Performance metrics - some early conclusions

[Ruslan Zasukhin]

On 11/29/05 4:36 PM, "Ed Kleban" <Ed at Kleban.com> wrote:

> Generating a 400 MB file by failing to turn of V4RB debug logging may cost
> you at least factor of 20 in performance degradation.
> 
> Variant.Hash is not unique for in-memory objects in RB 2004 r5 despite the
> language reference claim to the contrary.  It appears this may be a bug in
> multiple RB versions going back to 5.x.
> 
> Adding a record in a table with twice as many fields will likely take about
> twice as long, as you would expect.
> 
> Re-indexing or enabling indexing on a non-indexed field is very expensive.
> 
> Indexing a field after first populating it for all your records can save you
> time, perhaps 15%.
> 
> It takes about half as long to store an object hash in a memory buffer field
> as it does for Variant.hash to calculate the value.  Considering that
> Variant.hash is presumably basing the hash on the address of an object,
> that's darn impressive.
> 
> It is indeed possible to list all of the nodes in an XML parse tree in an
> in-memory table in perhaps 20% less time that it takes to build the parse
> tree from XML source using Theo's bat-out-of-hell XML Engine.  That bodes
> very well for overall performance.
> 
> Bottom line:  I'm a happy camper :)

Do you use Vtable to add records?

Have you specify 
    Table.SetBlank( forAdd )
                    ^^^^^^^

This can give 20% speedup


-- 
Best regards,

Ruslan Zasukhin
VP Engineering and New Technology
Paradigma Software, Inc

Valentina - Joining Worlds of Information
http://www.paradigmasoft.com

[I feel the need: the need for speed]