Just an FYI... I was so inspired by Michael Dinowitz's talk at CFObjective (and an internal office debate) that I took the time yesterday to do some time comparison's between file processing the "old fashioned way" (one line at a time) vs performing file processing utilizing an asynchronous gateway. Here are the results...
The Test Configure a CF Event gateway pointing to a cfc that performs record insertion, calling it "asyncTest" Read in an incoming flat file containing 236 records. For each row in the file, insert a record into a table. For each insert, the datetime stamp at that very instant will also be inserted into a field in the row so that we know exactly when it was inserted. Upon processing completion, by taking the difference in time between the first row inserted and the last (min(time) and max(time)), we can see how long it took to complete the process. The Results Processing the old fashioned way: one line at a time. 3 runs were executed. The average time for inserting 236 rows in this manner was 20.7 seconds. The page was returned to the user in 21990 ms. Processing each row asynchronously: each individual row was handed off to an asynchronous gateway. 3 runs were executed. The average time for inserting 236 rows in this manner was 1.7 seconds (12 times faster!) . The page was returned to the user between 67 ms and 90 ms. Of interest to note is the fact that setting the server's simultaneous gateway thread count to 260 did not increase the throughput of the thread executions any more than having it set at 30. Just wanted to share that inspiring info. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:235448 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
