[MLB-WIRELESS] Re[2]: Node DB Update

[evilbunny]

Hello rick,

I agree if they disappear for that length of time, it would take them
longer to get access to their old entry, then create a new one,
especially if they have forgotten their password, and now use a
different email address, this isn't a storage issue as much as a data
integrity issue... So they do one of 2 things, email the db admin, or
create a new node anyway...

Fact of the matter is it chews very little CPU/hdd as is, the biggest
resource hog so to speak is the image cache, was up to 120 megs at 1
stage... Start of may I went through and culled anything that hadn't
been accessed in more then a month...

-- 
Best regards,
 evilbunny                            mailto:evilbunny at sydneywireless.com

http://www.SydneyWireless.com - Exercise your communications
freedom to make it do what you never thought possible... 

Wednesday, June 5, 2002, 4:24:21 PM, you wrote:

r> they are ither intrested or not, after a year of being inactive they can
r> spend 5 minutes to enter the data, becouse thats alot of people getting
r> there hopes up, 5 people with LOS to me dont even live at thous addresses
r> anymore

r> rik
r> ----- Original Message -----
r> From: "evilbunny" <evilbunny at sydneywireless.com>
r> To: "John Dalton" <john.dalton at bigfoot.com>
r> Cc: <melbwireless at wireless.org.au>
r> Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2002 4:00 PM
r> Subject: [MLB-WIRELESS] Re[2]: Node DB Update


>> Hello John,
>>
>> The only problem is where do you draw the line, I mean after 2 or 3
>> years we could have a substantial amount of inactive nodes with the
>> persons having no intention of coming back... "seemed like a good idea
>> at the time(tm)"
>>
>> The option for the owner to remove themselves has always been in
>> place...
>>
>> --
>> Best regards,
>>  evilbunny                            mailto:evilbunny at sydneywireless.com
>>
>> http://www.SydneyWireless.com - Exercise your communications
>> freedom to make it do what you never thought possible...
>>
>> Wednesday, June 5, 2002, 3:52:10 PM, you wrote:
>>
>> JD> evilbunny at nodedb.com wrote:
>> >> There was an in depth discussion all day yesterday on the melb
>> >> wireless mailing about inactive or non-responsive nodes in node db's,
>> >> and basically the conclusion most are drawing is the following...
>> >> which has now been implemented...
>> JD> ...
>> >> email me or post a comment if you have other ideas/suggestions on how
>> >> this could/should be carried out...
>>
>> JD> I would suggest that expired nodes NOT be removed from
>> JD> the database.  Instead, they should be flagged as expired
>> JD> and not shown by default.  This allows someone to reactivate
>> JD> their expired node, without having to reenter all information.
>> JD> It also allows someone looking to connect to search through
>> JD> expired nodes as a last resort. Displaying expired nodes should
>> JD> be an option.  Of course a node owner should be able to explictly
>> JD> delete their node from the database.
>>
>> JD> John
>>
>>
>> To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at wireless.org.au
>> with "unsubscribe melbwireless" in the body of the message
>>


r> To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at wireless.org.au
r> with "unsubscribe melbwireless" in the body of the message


To unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo at wireless.org.au
with "unsubscribe melbwireless" in the body of the message