3

I've put this question on SO and the question was closed as not a real question. So I read the FAQ, it says -

not a real question

It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. For help clarifying this question so that it can be reopened, see the FAQ.

How can they say it cannot be reasonably answered when the question already has 5 answers?

If it couldn't be answered, then how come it has 5 answers.

Question - Why do some questions which do get answers are closed as unreal?

PS: same problem here - How does Facebook do it? Directories or 404 custom error?

|improve this question
  • It is reopened. – iDev Mar 6 '13 at 5:40
  • 1
    closing question requires at least 5 votes, each one must vote and do some clicks, I think instead of this, they can improve the question if possible to make the question improved! – user210003 Mar 6 '13 at 5:55
  • @Akam: What does that mean? – Robert Harvey Mar 6 '13 at 5:56
  • is there any ambiguous words? – user210003 Mar 6 '13 at 5:58
  • I read that as "Instead of closing the question, how about editing it to improve it?" Did I get it right? – Robert Harvey Mar 6 '13 at 5:59
  • @RobertHarvey I think he means moderators should improve the questions rather than closing them. – ShuklaSannidhya Mar 6 '13 at 6:01
  • yes very right ;) – user210003 Mar 6 '13 at 6:01
  • 8
    @Akam: Well, your comment illustrates why that doesn't always work... We can't fix questions we don't understand. – Robert Harvey Mar 6 '13 at 6:10
  • 4
    @sandy - moderators may have other things to do. Closing gives the OP a sign that they should fix it. – Rory Alsop Mar 6 '13 at 6:40
13

I have changed the title of your post to reflect the actual question being asked, and reopened it.

Negative on the Facebook question. Questions to the effect of "I like this feature on that website, can you reverse-engineer it for me and tell me how it works" are off-topic. What possessed you to ask that question twice?

After reviewing your questions, I suggest that you avoid:

  1. Questions that can be readily solved by reading the manual or gaining some basic knowledge of the subject matter,

  2. Questions that invite speculation or discussion,

  3. Questions asking for a tutorial.

|improve this answer
1

The answer would depend a lot on your environment, on the workload (many new images created, rarely asked for, light load ~~-> create on the fly; images rarely changed, often requested ~~-> precompute; have spare CPU cycles elsewhere, plenty of space here ~~-> precompute there; ...). As it stands, you could very well get lots of wild guesses, but no answers. And if yo narrow it down, the detailed answer is unlikely to be of help to anybody else.

|improve this answer
  • 1
    Well, thumbnails are really small, compared to the original image. Generating them every time an image is requested seems redundant, and wasteful of processor resources. As the posted answer points out, storage is a lot cheaper than processor time. – Robert Harvey Mar 6 '13 at 5:41
  • 2
    @RobertHarvey, that depends on how frequently they are used for a particular image. If infrequently enough, you can win by creating on the fly (and possibly caching). – vonbrand Mar 6 '13 at 5:44

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .