Marc,  Do you have access to the PC in question through RDP or some other 
program?  If so, I would pull up MS Task Manager and look at the CPU usage and 
memory usage when the application is running fast and when the application is 
running slow.  This should tell you if you have a problem in either area.  If 
you don’t have access you will need to have the operator collect the data for 
you.  Not long ago, I had a client that had a weather radar program that 
continually refreshed a map as weather conditions changed.  If there were 
storms in the area it would suck-up all of the PCs resources and my application 
would run slow.  By looking at Task Manager you could see the process servicing 
the weather program using more and more of the resources.

 

John 

 

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of MDRD
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 7:46 AM
To: RBASE-L Mailing List
Subject: [RBASE-L] - Re: Workstation speed

 

Buddy, George and all

 

 

This EEP is used about 60-100x a day,  Restarting RBase fixes this.

 

Dropping the table and Projecting the way I was doing did not make any 
difference. Therefore it seems either a Disc frees up

something and maybe forces some buffer cache to get cleared on Workstations.  I 
have never heard of this from the local computer.

 

So, I think I will send them a update with several buttons using these 
different versions with Pause 3 and 4 counting up from 1 to 10

so they can tell me where things bog down.

 

One of the big offices that had the problem is going to be a training office 
for that Other program!  I would love to get this speed thing

nailed down so they can compare my app when it is running at top speed.

 

These offices are speed nuts, they do repetitive tasks entering invoices one 
after another.  Some run this EEP from the local computer

others the workstation.

 

I will post my findings,  

 

my .0000001 cents is these workstations have some sort of buffer cache thing 
that gets filled up, like cleaning out your temp internet files

 

Thanks for all the help, now I have several ways to test.

Marc

 

 

 

 

From: Walker, <mailto:[email protected]>  Buddy 

Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 6:41 PM

To: RBASE-L Mailing List <mailto:[email protected]>  

Subject: [RBASE-L] - Re: Workstation speed

 

Marc

  If you are deleting the rows instead of dropping the table I think it get 
slower. I use temp tables and views and I drop and recreate them each time the 
criteria changes to populate the view or table. Since I’ve been doing that I 
very rarely have problems with speed.

 

Buddy

 

 

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of MDRD
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 7:09 PM
To: RBASE-L Mailing List
Subject: [RBASE-L] - Re: Workstation speed

 

Buddy

 

So, you think 

Drop table

Project where Count=0

Insert

 

will be faster than

Drop Table

Project

 

Why would this get slower as the day goes on?  

That seems like something is not getting refreshed.

 

Funny how only 3-5 rows can get slower no matter what method I use.

 

Thanks

Marc

 

 

 

From: Walker, <mailto:[email protected]>  Buddy 

Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 5:44 PM

To: RBASE-L Mailing List <mailto:[email protected]>  

Subject: [RBASE-L] - Re: Workstation speed

 

Marc

  That is why I’m saying drop the temp table and then recreate each time you 
want to add different rows instead of del rows ..

  

  Projecting the table where count = 0 creates the table without any rows. It 
is a lot faster then trying to create the table and add the rows at the same 
time. I believe doing an insert instead of a project or append seems faster.

 

Buddy

 

 

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of MDRD
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 6:29 PM
To: RBASE-L Mailing List
Subject: [RBASE-L] - Re: Workstation speed

 

Buddy

 

My code is fast at the start of the day, the longer they use my app the slower 
this gets

the rest of my app stays fast.  Restarting Rbase / my app makes it faster again

 

Not to sound dense but I will anyway... I do not under the Where Count = 0 ?

 

To me it seems like the Temp table bogs down the longer you use it and is not 
cleared from

memory or some other tech thingy.

 

Marc

 

 

From: Walker, <mailto:[email protected]>  Buddy 

Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 4:56 PM

To: RBASE-L Mailing List <mailto:[email protected]>  

Subject: [RBASE-L] - Re: Workstation speed

 

Marc

  If your form is based on the temp table and you are projecting only the rows 
you want, then I wouldn’t use the where clause on the EDIT using… I wouldn’t 
delete rows from the table either I would drop the table and recreate it.

 

  One thing you might want to try is   

 

   DROP TABLE tran_spd 

   PROJECT TEMP TABLE tran_spd FROM tran_hist USING * WHERE COUNT = 0

  INSERT INTO tran_spd (list only the columns you actually need) +

  SELECT the same list of columns in table FROM +

 Tran_hist WHERE custnum = .vcust AND …….

