Cache

[jda]

>
>  >
>>  Hm, yesterday I had one user with 7000 records. In V1.x this would
>>  require a cache of 6-8 MB. In V2 he had to go to > 15 MB to get
>>  satisfactory results (so I guess yes, about 2X).
>
>Results you mean speed?
>
>But may be not only cache affect that.
>
>Longer strings means longer CPU operations.
>

Yes, speed. Not a few ticks -- I mean the spinning beachball! Over a 
minute to do a search in some cases. Increasing cache to 25 MB fixed 
it (20 might have worked, too, but 15 was not enough).

Jon