Ciao TonyM & all interested I do think that a "Rules Of Thumb" note on SCALABILITY could be very useful.
The issue is expressing it correctly. So much of performance is an EMPIRICAL issue, that without testing variant use cases, you can make TW look worse than it is. That is not a good idea. To give an example: Whilst 8,000 Tiddlers of Tweets with tags that rely on filtering gets very slow, a TW with addresses for 8,000 external images of which the next displayed is calculated via a random number it is fine. In the first case you got a lot of processing & rendering. In the second you don't. To be useful guidance on Scalability I think needs informing by testing by USE CASE. Best wishes Josiah TonyM wrote: > > ... Perhaps we should start a discussion specifically on settings and > tools for large wikis? > > ... When it come to scale there are a number of performance issue's, one > of which NoteSelf solved by showing the "Loading" message before TW can > respond at all. What I quickly realised is when you have a lot of > tiddlers, quite a few assumptions made in a regular tiddlywiki's, for > features and responsiveness are no longer valid. Such as a search that > responds keystroke by keystroke. > > There is no reason why we can't supply some tools to support such large > data-sets. > > ... What I suggest is we bundle a range of settings together, perhaps in a > plugin designed to reconfigure TiddlyWiki for larger data sets... > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywiki. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/1238a62f-ab8c-491e-923d-88294aec73c1%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.