[thesite] if anyones bored..

.jeff jeff at members.evolt.org
Mon Oct 22 11:42:17 CDT 2001


dan,

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> From: Daniel J. Cody
>
> > 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.
> http://members.evolt.org/djc/temp/frontpage.html
>
> > 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..
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

i should have been more specific.  the times i mentioned i was seeing on
t.e.o.

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> > why is the blockfactor so high?
>
> we're only showing 10 rows, but we're still getting
> all articles, no?
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

yes, we're getting back all articles, but only showing 10.  i'm not
convinced that having such a high blockfactor is a good thing, but i'm doing
some tests on it right now.  i'm seeing slightly better results with a
blockfactor of 10.  this may have something to do with the fact that we're
only using 10 results at a time.  this quote from allaire seems to agree --
"This should be tuned based on the expected average size of the result set."

http://www.allaire.com/Handlers/index.cfm?ID=13810&Method=Full

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> > 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
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

what about the url scheme makes it more difficult.  perhaps we can work on
those things and make it easier to understand and work on.  depending on
what they are, you're likely to have those same complications in a php
version as well.

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><
> 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*)..
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

not active right now, but dave mccreath got pretty comfortable with it.
why's isaac not in that list?  i'll bet any number of coldfusion users that
are currently on this list could get comfortable with it given some time.
remember, you can't just walk into a big project knowing the language it's
written and expect to understand the particular technique used when building
it.  you have to learn the original developer's style as well.

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
> > 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 :)
><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

i meant "don't go trashing" as in don't go throwing out all we've done up
til now by going to a different application server.

thanks,

.jeff

http://evolt.org/
jeff at members.evolt.org
http://members.evolt.org/jeff/






More information about the thesite mailing list