geous?
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-
> View this message in context:
> http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098.html
> Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
On 7/30/16, 5:26 PM, "bilbosax" wrote:
>So my application is a HUGE number cruncher. But since it is running on
>one
>thread, the deployed version still takes about an hour to process my
>data.
>If at all possible, I would like to get this down to about 15 minutes so I
>could run it several t
case?
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13103.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hi,
> for (length of array collection = 38k)
> for (length of array collection = 38k)
>if condition one is met
> if condition two is met
>if condition three is met
> if condition four is met
>if condition five is met
> if condition six is met
>
On 7/30/16, 11:13 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> for (length of array collection = 38k)
>> for (length of array collection = 38k)
>>if condition one is met
>> if condition two is met
>>if condition three is met
>> if condition four is met
>>if condit
he loops?
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.2333346.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13107.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hi,
> Similar to Justin's caching suggestion, can the results of the past run be
> stored somewhere so only the new records need to be tested?
I was thinking of caching results as you go around the loop, if the
calculations use similar values or there's a lot of duplicates in those arrays
then
Hi,
> It is bindable. I will try turning off updates.
I would guess it going to be an order or two magnitudes faster - depending on
the changes you make to items in that array collection.
> How do you go about accessing/manipulating an array inside of an
> array collection?
myAC.source
> I
Alex / Justin:
Just a general question, related to this thread: why are we just assuming
that a worker implementation should be always faster that a single threaded
model? Isn't that heavily dependent on the underlying hardware (and flash
capability to properly use it)? I mean:
In a single thread
Hi,
> Just a general question, related to this thread: why are we just assuming
> that a worker implementation should be always faster that a single threaded
> model?
I never stated that workers would improve performance but it likely to help in
this situation. My understanding is that workers a
. The timeline just
stops. Any thoughts?
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13113.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hi,
> I don't know how useful Scout is going to turn out to be for me with the
> profiling in my speed issue. I am using Flash Builder 4.5, so I don't have
> the ability to turn on telemetry in the compiler.
You should be able to do so by adding “-advanced-telemetry=true" to “Additional
Compile
is
is what I have in the dialogue:
-locale en_US
-advanced-telemetry=true
-debug=false
Is my syntax wrong?
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13115.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On 7/31/16, 2:18 AM, "Javier Guerrero García" wrote:
>Alex / Justin:
>
>Just a general question, related to this thread: why are we just assuming
>that a worker implementation should be always faster that a single
>threaded
>model?
I don't think I've said that he's guaranteed to get better pe
On 7/31/16, 8:25 PM, "bilbosax" wrote:
>Hi Justin. I have never used the additional compiler arguments dialogue
>before. I profiled my app in Scout as you suggested, and when browsing
>through the Session Info, it says that Advanced Telemetry is disabled, so
>I
>don't know if I entered the ad
ebug=false
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13118.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hi,
> -locale en_US
> -advanced-telemetry=true
> -debug=false
May be the new lines are confusing it I usually put them all on one line like
so:
-locale en_US -advanced-telemetry=true -debug=false
Thanks,
Justin
Hi,
> It occurred to me that even if you got it right, if your code doesn't make
> function calls or instantiate objects, there may not be good sample data.
It should still show the self time, garbage collection (if any) and calls the
the trig functions being called (i.e. Math.cos or Math.sin).
On 7/31/16, 9:40 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> -locale en_US
>> -advanced-telemetry=true
>> -debug=false
>
>May be the new lines are confusing it I usually put them all on one line
>like so:
>-locale en_US -advanced-telemetry=true -debug=false
There are some post processing utils as wel
ache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13122.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13123.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
context:
http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13134.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
ative to the ObjectProxies
> and try and optimize working with my arraycollection, or should I simply
> make another worker to chop down this processing time? Math is not the
> bottleneck, getting the data together to do the math is the slow part.
>
>
>
> --
> View this
Hi,
> The results are both interesting, and a little confusing. The main loop took
> 2560 seconds. ObjectProxy.getProperty (mx utils) took 787 seconds.
