December 29, 2008 at 7:25 pm
Hello,
As others have stated, it is important to know which version the Original Poster is referring to. If different versions will be dealt with within the same forum, then the previously mentioned idea of a drop down list would be a big help, especially if it defaults to the currently most popular version.
At least, if the Original Poster does not select the relevant option, then they only have themselves to blame if the answers are not appropriate for their version.
Regards,
John Marsh
www.sql.lu
SQL Server Luxembourg User Group
December 30, 2008 at 5:44 am
RBarryYoung (12/29/2008)
For what it's worth, I think that one exercise that we should all try is to seriously consider what good the forum Taxonomy/Structure truly does for each of us individually.I know that as a frequent responder, I use it very little. Like Jeff and others, I most often use the "Recent Posts" options that just give me everything. However, over time I have found several uses for myself:
1- When responding to a question, I use the SQL Version of the forum to make sure that my answer is compatible with the OP's needs (hopefully). This is important for me because I have limited access to SQL 2000 anymore and I have to make a special effort to test against it now.
2- I skip over the questions in certain forums: I do not really know certain aspects of SQL Server all that well, so I do not bother to open those from my Active Threads list. This is a great time saver for me, so I would hate to lose it.
3- I subscribe to certain forums: I subscribe to the Service Broker and CLR fourms because I know that there are less question and only a handful of people like me who will answer those question. This way I make sure that I am notified of every post in them and none slip through the cracks on days when I cannot read or post.
And that's about all of the use that I get out of the Forums. Every once in a while I will walk through the Forums grid/tree, just looking for the latest posts that I might have missed, but that is rare.
I generally work off of only subscribed forums. I put the RSS feeds into Outlook and I gather the posts from there. I have to go & look to see if the existing taxonomy has changed every so often in case theres a different forum I want to participate in. I'd probably have to change that approach based on what we've been discussing so far.
"The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood"
- Theodore Roosevelt
Author of:
SQL Server Execution Plans
SQL Server Query Performance Tuning
December 30, 2008 at 6:42 am
Depending on how busy I am, I do one of two things.
I either pick posts from the daily newsletter to respond to or I go into the forums directly (especially if I'm posting my own question to that forum) and look for posts I can answer that have less than 2 or 3 replies.
I honestly have never looked at the Active Threads list.
And there are days where I just open up the Forums page (I have it bookmarked) and browse through it as a whole.
So, for me, the consolidation with versions prepended would be easier.
December 30, 2008 at 7:23 am
I typically Use the Active threads or Recent Posts lists when I'm looking for questions to answer.
If I have a question to post, I attempt to scroll through the forums list looking for the appropriate forum, however at times, I find it difficult to find the correct one. Lately I've had a number of questions about SSRS as I'm trying to get a good hold of how it all works, but do I post in 2005|BI, or SSRS|Development or SSRS|Adminsitration or just the General SSRS Forum sometimes it all sort of blends together depending on what I'm trying to accomplish.
December 30, 2008 at 7:46 am
Sounds an awful lot like MS' USENET group structure. I personally like the simplicity, but you may want to consider keeping some way of specifying a version or versions. One of the earlier posters suggested a version dropdown that would be required - maybe even set at the profile level so people don't have to remember it once it's been set. I kind of like the simplicity myself and a lot of SQL questions tend not to be too version specific. However, there are definitely times that the version matters quite a bit so we need a way to discern that and/or filter it.
December 30, 2008 at 12:05 pm
Peter Schott (12/30/2008)
Sounds an awful lot like MS' USENET group structure.
Which is why the whole BBS style forums feel clunky to me. We've only made access to the web faster, but the forum format as a whole is outdated. This is meta data, and should not rule the structure of OPs.
December 30, 2008 at 12:51 pm
It may be clunky, but there is a lot of clarity of information by seperating it into discrete buckets (even though the buckets are a bit abused by some of the posters).
"The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood"
- Theodore Roosevelt
Author of:
SQL Server Execution Plans
SQL Server Query Performance Tuning
December 30, 2008 at 1:32 pm
Grant Fritchey (12/30/2008)
It may be clunky, but there is a lot of clarity of information by seperating it into discrete buckets (even though the buckets are a bit abused by some of the posters).
Not bashing the buckets, just the flexibility. Of course we need "buckets". The buckets just don't have to be the same layout for everyone. Store the meta data (bucketizing info) with the OP and allow the end user to modify a default view of the forums to suit needs. Why lock the GUI to one tree?
