QuickStart Development

[Brian K. White]

On 6/9/2016 5:01 PM, Kenneth Brody wrote:
> 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?

Ah yes that makes sense. You are right that the payload probably always 
takes a vastly higher percentage of the total work time than the 
startup, and the payload does not change.

Changing .001% of the job to be 5000% faster makes only .001% difference 
to the job.

To see any difference, you would need a large and complex table that 
then does no actual work once loaded.


Wait what I meant to say was FU why do you have to be so arrogant saying 
I'm wrong...

-- 
bkw