Re: [WebDNA] CORRECTION: 60% failure rate using replace in a loop
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2010
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 105618
interpreted = N
texte = Ken, i am not sure if you are using [replace] or [replacefounditems]. Do = not forget [replacefounditems] is much faster than the old technique of = nesting a [replace] context inside a [founditems] context. - chris On Jul 18, 2010, at 23:24, Kenneth Grome wrote: >> Did you check if the [replace] tag actually writes to disk? >=20 > My tests confirm that replace will NOT write to disk, so that's not = the cause of the slowdown. =20 >=20 > I'm disappointed that my first coding approach was so slow that it was = essentially unworkable. I didn't have any idea that it would take more = than a fraction of a second to do a set of 9 replaces. But there were = two searches before the 9 replaces, and the db's were not tiny, so one = or both of these factors was apparently causing each set to taking 2-3 = seconds to complete. >=20 > Now I'm re-structuring my code to try an approach that might be = faster.=20 >=20 > Sincerely, > Kenneth Grome >=20 >=20 >=20 > --------------------------------------------------------- > 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 > Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
Ken, i am not sure if you are using [replace] or [replacefounditems]. Do = not forget [replacefounditems] is much faster than the old technique of = nesting a [replace] context inside a [founditems] context. - chris On Jul 18, 2010, at 23:24, Kenneth Grome wrote: >> Did you check if the [replace] tag actually writes to disk? >=20 > My tests confirm that replace will NOT write to disk, so that's not = the cause of the slowdown. =20 >=20 > I'm disappointed that my first coding approach was so slow that it was = essentially unworkable. I didn't have any idea that it would take more = than a fraction of a second to do a set of 9 replaces. But there were = two searches before the 9 replaces, and the db's were not tiny, so one = or both of these factors was apparently causing each set to taking 2-3 = seconds to complete. >=20 > Now I'm re-structuring my code to try an approach that might be = faster.=20 >=20 > Sincerely, > Kenneth Grome >=20 >=20 >=20 > --------------------------------------------------------- > 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 > Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us
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:
WebCatalog usage (1997)
PCS Frames (1997)
Sorting a [listfiles] (2003)
Email notification to one of multiple vendors ? (1997)
Show items based on login Password (2003)
Displaying photo attached to first record (1997)
Is there an alternative to emailer? (1999)
2.0 Info (1997)
Snake Bites (1997)
[defined]ish (1997)
createfolder not behaving as expected (1999)
Templates on Unix & CGI on Mac? (1997)
Country & Ship-to address & other fields ? (1997)
what's wrong with this picture (2006)
Extended [ConvertChars] (1997)
list cookies and list http headers (1997)
auto-stripping of spaces (1997)
ASP on OSX (2004)
[isfile] ? (1997)
[WebDNA] TCPCONNECT & Timeout (2015)