On Oct 19, 2017, at 1:45 PM, Jeffrey Kain wrote: > Decided to test it. Here are the results, running interpreted, client-server > against a server under very low load: > > Records in table: 565 ms > Semaphore polling: 2482 ms > Query into variable: 2749 ms
Makes sense to me if you think like a programmer and what it would take to accomplish the task. Records in table requires a small packet of data to be sent to the server, server checks a value in RAM and sends back a small packet of data with the result. So minimal network I/O. Semaphore would also be a small packet of data sent to the server, but the code running on the server would obviously be more complex so takes a little longer to process. Another small packet of data sent back to the client. And doing a QUERY would be the most code intensive on the server. Would have been interesting to see the result if you did a QUERY into the current selection. I would guess that would take a bit longer due to having to manage setting up the current selection on the server. And the packet of data returned by the server would also include the first record of the selection so it would be bigger. Plus all the time on the client side to setup the selection info and make the shadow copy of the current record. Everything is small bits of time, but they all add up when you do it thousands of times. Tim ******************************************** Tim Nevels Innovative Solutions 785-749-3444 timnev...@mac.com ******************************************** ********************************************************************** 4D Internet Users Group (4D iNUG) FAQ: http://lists.4d.com/faqnug.html Archive: http://lists.4d.com/archives.html Options: http://lists.4d.com/mailman/options/4d_tech Unsub: mailto:4d_tech-unsubscr...@lists.4d.com **********************************************************************
