Hmmm. On the face of it, this looks nice, and seems like a decent starting point, but a couple concerns come to mind.
First, reading the history indicates that the page as it stands it new and the work of a single individual. That's not necessarily bad, but it does mean that you have to interpret this assuming it could be too narrow or limited to the qualifications of that single author. Surely time will correct this, but any advice need to be seen through that lens.
Second, my brief look didn't see version differences discussed. For example, PostgreSQL had historically had issues with large connection counts (and still does). But the degree had changed over time as work had been done (and continues to be done) to make this problem less a problem. One size fits all advice simply doesn't give you what you might need for your version. The talk page rightfully calls this out
First, reading the history indicates that the page as it stands it new and the work of a single individual. That's not necessarily bad, but it does mean that you have to interpret this assuming it could be too narrow or limited to the qualifications of that single author. Surely time will correct this, but any advice need to be seen through that lens.
Second, my brief look didn't see version differences discussed. For example, PostgreSQL had historically had issues with large connection counts (and still does). But the degree had changed over time as work had been done (and continues to be done) to make this problem less a problem. One size fits all advice simply doesn't give you what you might need for your version. The talk page rightfully calls this out