[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.
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..
> 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.
oh..
> 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 :)
.djc.
More information about the thesite
mailing list