Hi Constantine,
Could I ask you to point directly to this software. I have trouble
trying to find it...
:-)
Regards
Xen
-----Original Message-----
From: Constantine Klyatskin
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, December 30, 1999 5:09 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: HotSync speed
Hi,
please do consider my mail as an ad by I advise you to
have a look at
PDBcruncher available at http://klyatskin.da.ru
With its aid I have HotSync session in less then minute
while without it it
tooks 2+ hours. It's true, not joke.
There is a restriction for DB record lengths there
(README.TXT) but if
you'll like it I could fixed it for you personally. Or
adopt it in any other
way.
Regards,
Constantine Klyatskin
----------------------
http://klyatskin.da.ru
===============
Date: 28 Dec 1999 06:51:56 -0800
From: "Howard C. Shaw III" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: HotSync speed
We are developing a product which has the implicit
requirement that a single
hotsync take no longer than five minutes to complete.
Currently, with a portion of our dataset consisting of
11,600 records, it
takes 4 minutes 20 seconds to retrieve the first four
bytes and the record
id from each record in this dataset. We have a
sophisticated fully
server-side system for determining what records have
changed, and do not
need to examine the records on the handheld to determine
this, but must
obtain the record-id corresponding to a particular
identifying DWord. Since
the initial read of these DWords takes 4 minutes, we are
being pushed over
our limit almost before we begin. This is deeply
puzzling, since, having
examined what information is returned in the header, we
have determined that
the handheld should only need to transfer 13 bytes per
record; four bytes
from the record itself (which we are limiting using
totalbytes on a >= 2.1
API), and the header information (using
SyncReadRecByIndex). For 11,600
records this is 150,800 bytes. At 57,600 this should
take around 20.9
seconds. Instead, it takes 260 seconds. Thus this
transfer is 91% overhead!
Why is the overhead so great? We are trying to get setup
for 115 kbps
transfer, but don't see that this will provide much
benefit to a transfer
that has this kind of overhead.
Howard C. Shaw III
Programmer
Tyrol Data Systems
================
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
