On Wed, 28 May 2003, Philippe Grosjean wrote: > I suspect that your problem comes from the rbind(). I have also noticed an > exponentially slower execution with the increase of the size of the data > frame that you rbind()s. It is much faster to rbind() several separated > temporary data frames (let's say, ten by ten loops), and then to rbind() > them all together. > > An even better solution is to allocate a data frame or matrix with the final > size (it seems you can predict it in your example), and then use > df[n, ] <- result > where df is your allocated data frame and n is the iteration.
Since we are told the results are all numeric, it would be even better to use a pre-computed numeric matrix to store them. rbind.data.frame is about the worst possible choice in such circumstances. -- Brian D. Ripley, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Professor of Applied Statistics, http://www.stats.ox.ac.uk/~ripley/ University of Oxford, Tel: +44 1865 272861 (self) 1 South Parks Road, +44 1865 272866 (PA) Oxford OX1 3TG, UK Fax: +44 1865 272595 ______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list https://www.stat.math.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
