>>In other words, the slowdown on these queries seems to be through the
webserver?
Sorry, I meant the search takes the same amount of time using command line or server.
Do you have a guess on how much of a search speed up there is with 3.2B over 3.15?
thanks
chad
>>> Geoff Hutchison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 07/31/00 03:59PM >>>
On Mon, 31 Jul 2000, Chad Phillips wrote:
> I have run it from the server and from the command line and the speed
> is about the same.
In other words, the slowdown on these queries seems to be through the
webserver? If so, I'd check to see how your memory usage varies with a web
query. I don't know *why* it would be substantially different, but perhaps
the server process is having a problem spawning htsearch.
> I did play around with the searches, and your right. When I use
> criteria that causes fewer hits the search is much faster. So it
> looks like everything is normal. Would there be any advantage in
> using 3.2, since a lot of my searches may return many hits?
There should be a general speedup in searches with 3.2, but I wouldn't
jump just yet. If we can get some more help with development, we may get
search caching in sooner rather than later!
--
-Geoff Hutchison
Williams Students Online
http://wso.williams.edu/
------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the htdig mailing list, send a message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
You will receive a message to confirm this.
------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from the htdig mailing list, send a message to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
You will receive a message to confirm this.
