Mailing List Archive: 49091 messages
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search
 

[REBOL] Re: REBOL and database stuff

From: tim:johnsons-web at: 30-Mar-2003 19:10

* Gregg Irwin <[greggirwin--mindspring--com]> [030330 18:43]:
> Hi Mat, > > MB> Certainly not too late for me to shift! > > Shouldn't be too different, at least to see which works best for you, > and as Tim said, it works with Core. > > MB> I guess that's not really important now we've established the rows > MB> don't have 5000 fields :) > > :) Well, I haven't used db.r, but I just glanced at it and it loads > each line individually it seems, and creates just an empty block to > load them into as a starting point. If loading the database is what's > slow for you, just changing those things might help quite a bit. Also, > if doing lots of inserts deletes, using a list! would be faster for > that. It does a linear search to delete a record, so that could > probably be sped up as well. Same for update. Selecting records could > probably be sped up as well, but I'd have to spend more time to see > what he's actually doing. > > MB> Nothing that's not in that lovely db.r really. It's just that it'd > MB> probably get very slow or break with 5000 records. > > Gotta profile it to be sure, unless you already know exactly what > parts are slow about it. > > MB> My immediate requirement is 3000 records and I had set about doing > MB> that with db.r and suspected it would work. But I thought better to do > MB> the work now, for when I need to do one later in the month with 50,000 > MB> records. > > For 50K records you probably want a true DB. > > MB> I also thought it'd be pretty fast. However just inserting a new row > MB> into a datbase with less than ten fields... it's only doing 2-3 a > MB> second. Can that be entirely down to the MySQL server being on another > MB> machine? Surely it's faster than that? > > Dunno. I've heard that MySQL can peform pretty well and I'd have to > guess that not many big folks would use it if that was as fast as it > went.
Using rebol with mysql has given me better performance than "C" with a compiled in DBMS. Talking about hundreds of thousands of records.... The nice thing about using rebol to "drive" mysql is that one is using one fine product to exploit another. Interoperability at it's best. I've put together a couple of text-based dbms with rebol and after a small learning curve with mysql - I wouldn't go back to them. And from what DocKimbel has told me, the PostreSQL driver gives even faster performance. tim -- Tim Johnson <[tim--johnsons-web--com]> http://www.alaska-internet-solutions.com http://www.johnsons-web.com