is a wikipedia server manteinance operation and the user cannot save it.
Hmm, at the very least the text should remain available in a textarea so those using browsers that clear the form out when hitting 'back' can still copy-paste and save to a text file on their machine.
-- brion vibber (brion @ pobox.com)
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org