Ulrich, all improvements in knowledge start with curiosity, our most
precious asset.
JS
Ulrich Schöbel wrote:
Hi John,
there isn't really much to remove, but nevertheless I
followed your advice and replaced the sqlite select
by a small standard tcl procedure. Maybe that set me
on the right
Hi Adrian,
I tried your script and got, after a slight modification, quite
consistent results. When I tried it as is, I got slightly varying
time results with a peak in the 50 to 100 region. Then I
commented out all lines concerning the deletion, creation
and filling to get the pure retrieval
Could it be connected to the stepping up of the CPU? Do you run those tests
on a laptop? This at least could explain how the many iterations are faster
(the CPU has time to step up).
It does not explain why the 10 and 5 are fast as well (maybe when doing few
iterations, the time calculation is
Hi Ran,
no, sorry. It's running on a normal Linux PC, runnning 24/7.
No laptop, no stepping up. Time calculation is probably
a bit less accurate in the lower regions, but not that much.
It's really a mind boggler.
Thanks and kind regards
Ulrich
On Wednesday 22 February 2006 11:27, Ran wrote:
Ulrich =?iso-8859-1?q?Sch=F6bel?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
% time {db eval {select * from cust_persons where first_name='Ulrich'}} 1000
75.498 microseconds per iteration
% time {db eval {select * from cust_persons where first_name='Ulrich'}} 1
51.6179 microseconds per iteration
% time
Hi Richard,
thanks for trying to reproduce my 'problem'.
I'm using Linux 2.6.12 (Ubuntu Breezy Badger, a debian distro),
Tcl/Tk 8.4.12, sqlite 3.3.4, all pretty recent versions.
I made the same tests today with the same results.
Nevertheless, sqlite is by far faster than mySQL, so I'm going
to
On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 11:11:45AM +0200, Ulrich Sch?bel wrote:
I tried your script and got, after a slight modification, quite
consistent results. When I tried it as is, I got slightly varying
time results with a peak in the 50 to 100 region. Then I
commented out all lines concerning the
On Wednesday 22 February 2006 15:59, Adrian Ho wrote:
Do you come to similar results?
Nope, mine were a lot more consistent (Centrino 1.6GHz laptop, 512MB RAM):
t(1)=254 microseconds per iteration
t(5)=186.6 microseconds per iteration
t(10)=156.1 microseconds per iteration
t(50)=147.24
On February 22, 2006 05:59 am, Adrian Ho wrote:
On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 11:11:45AM +0200, Ulrich Sch?bel wrote:
I tried your script and got, after a slight modification, quite
consistent results. When I tried it as is, I got slightly varying
time results with a peak in the 50 to 100 region.
Ulrich Schöbel wrote:
Hi Richard,
thanks for trying to reproduce my 'problem'.
I'm using Linux 2.6.12 (Ubuntu Breezy Badger, a debian distro),
Tcl/Tk 8.4.12, sqlite 3.3.4, all pretty recent versions.
I made the same tests today with the same results.
Nevertheless, sqlite is by far faster
Ulrich, try designing an experiment which removes SQLITE and measures
the performance of the other software layers. That might resolve your
dilemma.
JS
Ulrich Schöbel wrote:
Hi Richard,
thanks for trying to reproduce my 'problem'.
I'm using Linux 2.6.12 (Ubuntu Breezy Badger, a debian
Hi John,
there isn't really much to remove, but nevertheless I
followed your advice and replaced the sqlite select
by a small standard tcl procedure. Maybe that set me
on the right track.
There were also some exceptionally high execution
times in between, but not in every test run and not
always
Hi all,
I just made my first steps into sqlite (3.3.4).
I created a small table, filled it with two rows of data
and timed a select. Those were the results:
% time {db eval {select * from cust_persons where first_name='Ulrich'}} 1000
75.498 microseconds per iteration
% time {db eval {select *
On Tue, 21 Feb 2006, UlrichSchöbel wrote:
[...] Where do those 309.95 microseconds come from? What's the
difference between running a query 100 times or 1 times? Should I
avoid running a select exactly 100 times for some obscure reason? [...]
Hello,
can you reproduce similar timings in
Ulrich =?iso-8859-1?q?Sch=F6bel?= [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
% time {db eval {select * from cust_persons where first_name='Ulrich'}} 1000
75.498 microseconds per iteration
% time {db eval {select * from cust_persons where first_name='Ulrich'}} 1
51.6179 microseconds per iteration
% time
Hi Thomas,
no, I can't reproduce it in C. The problem is not worth the effort,
I can live with these timings, it's just strange.
I don't think it's an interface problem. I'm using Tcl, more or less
the 'natural' language for sqlite. Tcl doesn't have a garbage
collection.
The strangest thing is,
On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 01:13:19AM +0200, Ulrich Schöbel wrote:
I tried the 10 reps expecting even more. Then came the surprise:
only 67 microsecs.
My first feeling was, something like a busy disk or so came
in just when I tried the 100 reps. But the results were reproducible,
deviating
Hi Nathaniel,
even if it is not absolutely accurate, a factor of about 5
is beyond accuracy tolerances.
Kind regards
Ulrich
On Wednesday 22 February 2006 01:38, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 01:13:19AM +0200, Ulrich Schöbel wrote:
I tried the 10 reps expecting even more.
On Wed, Feb 22, 2006 at 01:13:19AM +0200, Ulrich Sch??bel wrote:
I don't think it's an interface problem. I'm using Tcl, more or less
the 'natural' language for sqlite. Tcl doesn't have a garbage
collection.
Tcl certainly *does* have garbage collection:
http://wiki.tcl.tk/3096
19 matches
Mail list logo