Are you using ObjectProxies in your code? It may be the way you are accessing
the data as well myAC[1].[“prop”] is AFAIK a lot slower than myAC
message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13137.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hi,
> for(var s:Object in mainArrayCollection)
From memory for in loops are slow I’d avoid this if possible - probably where
all the length calculations are coming from?
> {
> proxyArray[s] = new
> ObjectProxy(mainArrayCollect
On 8/1/16, 8:42 PM, "bilbosax" wrote:
>> Are you using ObjectProxies or a bindable named class?
>
>Yes, I am using ObjectProxies. I found this little bit of code that
>allowed
>me to convert all of my objects to object proxies so that my itemrenderers
>would see the data as bindable. I was ge
think that it would help my
speed problems, could you help me to understand how to use this bindable
class that you and Alex have referred to?
Thanks for all of your help!!! I've gone from over 2 hours down to 23
minutes!
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.2333
Hi,
> ObjectProxy.getProperty --> 804 sec
> Garbarge Collection --> 198 sec
With a little work you should be able to make both of these zero.
> I wish there was a way to get rid of some of that ObjectProxy time.
There is one way. Keep the original Object based array and use that for your
calc
346.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13142.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
t ;-) )
Chris
Von: bilbosax
Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. August 2016 07:24:17
An: users@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: Workers and Speed
Alright!!! Now we are getting somewhere! Passing the ArrayCollection to a
standard Array cut the time in Half! From almost 50 minutes down to 23
mi
about what goes on inside
of components by profiling.
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.2333346.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13145.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hi,
> So inside of all my Loops where I calculate the trig, I update an
> arraycollection(containing ObjectProxies) with the new values that I
> calculate. Do you think if I passed this data to a regular array instead,
> and then over to the ArrayCollection when the processing was finished that I
com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13154.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On 8/2/16, 9:07 AM, "bilbosax" wrote:
>From what I have learned from this process, I think I am going to change
>my
>logic in the loop a little. I no longer feel that the math functions are
>the
>bottleneck near as much as getting data in and out of the arrays and
>comparing them. So I am going
give you
a good answe as to why I am not receiving one.
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13156.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13156.html
> Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13158.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On 8/2/16, 7:04 PM, "bilbosax" wrote:
>What about changing datatypes, does this eat up a lot of time? My
>database
>has some values that are typed as string but are actually numbers. When I
>download them from the database, I assume that they are entered into the
>arraycollection as strings.
ext:
http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13160.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hi,
> Was just wondering. In Scout, if it says that something is taking say 150
> sec, when you drill down into the object/function/event, the parts don't
> ever add up to 150 seconds. So I thought that some things, like data type
> conversions, just weren't declared.
If I understand you correctl
On 8/2/16, 10:57 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> Was just wondering. In Scout, if it says that something is taking say
>>150
>> sec, when you drill down into the object/function/event, the parts don't
>> ever add up to 150 seconds. So I thought that some things, like data
>>type
>> convers
such:
>
> var a:Number = Number(myArray[1].someProp)*10;
>
> When doing this a large number of times in big loops, will it eat up a
> significant amount of time or is type conversion pretty fast?
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://apache-flex
compArrayCollection.source = tempCompArray;
mainArrayCollection.source = tempArray;
}
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13192.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hi,
Not looked at the code in detail yet. Probably not a big deal but a small
simple win is to move Math.PI/180 into a variable and do the calculation once
rather than calculating 4 x times around the loop.
>
>
Awesome Tip! Thanks!
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13194.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hi,
Just out of interest how large is tempDistance (it it’s range of values)? It
looks like you working out distances of long/lat and for small values of
tempDistance you can use approximations than mean that just about all of the
maths goes away.
Of course if the math isn’t taking up a lot of
46.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13196.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
By the way, your Math.PI/180 suggestion has us down to 2 minutes and 17
seconds, so thanks a lot!
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13197.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
s the key to the whole thing here and has to be
> exact, I can't be off by 10ths of a mile, it needs to be within say, 20
> feet.