 

  EDIT USI spdyov2 

   No where clause should be necessary since you already filtered the table 
with the project and insert where clause.

 

Buddy

 

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of MDRD
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 5:21 PM
To: RBASE-L Mailing List
Subject: [RBASE-L] - Re: Workstation speed

 

Bob and Karen

 

It seems when I first went from 6.5 to 7.5 I used a regular table with Indexes.

But I switched to Temp tables thinking it would be safer is 2 workstations were 
doing the same EEP.

It has been a long time and in the server you can not tell any difference.

 

There are only 3-5 rows each time.

 

These offices waited for several updates of mine so I can't be sure which of my 
"improvements" caused this <g>

 

Scratch is Local TMP

 

I have tried Drop and Project but they say it is still slow 

DROP TABLE tran_spd
 PROJECT TEMP tran_spd FROM tran_hist USING *  +
 WHERE custnum = .vcust AND tr_type = 1 AND tr_date = .vmaxdate

 EDIT USING spdyov2 +
 WHERE tr_type = 1 AND custnum = .vcust CAPTION .vcap

I need to find 2 slow computers to network to make it easier to test this

 

 

Thanks

Marc

 

 

 

From: [email protected] 

Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 3:10 PM

To: RBASE-L <mailto:[email protected]>  Mailing List 

Subject: [RBASE-L] - Re: Workstation speed

 

Marc,

  I would not use Delete Rows from a temp table when wanting to remove all 
rows.  This is much slower

if there are any number of rows to delete.

 

Instead try, 

 

Drop table Tran_spd

Project temp Tran_Spd from (Permanent empty table name of same column 
structure) using all

   or

If Speedov has the same column names, skip the insert and

 

Project temp Tran_Spd from Speedov using (column list) where......

 

This may prove even faster yet.   However, note that a lock will be placed on 
Speedov if you

use the project from it.  Otherwise project using Where limit = 0 and then use 
the Insert if a lock

on the table would be problematic.

 

You do not say how many records are being inserted at a time.  You do not show 
building an

index on your temp table.  I normally do not use indexes on temp tables unless 
there is a lot of

data and of a type that an index would help with.   If you have indexes and are 
using the

Delete Rows command, that will definitely be slower as it has to update all the 
indexes as well.

 

As Karen stated, make sure your temp settings are local.

-Bob

----- Original Message -----
From: [email protected]
To: "RBASE-L Mailing List" <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 2:53:10 PM GMT -06:00 US/Canada Central
Subject: [RBASE-L] - Re: Workstation speed

Marc:   Have you tried using a permanent table in 7.5 to see if it's faster 
than using the temp table?    And if you're using temp tables, make sure your 
scratch setting is to a local drive (like SET SCRATCH C:\TEMP)  so that temp 
table information is kept local rather than traveling through the network.

Karen

This is the second office that has brought up the issue of Rbase getting slower 
as the day wears on.
  
This tech is a certified network guy so I assume the network is OK, new 
computers 1 gig switches ...
  
My old code used a regular table and I would just delete rows .....but I never 
heard a complaint on
the speed
  
-- tran_spd is a temp table that is created on start of the main menu
  DELETE ROWS FROM tran_spd
-- APPEND  .... using append instead of insert does not seem to make any 
difference
   
  INSERT +
INTO tran_spd (custnum,date_con,tr_date,tr_type,ch_code,ch_price,+
ptest,dig_ch,memo,treat_dr,inscomp,inshold,modf1,modf2,modf3,+
modf4  ) SELECT custnum,date_con,tr_date,tr_type,ch_code,ch_price,+
ptest, dig_ch,memo,treat_dr,inscomp,inshold,modf1,modf2,modf3,+
modf4   FROM speedov WHERE custnum = .vaptcust
  
  EDIT USING spdyov2 +
WHERE tr_type = 1 AND custnum = .vcust CAPTION .vcap
  
Then then click a button to Save or append these charges to another table then
go back to this same EEP again.
  
Even if I drop Temp tab and Project Temp tab is not faster
  
I think is it my program logic not 7.5, but my old permanent table in 6.5 was 
faster than the
temp table in 7.5 

Why would using Temp table be slower?
  
  
Marc

 

Reply via email to