Re: Performance in views

David Crossley wrote: David Crossley wrote: CFAS Webmaster wrote: Here's a second try... Tigris skin: Part 1: http://forrest.pastebin.com/385730 Part 2: http://forrest.pastebin.com/385731 Did you grasp the importance of issue FOR-677 below? You should fix that issue first. I

Re: Performance in views

David Crossley wrote: > CFAS Webmaster wrote: > > Here's a second try... > > > > Tigris skin: > > Part 1: http://forrest.pastebin.com/385730 > > Part 2: http://forrest.pastebin.com/385731 > > Did you grasp the importance of issue FOR-677 below? > You should fix that issue first. It is causing doc

Re: Performance in views

CFAS Webmaster wrote: > Here's a second try... > > Tigris skin: > Part 1: http://forrest.pastebin.com/385730 > Part 2: http://forrest.pastebin.com/385731 Did you grasp the importance of issue FOR-677 below? You should fix that issue first. It is causing documents to be duplicated. -David > View

Re: Performance in views

Here's a second try... Tigris skin: Part 1: http://forrest.pastebin.com/385730 Part 2: http://forrest.pastebin.com/385731 Views: Part 1: http://forrest.pastebin.com/385761 Part 2: http://forrest.pastebin.com/385762 However, my "feeling" that pages were being processed about 4 times appears not

Re: Performance in views

Sorry, I royally messed up on posting to pastebin... I'll post it again and send the links... By the way, do we use http://forrest.pastebin.com or something like it? It can give us a semi-private posting area outside of the main page. -Paul David Crossley wrote: CFAS Webmaster wrote:

Re: Performance in views

CFAS Webmaster wrote: > > > If anyone is interested, I have posted a complete log of the views & > pelt build so everyone can see how many times various pages are compiled... > > Views: http://pastebin.com/385671 (**Huge**) & ~30 minutes > Pelt: http://pastebin.com/385673 ~4 minutes... > > While

Re: Performance in views

David Crossley wrote: Thorsten Scherler wrote: Ross Gardler escribi??: From the FT IRC logs: +Oct 05 15:00:15 On my quip regarding cocoon caching... That site took 50 minutes to build using 0.8 & views. +Oct 05 15:00:21Ah yeah. +Oct 05 15:00:34 With essentially the same cont

Re: Performance in views

Thorsten Scherler wrote: ... One reason for this poor performance is that xinclude is used extensively. Actually there is "only" one part of the code depending on a include with a xpointer. That is the reason I used xinclude. AFAIK cinclude does not support xpointer, right? I think you

Re: Performance in views

El jue, 06-10-2005 a las 18:34 +1000, David Crossley escribió: ... > > Why do you think that David? > > Can you please show us! > > I needed to do a better analysis before saying anything, > but since you ask now ... > > Have a look at a views enabled site using the Cocoon Profiler: > http://for

Re: Performance in views

Thorsten Scherler wrote: > Ross Gardler escribi??: > > From the FT IRC logs: > > > > +Oct 05 15:00:15 On my quip regarding cocoon caching... That > > site took 50 minutes to build using 0.8 & views. > > +Oct 05 15:00:21 Ah yeah. > > +Oct 05 15:00:34 With essentially the same content the

Re: Performance in views

El mié, 05-10-2005 a las 11:21 +0100, Ross Gardler escribió: > From the FT IRC logs: > > +Oct 05 15:00:15On my quip regarding cocoon caching... That > site took 50 minutes to build using 0.8 & views. > +Oct 05 15:00:21Ah yeah. > +Oct 05 15:00:34With essentially the same content

Performance in views

From the FT IRC logs: +Oct 05 15:00:15 On my quip regarding cocoon caching... That site took 50 minutes to build using 0.8 & views. +Oct 05 15:00:21Ah yeah. +Oct 05 15:00:34 With essentially the same content the pelt site takes much less. +Oct 05 15:00:35good success story +Oct 05