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13196.html
> Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
he range of
>> .25
>> to 4 miles. Distance is the key to the whole thing here and has to be
>> exact, I can't be off by 10ths of a mile, it needs to be within say, 20
>> feet.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context:
>> http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13196.html
>> Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>
>
Hi,
> Distances are selected by the user using a dropdownlist in the range of .25
> to 4 miles.
A 4 miles square section of the earth is going to be fairly close to flat. A
pythagorean distance formula is very likely to give errors of < 20 feet over
that range. A quick google search suggests 8
Hi,
> for (var i:int = 0; i < length; i++) { /*
> Loop Through Each of the
> Records*/
> if (tempArray[i].status == "Act") { /*
> Test to see if current record
> status is ACTIVE */
String comparisons are slow, try to make
y and adding another conditional for at
least half of the calculations.
Do you think it is worth trying this scenario?
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13202.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hi,
> If i compare record 20 to record 1030 and find them to be comparable and
> decide to calculate the distance between them, then why should i recompare
> record 1030 to 20 when the time comes in the loop?
Correct theres no need to.
> So if I stored the distance in a huge 38k x 38k array(or
>
e the
distance.
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13204.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hi,
> Well, it is not quite as simple as that. If I were just updating the array,
> then yes, it would be. But I am keeping track of a count of items within a
> distance of a particular record, and averages and medians and other such
> things that have to be calculated specifically with respect to
ray is a better choice than a Vector here?
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.2333346.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13206.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
a great idea in theory, but in
mechanics, unmanageable by the program.
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13207.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hi,
> Do you think an Array is a better choice than a Vector here?
Yes arrays can be sparse (i.e. missing values), vectors are not in ActionScript.
Justin
Hi,
> For instance, if I create an array like so:
>
> var tableArray:Array = new Array();
>
> then how do I go about placing a distance calculation in say, slot
> [1703][25000]? Flex won't allow me to do this:
>
> tableArray[1703][25000] = distance;
You need to do something like this:
if (!t
> count = 0;
> average = 0.0;
> someNumber = 0.0;
> }
> }
>
> PopUpManager.removePopUp(processingPU);
> compArrayCollection.source = tempCompArray;
> mainArrayCollection.source = tempArray;
>
>}
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13192.html
> Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On 8/3/16, 5:58 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> If i compare record 20 to record 1030 and find them to be comparable and
>> decide to calculate the distance between them, then why should i
>>recompare
>> record 1030 to 20 when the time comes in the loop?
>
>Correct theres no need to.
I co
in my project!
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13212.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hi,
> As far as the pythagorean theorem was concerened, the results were accurate
> enough but saved no noticeable time. In other words, the actual math is not
> the real culprit here with the speed in the grand scheme of things.
I expected it to show something but that just goes to show you whi
time and get 2 min and 5 sec, close the program and open it
again and get 2 min and 30 seconds. What gives?
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13214.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On 8/3/16, 7:32 PM, "bilbosax" wrote:
>True, I can live with the speed that it is currently running. I was
>willing
>to construct 4 workers in hopes of getting it down to 15 minutes. To be
>able to have it running in my main application in under three minutes is a
>dream. Now it is just a fu
On 8/3/16, 10:33 PM, "bilbosax" wrote:
>
>Strange thing though, the results are not very consistent. I can run the
>program one time and get 2 min and 5 sec, close the program and open it
>again and get 2 min and 30 seconds. What gives?
There are dozens of factors in the run time. The garbag
st glanced at
it. I will take a deeper look into it soon, as it seems like something I
should know to a certain degree of competency.
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13217.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list
On 8/3/16, 11:41 PM, "bilbosax" wrote:
>You just stepped outside of my academic sphere :) Although, I did a quick
>wiki scan on hashes and it sounds fascinating, but I don't know how well
>it
>would work in this situation. I think I would have to do a hash 38k times
>if I understand it correc
shing?
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13219.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On 8/4/16, 1:54 PM, "bilbosax" wrote:
>I'm going to read up about hashing, this sounds very very interesting.
