David Engel wrote:
You all tell me which is more efficient, temp table or duplicating the function. The function is below. It goes in the big, ugly, scheduler query and needs to returned in the SELECT list and used in JOINs for recorded and oldrecorded.
QString progfindid = QString( "(CASE record.type " " WHEN %1 " " THEN to_days(date_sub(program.starttime, interval " " date_format(record.findtime, '%H:%i') hour_minute)) " " WHEN %2 " " THEN floor((to_days(date_sub(program.starttime, interval " " date_format(record.findtime, '%H:%i') hour_minute)) - " " to_days(record.findtime))/7) * 7 + to_days(record.findtime) " " ELSE 0 " " END) ") .arg(kFindDailyRecord) .arg(kFindWeeklyRecord);
David, while I don't mean to discourage any optimization =), as ugly as this is, I don't think it has a real appreciable impact on run time. Because if the CASE, only one or the other of these will apply when there is a FindDaily or FindWeekly (letting the cat further out of the bag ;-) and a NOOP otherwise. Depending on how much these are used, it may only apply to a couple dozen items out of a couple hundred in the reclist.
As cryptic as it looks, these are only a couple time functions and integer math and may have no more impact than, say, the TIME_TO_SEC(), DAYOFWEEK() and TO_DAYS() later on in TUQ when it is matching times per record type.
In testing, it's hard to come up with a truly fair comparison but I'm not seeing any big difference between using lots of Find* rules with this code vs lots of traditional rules.
-- bjm
_______________________________________________ mythtv-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-dev
