# A pathetic plea regarding the search engine **URL:** \ **Category:** About This Message Board\ **Created:** [January 26, 2009, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-pathetic-plea-regarding-the-search-engine/483064 "2009-01-26T16:33:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Agent\_Foxtrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc29f/32.png) [@Agent\_Foxtrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Agent_Foxtrot)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2009, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-pathetic-plea-regarding-the-search-engine/483064/1 "2009-01-26T16:33:47Z")
Can we please, please, please make the search engine a little more forgiving? So we have to wait 300 seconds per search. I can live with that… it forces me to do some actual work while I’m browsing the SDMB. 😃 But today I was doing an ego search and accidentally typed “Agent Foxtot”. No user found; a 300-second wait. A couple of weeks ago, I was looking for threads on the game “God of War”. The engine ignored all three words because they were three letters or less. Another 300 seconds. Sometimes searching results in a database error, which is yet another 300 second wait. I understand the 300 seconds were put in place to relieve load on the server, but I can’t imagine it would cause much more traffic to make the delay a little more flexible. How bout it? ---
**Author:** ![Beware\_of\_Doug](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/278dde/32.png) [@Beware\_of\_Doug](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beware_of_Doug)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2009, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-pathetic-plea-regarding-the-search-engine/483064/2 "2009-01-26T16:42:57Z")
That raises the question: Do “no results” searches tie up the server as long, or as much, as searches that find results? I suspect yes. Otherwise they’d give you a mulligan after your no results search. ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2009, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-pathetic-plea-regarding-the-search-engine/483064/3 "2009-01-26T17:59:40Z")
> [@Beware\_of\_Doug](#): > > Otherwise they’d give you a mulligan after your no results search. They did before, even prior to limiting searches to subscribers IIRC; now they don’t. What changed? ---
**Author:** ![Mangetout](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mangetout/32/19_2.png) [@Mangetout](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mangetout)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2009, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-pathetic-plea-regarding-the-search-engine/483064/4 "2009-01-27T00:51:13Z")
> [@Beware\_of\_Doug](#): > > That raises the question: Do “no results” searches tie up the server as long, or as much, as searches that find results? A search with results has to pull records out of databases and render them as HTML results - that bit must take longer. I’m not sure about the actual business of hitting the indexes, etc - I guess that’s an information theory question - and I’m not sure if there aren’t ways of optimising indices depending on whether you expect search hits to be common or rare. ---
**Author:** ![Muffin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/muffin/32/4341_2.png) [@Muffin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Muffin)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2009, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-pathetic-plea-regarding-the-search-engine/483064/5 "2009-01-27T00:57:08Z")
It’s moot anyway, for it fails to search for certan words, leaving the choice between not being able to search every five minutes or not being able to search every three minutes, or not being able to search every minute . . . ---
**Author:** ![An\_Arky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/87869e/32.png) [@An\_Arky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/An_Arky)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2009, 1:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-pathetic-plea-regarding-the-search-engine/483064/6 "2009-01-27T01:01:52Z")
Yep, Search is a problem; has been for a while. So have a lot of other things. This board is owned and operated by a bankrupt entity. Nobody’s going to fix anything, if there’s even anyone still employed in that capacity, which I doubt is effectively the case. ---
**Author:** ![ianzin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/ed655f/32.png) [@ianzin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ianzin)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2009, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-pathetic-plea-regarding-the-search-engine/483064/7 "2009-01-29T14:38:56Z")
May I respectfully add another request for a more forgiving interval. Having to wait five minutes between searches is rather extreme, especially if the first search attempt fails for some trivial reason that _might_ not even be the user’s fault. I understand about wanting to deter over-use of the Search function and to relieve pressure on the server, but something nearer two minutes would serve the same objectives while not quite so harshly punishing minor errors. ---
**Author:** ![NineToTheSky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/b5a626/32.png) [@NineToTheSky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NineToTheSky)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2009, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/a-pathetic-plea-regarding-the-search-engine/483064/8 "2009-01-29T17:38:23Z")
I love the Dope. I hate the search engine. Aeons pass, stars are born, civilizations rise and collapse, but a wizened old woman pushes the SD search engine around in a rusty pram, forever going in circles, never going anywhere.