>But I
>am curious, does it also work if you have to do more than just compare
>strings? What if you have to read a guys shoe size and make sure it is
>within 3 sizes of a predetermine
Hi,
> The simplest hash is the concatenation of the string representation of all
> the properties you are currently comparing, assuming that no property will
> have the value of empty string "". I believe you can always test for ""
> and swap for something else, even a simple space " ". If there
On 8/4/16, 3:04 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> The simplest hash is the concatenation of the string representation of
>>all
>> the properties you are currently comparing, assuming that no property
>>will
>> have the value of empty string "". I believe you can always test for ""
>> and sw
z, myProperty);
}
}
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13223.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Ooops. I get it. It is giving me the position of the data.
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13224.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
all of you!
...now, I am going to have to read up about hashing :)
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13225.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Thanks for all of the
>help guys, I am glad this community is here and I have learned a lot from
>all of you!
>
>...now, I am going to have to read up about hashing :)
>
>
>
>--
>View this message in context:
>http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-
s for all of the
> >help guys, I am glad this community is here and I have learned a lot from
> >all of you!
> >
> >...now, I am going to have to read up about hashing :)
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >View this message in context:
> >http://apache-f
o the distance for every record.
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13230.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
lated in addition to the distance for every record.
>
>
>
>--
>View this message in context:
>http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p1
>3230.html
>Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
nd to learn a lot about hash
functions?
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13232.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On 8/5/16, 6:55 PM, "bilbosax" wrote:
>Alex Harui wrote
>> IMO, the new loop is constructed in a way that it will only test a vs b
>> and never b vs a, so there is no need to store things for the b vs a
>>test.
>
>Yes, but the point that I am trying to make is that I can only calculate
>the
>te
he-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13234.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On 8/5/16, 10:24 PM, "bilbosax" wrote:
>> You might want to make sure the sparse array doesn't have some
>unintended side effect.
>
>What did you mean by this? When I run my program the original way, doing
>ALL of the calculations, I get a certain number of matches.
>
>When I am running the p
does not change the fact that other numbers have to be
> calculated in addition to the distance for every record.
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://apache-flex-users.
> 246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13230.html
> Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
. End of rant.
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13238.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hi,
Hard to know without seeing the code. One way to make sure that the program is
behaving correctly is to use unit tests, you make a change, run the tests if
everything the same you know you’ve not introduced an error. That combined with
version control can be a very effective way of programm
lways returns the exact
> same, but faulty, data. Ugh. End of rant.
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://apache-flex-users.
> 246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13238.html
> Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>>the
>> sparse array is unstable or unrelieable, but it always returns the exact
>> same, but faulty, data. Ugh. End of rant.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context: http://apache-flex-users.
>> 246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13238.html
>> Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
tions in about 2 minutes, how long should I expect an iPad to be able
to do the same work? 5 min, 15 min, an hour?
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13244.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
still going to write my mobile version in AIR, but now it will download
pre-processed data calculated by my C application. I'll be able to process
the entire USA in 5 hours every night. Wicked psyched!!
--
View this message in context:
http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers
age in context:
http://apache-flex-users.246.n4.nabble.com/Workers-and-Speed-tp13098p13353.html
Sent from the Apache Flex Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Sidenote if you weren't using the array directly; We had a discussion one time
that the ArrayCollection getItemAt(n) method was proven to be faster than its
["someProperty"]. But accessing the array directly and using the index [n] is
even faster for this use case as Justin pointed out.
-Ma
;
>
>Von: bilbosax
>Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. August 2016 07:24:17
>An: users@flex.apache.org
>Betreff: Re: Workers and Speed
>
>Alright!!! Now we are getting somewhere! Passing the ArrayCollection to a
>standard Array cut the time in Half! Fro
r that ;-) )
>
>
>Chris
>
>
>Von: bilbosax
>Gesendet: Dienstag, 2. August 2016 07:24:17
>An: users@flex.apache.org
>Betreff: Re: Workers and Speed
>
>Alright!!! Now we are getting somewhere! Passing the ArrayCollection to a
>standar
and not relying on a bindable model, I cut
>>the overhead by 9/10th ... could check this (Have to admit that I haven't
>>read all of this lengthy thread though ... so if I'm suggesting something
>>that's already been suggested ... sorry for that ;-) )
>>
>
98 matches
Mail list logo
