Hi Peter, Peter Norman wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Dave Mayall" <[email protected]> > To: <[email protected]> > Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2001 10:15 AM > Subject: Re: The Complex Search Issue > > > On Sun, 22 Jul 2001 10:27:13 +0200, you wrote: > > > > >Hi Susannah > > > > > >If the name you are researching is very rare, then even searching the > entire > > >database does not return a complete page, let alone multiple pages. > > > > And would not give a "Search too Complex" error. > > > > >So to those who want to change the search engine, please consider the > whole > > >range of people who will want to use FreeBMD, including the one-name > study > > >style or researcher, and those researchers whose family names are extinct > in > > >20th century England and Wales. > > > > "Those who want to change the search engine" reads as if the changes > > that have been implemented have been implemented because of some > > strange desire to make life difficult. > > > > Let me state again that the changes were NECESSARY. Cross database > > searching makes HUGE demands on the server, and if hugely complex > > searches are allowed EVERYBODY else who is searching at the same time > > gets thrown out. > > > > It is not acceptable that a single search should prevent 40 others > > from working, so we have blocked the searches that were causing the > > problem. It is *still* possible to get the same information by > > searching a limited timescale (say in 10 year chunks). I realise that > > this is less convenient, but it can still be done. > > Dave > > You have explained why it was necessary to do this. But it might be helpful > to change the terminology employed since the issue is not strictly one of > complexity but of the number of potential hits. > > A complex search implies, at least to me, that it is one that seeks to match > multiple criteria. Such a search might be anticipated to require more cpu > time. Whereas searching for a single but common surname is not complex. But > the number of hits also takes up too much cpu time. Yet the current default > explanation implies that it is searches lacking a surname that will cause > problems. It is genuinely a complex search. What the system is saying is: "That search is so complex that I am going to have to look through more than 2 million records to find the answer" Searches without Surnames are a good candidate for this but so are searches on common surnames across medium to large data ranges. We can look at the wording but its not possible to have a generic piece of advice to the searcher except try to narrow your search. We can look at search hints and tips, but that'll have to wait while the indexes are being tweaked because it changes from upload to upload :) Cheers Graham > > Peter Norman > > ============================== > Visit Ancestry's Library - The best collection of family history > learning and how-to articles on the Internet. > http://www.ancestry.com/learn/library