Re: [WebDNA] Lookup vs. Search (was: 3-5 GB of native WebDNA db...)
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2009
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 103047
interpreted = N
texte = right, the exact same test on a Ubuntu 8 server (4 proc.) using 6.0a showed these results: 40000 searches with [lookup].......................................: 70 s 10000 searches with [search].......................................: 27 s which would makes a [search] delay closer to two [lookup] Note the previous test was done on my 2.4GHz intel iMac. 6.2 optimization is much better than 6.0 on modern platforms. - chris On Jul 28, 2009, at 11:29, Kenneth Grome wrote: > Grant once said a single search takes as long as about three > lookups, but he probably said that a decade ago. After > seeing Christophe's test results it appears this > relationship may no longer apply. > > Sincerely, > Ken Grome > > > > >> I know this is a difficult question but is it possible to >> give a rough estimate of *how* much faster a lookup is? >> >> I mean, if I need the values of two fields in a database, >> would a search or two consecutive lookpus be my best bet? > > --------------------------------------------------------- > This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list
. > To unsubscribe, E-mail to: > archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us > old archives: http://dev.webdna.us/TalkListArchive/
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
right, the exact same test on a Ubuntu 8 server (4 proc.) using 6.0a showed these results: 40000 searches with [lookup].......................................: 70 s 10000 searches with [search].......................................: 27 s which would makes a [search] delay closer to two [lookup] Note the previous test was done on my 2.4GHz intel iMac. 6.2 optimization is much better than 6.0 on modern platforms. - chris On Jul 28, 2009, at 11:29, Kenneth Grome wrote: > Grant once said a single search takes as long as about three > lookups, but he probably said that a decade ago. After > seeing Christophe's test results it appears this > relationship may no longer apply. > > Sincerely, > Ken Grome > > > > >> I know this is a difficult question but is it possible to >> give a rough estimate of *how* much faster a lookup is? >> >> I mean, if I need the values of two fields in a database, >> would a search or two consecutive lookpus be my best bet? > > --------------------------------------------------------- > This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list . > To unsubscribe, E-mail to: > archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us > old archives: http://dev.webdna.us/TalkListArchive/
christophe.billiottet@webdna.us
DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!
Top Articles:
Talk List
The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...
Related Readings:
mod_webcatalog2.so.2-40 is garbled (2008)
Safari browser and WebDNA set-cookies (2003)
[WebDNA] Downloadable docs (2011)
webcat- multiple selection in input field (1997)
Add a Blog to your site. (2002)
Signal Raised (1997)
taxTotal confusion (1998)
Passing radio check box value to itself... (2000)
WebCatalog can't find database (1997)
WebCat2b15MacPlugin - [protect] (1997)
[searh] or [shownext]problem (1998)
Click-through/Referral tracking solution needed (2000)
suggestions (1998)
update on wn searching (1997)
Practice runs ? (1997)
Interfacing WebMerchant to www.fedex.com (1997)
[WebDNA] Hosting in Scandinavia (2008)
Searching multiple Databases (1997)
can webcat determine an image's pixel dimensions? (2000)
Webcatalog, Webstar and Crasharama (1999)