Archive of UserLand's first discussion group, started October 5, 1998.
Re: Memory management w/ Frontier
Author: Kurt J. Egger Posted: 1/12/1999; 6:00:25 AM Topic: Memory management w/ Frontier Msg #: 2015 (In response to 2013) Prev/Next: 2014 / 2016
I had a test w/ flat structures and the performance went down after 3000 sub-tables per table. But that could be the memory consumption, I ran the first tests on a smaller machine (64MB).I recall reading postings in a discussion flat vs. deep table structures, where performance will be more stable with deep structures.
Now I use this record structure:
LW:\gdb.root\gdb.tablename.["000"].["000"].["000"].["000000000001"].fieldFor every 1.000 records I get a new parent, etc. Each record retains its full recId, so I can construct the real position out of its name. Maybe I´m wrong and this tweaking is not needed, but my db will get transaction data in this sizes.
Thanks for the tip, I´ll try it
Kurt
There are responses to this message:
- Re: Memory management w/ Frontier, Dave Winer, 1/12/1999; 6:19:19 AM
This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:47:12 PM.
© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.