Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with canonical
Search options not deleted
user 6352
2
votes
1
answer
66
views
Proposed canonical question: Why is it considered bad practice to run everything on the same...
But I think we can do better than this; we can have a canonical question actually explaining why this is so bad in so many ways. … I suggest something like this:
This is a Canonical Question about running too many different things on the same server. …
- 72.3k
2
votes
Do we have a canonical question about multiple MX records?
This would be more a question about shared SMTP domains (whose configuration strongly depend on the actual mail servers being in use) than MX records.
Multiple MX records, depending on priority and r …
- 72.3k
10
votes
I'm tired of answering questions with: "Upgrade the firmware" or "Run updates"
One time I had to rush at a customer's site whose quite impressive Exchange 2010 system (talking about > 20 servers here) kept randomly stopping mail delivery, which definitely isn't something you wou …
- 72.3k