Re: Suspending SELECTs
От
mark@mark.mielke.cc
Тема
Re: Suspending SELECTs
Дата
Msg-id
20060118165017.GA10026@mark.mielke.cc
Ответ на
Re: Suspending SELECTs (Harry Jackson)
Список
Дерево обсуждения
Suspending SELECTs Alessandro Baretta <a.baretta@barettadeit.com>
Re: Suspending SELECTs Mark Lewis <mark.lewis@mir3.com>
Re: Suspending SELECTs Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Suspending SELECTs Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>
Re: Suspending SELECTs Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Suspending SELECTs "Craig A. James" <cjames@modgraph-usa.com>
Re: Suspending SELECTs Alessandro Baretta <a.baretta@barettadeit.com>
Re: Suspending SELECTs Mark Lewis <mark.lewis@mir3.com>
Re: Suspending SELECTs "Jim C. Nasby" <jnasby@pervasive.com>
Re: Suspending SELECTs "Craig A. James" <cjames@modgraph-usa.com>
Re: Suspending SELECTs Alessandro Baretta <a.baretta@barettadeit.com>
Re: Suspending SELECTs Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Re: Suspending SELECTs Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>
Re: Suspending SELECTs Alessandro Baretta <a.baretta@barettadeit.com>
Re: Suspending SELECTs August Zajonc <augustz@augustz.com>
Re: Suspending SELECTs Alessandro Baretta <a.baretta@barettadeit.com>
Re: Suspending SELECTs Michael Stone <mstone+postgres@mathom.us>
Re: Suspending SELECTs mark@mark.mielke.cc
Re: Suspending SELECTs Frank Wiles <frank@wiles.org>
Re: Suspending SELECTs Mark Kirkwood <markir@paradise.net.nz>
Re: Suspending SELECTs Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Re: Suspending SELECTs Mark Kirkwood <markir@paradise.net.nz>
Re: Suspending SELECTs Alessandro Baretta <a.baretta@barettadeit.com>
Re: Suspending SELECTs mark@mark.mielke.cc
Re: Suspending SELECTs Alessandro Baretta <a.baretta@barettadeit.com>
Re: Suspending SELECTs Harry Jackson <harryjackson@gmail.com>
Re: Suspending SELECTs mark@mark.mielke.cc
Re: Suspending SELECTs Tino Wildenhain <tino@wildenhain.de>
Re: Suspending SELECTs Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
On Wed, Jan 18, 2006 at 03:41:57PM +0000, Harry Jackson wrote:
> There are various reason why google might want to limit the search
> result returned ie to encourage people to narrow their search. Prevent
> screen scrapers from hitting them really hard blah blah. Perhaps less
> than 0.00000001% of real users (not scrapers) actually dig down to the
> 10th page so whats the point.
I recall a day when google crashed, apparently due to a Windows virus
that would use google to obtain email addresses.
As an unsubstantiated theory - this may have involved many, many clients,
all accessing search page results beyond the first page.
I don't see google optimizing for the multiple page scenario. Most
people (as I think you agree above), are happy with the first or
second page, and they are gone. Keeping a cursor for these people as
anything more than an offset into search criteria, would not be
useful.
Cheers,
--
mark@mielke.cc / markm@ncf.ca / markm@nortel.com __________________________
. . _ ._ . . .__ . . ._. .__ . . . .__ | Neighbourhood Coder
|\/| |_| |_| |/ |_ |\/| | |_ | |/ |_ |
| | | | | \ | \ |__ . | | .|. |__ |__ | \ |__ | Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
One ring to rule them all, one ring to find them, one ring to bring them all
and in the darkness bind them...
http://mark.mielke.cc/
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления