On 6/14/06, Jay R. Ashworth <jra(a)baylink.com>
wrote:
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 10:26:43AM +0200, Steve
Bennett wrote:
Can someone tell me how important this last
reason is? How bad is
it to transclude frequently used templates? Could it be improved?
Is this going to go away? Permanently substing a large number of
templates to solve a short-term performance problem is, well, bad.
That's roughly the same argument adduced to explain why WAP sucks,
and it's just as cogent here as it is there.
Never permanently "fix" performance problems by translating them out
of existence; it will bite you when the machines catch up.
So, we're still yet to hear how bad it is to have, say, 5 transcluded
templates on each of, say, 50,000 not particularly popular pages.
Compared to substituting them all.
Also, is it true to say that the transclusion only takes place the
next time the page is modified and resaved?
Yes. The nice things about templates is that you can do tricks like
editing this page:
And all the presentation slides will be updated automatically.
So, I probably missed half of the argumentation, but why is the
performance problem more important than the saved human work?
best wishes,
tels
--
Signed on Wed Jun 14 18:18:36 2006 with key 0x93B84C15.
Visit my photo gallery at
or per email.
"If you want to travel around the world and be invited to speak at a lot
of different places, just write a Unix operating system." -- Linus
Torvalds