Error all the time

[Derick Centeno]

On Sat, 2005-01-15 at 06:30, Geert Janssens wrote:
> Ok, I did the two independent searches:
> 
> 1. bind key 255
> This results in 14 hits, of which two refer to moved pages (404 error 
> message), and none actually mentions "bind key 255", but all mention 
> "key" or "255" (in case of the TCP one) only.
> 
> 2. value 3325
> This results in 6 hits, and none actually mentions "value 3325", but 
> only mention "value"
> 
> I did review all articles. Although they are full of useful information, 
> none of the information would help with the original question.
> 
> I tend to draw the following conclusion:
> The YLD faq's search mechanism behaves differently than you did expect. 
> Apparently it searches for any word in the seach term, instead of the 
> expected all words. To search for all words (as would be  more useful in 
> case of searching for specific error messages), one has to quote the 
> search term, as I just tested. If I quote your search strings, there are 
> no hits left (which is correct, since there are no articles dealing with 
> the problem).
> 
> For me, again this conclusion supports the idea of verifying replies.

Geert you are correct, my expectation regarding the YDL FAQ search
engine was not met.  My DB experience goes back to the early 70's; I had
not expected that any current software in existence would still be
saddled with design limitations created that far back!  So applying
quotes, is the only proper solution here and as you discovered and I
verified for myself...again...no references showed up.

Sad because I recall coming up with a reference earlier on the site
which I still believe is useful but as I didn't note the specific page,
there is no record of what it was, nor do I remember it any longer.  I
entrusted instead that the search engine would bring up the same record
in any other search.

It has not.  Very disturbing to me is that I did come up with the
grouping of 14 and 6 documents as you did, but when I first did my
search there I orginally came up with 7 and 6 respectfully.

> Finally, I would also like to stress it's not my intention of offending 
> anyone, and not you Mr. Centeno in particular. You're a very active list 
> member, and I appreciate that. My reply just comes from my past, 
> remembering the frustration and discouragement of getting answers that 
> actually were none. It made me feel stupid for not seeing or 
> understanding the answer.
> 
> 
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Geert Jan

I experienced no offense, Geert.  My response was to merely express what
I did and found.  The exchanges between you, I and other regulars, I
accept as learning opportunities without any underhanded intention,
meaning or swipes.  There is a comportment which we all have engaged in
which I find refreshing, inspiring and even encouraging that we humans
have the capacity to engage respectfully with competing and differing
ideas without rancor or other negative expressions.  The nature of the
regulars here makes this list unique and provides a special character
which I hope to continue to participate with, as I find my own character
improving with it as well.

Geert, I can work into an explanation of the nuances of DB analysis the
Tales of Ali Baba and the 40 Thieves, or my more favorite Tale of the 18
Lohan!  I restrain myself yes, but I actually feel fine that you are on
this list ensuring and reminding me to be even more concise and to the
point.  I find this instructive in a positive way and welcome this and
all other of your respected comments.  Likewise from other regulars, I
am open to them likewise, my attitude is one of appreciation.

So Geert, I'm attentive and very appreciative.  There are no ill
feelings, and certainly no ill will.  Rather I have deep appreciation
for having wandered into a team or association of people who are
committed and serious about what is going on, and how things should
proceed.