>Please email Michel Fournier or any of the sysops for any suggestions, bug reports, etc.
>
>Regarding your specific suggestion: AFAIK, the 6 month range allows faster searches. The idea is that the messages are stored in separate tables (one for each 6 months), so, the search is done against smaller tables. The reason for doing it in this way is that, usually, you'll find an answer in the last 6 months. If you don't, you can also go back another 6 months, and another 6 months, and so on. But, usually, old messages will be about older versions of VFP and, most probably, the better solutions are newer. I doubt that you want all messages from 96 that match your search every time. Usually, the interest is much higher on newer solutions than old solutions.
>
>Another reason is to narrow the search. If one searches for some common words, a huge number of messages may be returned and that may be an unnecessary burden for the server.
>
>Yet another reason is that, many times, the user knows approximatively the period of time when he/she saw a solution. For example, I may remember that I've seen a good message on a subject sometime at the end of 97 or beginning of 98. So, I have to do only 2 searches. Etc.
>
>At the beginning of UT, the search was against all messages. When the total number of messages got huge, we had long discussions on how to make it faster and easier for the user. Michel came with the current solution and, (at least in my opinion), this is good more often than bad.
>
>Thanks,
>Vlad
>
>>On the search feature, a 6 month restriction is unnecessary and limiting. Results should be returned regardless of period.
>>
>>Just my .02
From the standpoint of how the tables are kept, I suppose it makes things easier for the server. Although my experience is that an answer is not always found in the last 6 months. For sure I don't think I can tell if I read a thread either in December or January, let alone something like "the end of 97".

The reason I posted this under Chatter is the message on UT's home page about suggestions. You are the second sysop that I've noticed saying it's better to send email to Michel. It seems to me there's a disconnection somewhere among you guys.