Viewing Thread:
"Searchable Databases????"

or summat like that??

I would like to know how to make a website searchable so I could put a search box on it....or even better, a members page or something like that.

But the Search thing is more important. Because I would like to know so I can put it on...in say a month. As I will soon have lots more things on my website.

So is it something to do with sorting them into folders or on Excel???

Can someone please help me out??

ajg wrote:
> JS is by far quicker than searching a database. actually.


That wholly depends on the speed of the user's PC, and whether they really want to give up the sycles to performs regex on God knows how many terms when the server really should be doing it.

Tyla: I don't really understand what you're getting at, but it's client side obviously. If you're using a server that doesn't have database access then you probably would have to go with the JS option, but I would always try and find another server first.

Turbonutter wrote:
> Tyla: I don't really
> understand what you're getting at, but it's client side obviously.

I was trying to point out that if you made it Serverside instead of dependant on the client, it wouldn't matter if the end user had JS turned off.

Personally I wouldn't go for a JS based search anyway, but thats dependant on the level of search you want to do. If your basing it on the text within the site then fine, but as you know your self, for Database searching, the solution is probably better found elswhere. either JSP, ASP or even PHP.

What's being used at the data source?
What level of granularity is the search to run at?
Booleans?
Strings?


I hate searches... I spend my life building GUI's for them and have yet to find one that thinks the same way as a user... luckily I leave all of that to the CodeMonkeys upstairs!!:-)


I'd suggest that ZP gpes with what he's comfortable with as it will be ZP who has to maintain and babysit it in the end.

Tyla wrote:
> Turbonutter wrote:
> Not to mention the fact that some people browse
>
> with js turned off, leaving the site useless.

Now is that dependant on
> whether it's client side ot sever side?

Er, surely it dosn't matter if the browser has disabled js if the js is run server side?

I know js can sometimes be better, but due to browser problems and stuff, I prefer doing stuff like form validation server-side (ASP or TCL or JSP or PL, whatever...) rather then client side js, that way, OK, it takes up server cycles, but at least you know FOR SURE that data is valid.

IMHO, js should only be used for button rollovers!!! And even then sparingly!

Hey, anyone noticed... turn off js in NS4, and style sheets stop working aswell. Nice one.

Tyla wrote:
>I was trying to point out that
> if you made it Serverside instead of dependant on the client, it wouldn't matter
> if the end user had JS turned off.

Great minds think alike....

Personally I wouldn't go for a JS based
> search anyway, but thats dependant on the level of search you want to do. If
> your basing it on the text within the site then fine, but as you know your self,
> for Database searching, the solution is probably better found elswhere. either
> JSP, ASP or even PHP.

I love it when you talk dirty to me...

What's being used at the data source?
What level of
> granularity is the search to run at?
Booleans?
Strings?

Now you are just being an*l ;) Dammit - rudeness checker wouldn't let me write an*l!

>I hate
> searches... I spend my life building GUI's for them and have yet to find one
> that thinks the same way as a user... luckily I leave all of that to the
> CodeMonkeys upstairs!!:-)

Damn you designer types! Still, that what us CodeMonkeys what are for eh? Yeh, I know what you mean about searches though, you can't please all the people all the time, even less so when it comes to building them a web site.


I'd suggest that ZP gpes with what he's
> comfortable with as it will be ZP who has to maintain and babysit it in the
> end.

Good advice.

WOW! ME AND TYLA AGREEING? Surely not...

Further more, I agree with all of you. Doing a client-side JS search (that can't possibly be server-side, funkygamer) is probably a stupid idea.

Turbonutter wrote:
> WOW! ME AND TYLA AGREEING? Surely not...

Nope... your right... I mentioned that wonderful accronim PHP!!


>Further more, I agree with all of you. Doing a client-side JS search (that can't possibly ?>be server-side, funkygamer) is probably a stupid idea.

Why can it not be server side? We write a lot of Server Side JS here including the occassional "Site Text" search?

Turbonutter wrote:
> WOW! ME AND TYLA AGREEING? Surely not...

Further more, I agree with all of
> you. Doing a client-side JS search (that can't possibly be server-side,
> funkygamer) is probably a stupid idea.

I refer you to Tylas' answer... You can also have client side ASP, but it is slow as a dog, I wouldn't recommend it.

funkygamer wrote:
> You can also have client side ASP, but it is slow as a dog, I wouldn't recommend it.

Until .NET arrives!!:)

going back to ZP's original question though...

for a simple site search, isn't clientside JS is the best option? Specially if you're hosted at Freeola and are limited personal web server/IIS -wise.

Obviously ASP etc is the best solution, but a quick n dirty solution for a site that is only made up of a few pages, that isn't going to get thousands of hits a day, an array search is a nice simple way to do it.

Does the job on my personal site anyway. ;)

Hmm.. never heard of server-side JS. You sure you're not abbreviating JSP?