Re: List traffic

Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> writes:
> On 5/27/10 8:38 AM, Greg Stark wrote:
>> Mot administration
>> questions are originally posed as general help questions. If you're
>> subscribed to these lists you get a random, fairly small, subset of
>> discussion related these topics.

> Only someone who is a postgresql developer would consider 15-30
> posts/day "small".  For most of our user base, the level of traffic on
> -performance, -sql, and -general is already too high and many people
> don't subscribe to these lists because it is too high.  I get complaints
> -- and people personal-sending me questions because they don't want to
> subscribe -- all the time.

> Having fewer posts on any particular list is *desireable*.  It's a good
> thing.  It's *only* a problem when a bug report or user question goes
> unanswered because the list is unattended.  And so far, I've only seen
> one report of that.

Well, there's no free lunch.  If we have a whole lot of "small" lists
there are going to be two big downsides: fewer people reading each list
(hence fewer answers), and many more arguably-misclassified postings,
thus diluting the theoretical targetedness of the lists.

If you want good answers to questions you need to post them in a forum
where there are enough people to ensure someone will know the answer
(and have the time/interest to respond).  People who want answers and
don't want to have to read other discussions should consider obtaining
commercial support.
        regards, tom lane