December 31, 2008 at 2:06 am
I definitely think that organizing by function instead of version makes a lot more sense. Much of the information is generic for many versions, so why duplicate it on several forums?
To satisfy those who want the version information, how about a line of check boxes along the bottom with one check box per version (plus 'any version') and the same arrangement on the search dialog. That would satisfy all parties I think.
December 31, 2008 at 10:18 am
I think that organizing by version and function is the best way to approach this, however I think that the submission process is where the most benefit will be had.
Instead of having someone post to a particular forum provide a page for new items.
On that page you can have drop downs for SQL version, type of question or issue (for example backups, administration, t-sql programming), etc...
Force the user to fill in certain of those values, and based upon those answers post to the appropriate forum. This will help keep things clean, prevent cross postings, and can guide folks to the best place to get answers. This would be especially useful for newbies, who could easily get confused by the setup.
December 31, 2008 at 12:22 pm
I think dphillips has an interesting idea. The meta data is there, why does it drive the display for everyone.
That's a fairly major change, and one that I'm not sure we can do now, but I'll debate it a bit and see if we can open a dialog with the InstantASP people.
December 31, 2008 at 12:51 pm
Actually, I like the adjustable display idea too.
But it does seem like an awful lot of code to rewrite in order to get it working to begin with.
December 31, 2008 at 1:25 pm
I like the idea of consolidating forums. I think keeping 2005 and 2008 together would work just fine.
I would, however, simplify the number of subjects within those.
Performance Tuning and T-SQL are (more often than not) both applicable for the same questions. I've spent a lot of time in both of those helping people rewrite queries. If the performance tuning is more about indexes and hints and so on, and T-SQL is more about what various functions do and so on, then it would make sense. But the majority of the questions I see in both areas are "my proc doesn't do what I need to, how do I fix it?", whether that need is speed or results.
On the point of a "newbies" forum, I kind of like it. A person is a newbie as long as they consider themselves one. I have to admit, I'm a bit more forgiving of simple errors in that forum than I would be in other ones, and I spend more time explaining each step of my answers in there. (Not that I've posted enough recently, but when I do, I do handle that forum slightly differently.) In the "regular" forums, I might say, "you can handle that with scope_identity", while in the newbies forum, I'll actually write sample code with comments, on the assumption that the person asking the original question may have no slightest clue how to use scope_identity.
But I do think that clearing up the forum topics might help with cross-posting. I'd put everything regarding writing procs/scripts/views/functions, designing tables, creating constraints, figuring out indexes, etc., in one, and split up administration into sub-sections (data corruption, backups, security, et al). SSIS, third-party tools, CLR, Reporting Services, etc., could be separate too. But I'd definitely go with one forum for all design and coding issues except CLR. All the places where we always have to ask for the DDL before we can answer the questions.
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
December 31, 2008 at 1:38 pm
I like the idea of compressing the forums down and having either a checkbox or dropdown list on the Thread Header / Title that asks for a version. This way people don't have to think about adding the version into the actual verbage of the post.
Sort of like:
SUBJECT: ____________ VERSION: (Dropdown List)
DESCRIPTION: _____________
MESSAGE:
Then the forum code could prepend the version to the title. Example, "Insert Error - Duplicate Key" might be someone's title and then the version would be SQL 2000. So in the forum, you'd see "SQL 2000: Insert Error - Duplicate Key". That way people could search on the SQL 2000 or SQL 2005, etc. threads within the forums.
I like this idea because it should make cleaning up the forums so much easier. Too many drill downs is going to make it a bit hairy in the forums and when the version is forced then when someone selects the wrong version it is their own fault. This was my first idea the moment I read the article.
:-PManie Verster
Developer
Johannesburg
South Africa
I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me. - Holy Bible
I am a man of fixed and unbending principles, the first of which is to be flexible at all times. - Everett Mckinley Dirkson (Well, I am trying. - Manie Verster)
December 31, 2008 at 2:42 pm
You know, as long as we are on the subject: One thing that I would really like to see is a "Challenges" forum. Someplace were one of us could post a challenge or problem like "What's the fastest way to do a GROUP BY JOIN".
It may not get a lot of threads, but it would probably get a ton of posts per thread, and would serve as convenient way to go back and find clever ways to implement certain tasks.
[font="Times New Roman"]-- RBarryYoung[/font], [font="Times New Roman"] (302)375-0451[/font] blog: MovingSQL.com, Twitter: @RBarryYoung[font="Arial Black"]
Proactive Performance Solutions, Inc. [/font][font="Verdana"] "Performance is our middle name."[/font]
Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 99 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply