[thesite] if anyones bored..

Daniel J. Cody djc at starkmedia.com
Mon Oct 22 10:42:39 CDT 2001

.jeff wrote:

> 5-20ms a piece for a bunch of queries adds up quickly.
> at my count, the execution times for queries and includes for the sidebar
> total about 700-750 milliseconds.  that's longer than it needs to be.

  no shit? i'm seeing 98 msecs for every query except the main one.

> much.  for example, why is it taking over 7000 milliseconds to join 3
> relatively small tables and return a query resultset just over 700?  that's

good question. again, i'm seeing about 3000msecs for that query though..

> absolutely ridiculous.  solve that and you've solved 90% of the time wasted
> rendering the homepage.  here's a question, if we're only showing ten rows
> at a time on the homepage, why is the blockfactor so high?  also, why isn't

we're only showing 10 rows, but we're still getting all articles, no?

> first of all, these hacks you keep referring to are no longer necessary with
> what i've learned about implementing sites using directory-style query
> strings.  since the architecture i put in place which required the
> alphaboxcontroller.cfm file was never used properly, there's really no need
> to keep using that file.

sorry, i didn't know that..

> you talk about the complication of the architecture.  this actually has very
> little to do with using directory-style urls.  it's designed so that it's
> highly modular and can be worked on by multiple people without stepping on
> each others toes.  

i wasn't refering to its modularity and thats not really an issue. 
personally, i find that the complication does come from the URL scheme, 
but like i said at the beginning, thse are just my thoughts/opinions

> don't even know what to say to that it's so silly.  there are most
> definitely more than 2 people on this list that have some degree of comfort
> with working with the cf source code.

sorry. maybe 2 was an exageration.. 4? seriously, i don't know of anyone 
other than me, you, josh, and matt and seth to an extent(nothing against 
anyone.. *sigh*)..

> well, for starters, we could use a user-defined function to perform the
> tasks of the uta custom tag.  we could do the same for the pageresults
> custom tag.  we could be a crapload more careful about how we read/write
> session variables.  


> don't go trashing the application server because it's not as fast as you'd
> like when there's *lots* of room for improvement in the code.

i've trashed CF before dont forget :)


More information about the thesite mailing list