On Friday, March 2, 2018 at 6:52:43 PM UTC+1, joearms wrote:
> Tiddlers should be small (in order to make them reusable)
> If they are (say) on average c. 300 bytes
Tiddlers internally do have a little bit of an overhead.
We use several invisible core fields, which also need a bit memory.
title: tiddler title
tags: a b c
So the "header" is already about 150 byte. ... So I think a good
approximation is ~1k Byte per tiddler with user content.
we could get 3 tiddlers per KB of 3K tiddlers / MB
3000 tiddlers is ok, even if they are ~1k
> or 3M tiddlers per GB
This will definitely be a problem and probably cause browser "long running
script" messages. Or it may crash.
TiddlyWiki doesn't use a database in the background. Internally its a
"simple" JSON structure. So search doesn't use an index. ... There is a
"indexing" plugin ...
I did some tests with about 20'000 tiddlers which are also taged. So
backlinks have to be calculated. Tag Pills are claculated ...
The program is still usable, but opening a tiddler takes several seconds.
Which is "kind" of slow. Saving and loading is even slower.
>From my tests
The result is a 20Mbyte html file.
> - no crashes at save fromo tiddlywiki.com ... but 3 times a slow script
> - it needs about 13 seconds to load from disk
> - and about 25 seconds to save with TiddlyFox
> If the "long script warning" is not disabled with firefox setting
> about:config ... It crashed several times while saving
> Disabling the long script warning didn't crash it.
So size isn't a problem - is performance a problem (when searching etc)
As I wrote. No index
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
To post to this group, send email to email@example.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywikidev.
To view this discussion on the web visit
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.