QuickStart Development

[Kenneth Brody]

On 6/9/2016 4:14 PM, Brian K. White via Filepro-list wrote:
> On 6/6/2016 1:02 PM, Kenneth Brody via Filepro-list wrote:
>
>> It used to make a huge difference in startup speed for large processing
>> tables.  (For example, the Medical Office System would take several
>> minutes to start on a Tandy 6000, and only several seconds with
>> Quikstart.)  Not so much any more.  The main difference nowadays is
>> protecting your source code, as you do not need to distribute it to your
>> clients.
>
> But wouldn't that same % difference in efficiency still hold exactly as
> true, if the table were called a thousand times in a cgi environment?
>
> If you have a machine that can do 500 X's per second, then it still holds
> that the same machine can do 5000 X/10's per second.
>
> It still matters, one would think. Or at least in use cases that involve
> more than a few users.

While the total time saved in rcabe-vs-dcabe might be significant in such a 
scenario, the percent of time saved would probably not be that significant. 
Consider the fact that the amount of time to compile the processing versus 
the entire time of running the process has shrunk.

(In my example of the MOS, it was simply starting dclerk versus rclerk.)

If the CGI environment runs *report thousands of times, what percent of that 
time is dreport compiling the processing, versus the startup, run, and 
shutdown of the program?

If you can save 10 milliseconds needed to compile the processing, and run it 
10,000 times, yes you have saved 100 seconds.  But how long did it take in 
total to run those 10,000 CGI requests?

-- 
Kenneth Brody