Performance differences between VFP 5 and VFP 6 
Author Message
 Performance differences between VFP 5 and VFP 6

We've got a very large application that supports multiple instances of the
same forms. A few of these forms have a large pageframe with about 18 pages,
with anywhere from 10 to 50 controls per page. These controls are all
contained within a container class that is not instantiated until the first
time that the user goes to the page. The EXE was built using VFP 5.0.

If we open 5-6 of these forms, and then go to every page on every form, the
time that it takes to change pages becomes essentially unusable, anywhere
from 45 seconds to as much as a minute or two. As you open more and more of
these forms, the performance continues to degrade further and further.

Note that if you open 5-6 forms, but leave all but 1 of them on the first
page and only cycle through the pages on one of the forms, performance is
still not as good as when just one form is open, but it is acceptable. So
this performance degradation appears to be directly related to the number of
objects that have been instantiated. This has been tested on machines with
64+ MB of RAM, so this is not an issue of getting into virtual memory.

Under VFP 5, this same executable runs with completely acceptable
performance, even with twice the number of forms. Changing pages takes at
most anywhere from 2-10 seconds. It would appear that some sort of change
was made between 5.0 and 6.0 that causes 6.0's interface performance to
degrade much more rapidly as more and more objects are instantiated. If you
run this same EXE side by side under VFP 5 and VFP 6, with only one form
open you may not notice any difference. As you open more forms, and cause
more and more objects to be instantiated, the difference becomes very
obvious very quickly.

From preliminary testing, building the EXE under 6.0 doesn't seem to make
any difference in performance. An EXE built with 6.0 exhibits the same
problem as one built with 5.0. I'm still working on coming up with a small
sample that will demonstrate the problem. If I can do that, I'll post it
here.



Tue, 16 Jan 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 Performance differences between VFP 5 and VFP 6
Doug,

Are you using timers anywhere?

--
Brett Slattery


Quote:
>We've got a very large application that supports multiple instances of the
>same forms. A few of these forms have a large pageframe with about 18
pages,
>with anywhere from 10 to 50 controls per page. These controls are all
>contained within a container class that is not instantiated until the first
>time that the user goes to the page. The EXE was built using VFP 5.0.

>If we open 5-6 of these forms, and then go to every page on every form, the
>time that it takes to change pages becomes essentially unusable, anywhere
>from 45 seconds to as much as a minute or two. As you open more and more of
>these forms, the performance continues to degrade further and further.

>Note that if you open 5-6 forms, but leave all but 1 of them on the first
>page and only cycle through the pages on one of the forms, performance is
>still not as good as when just one form is open, but it is acceptable. So
>this performance degradation appears to be directly related to the number
of
>objects that have been instantiated. This has been tested on machines with
>64+ MB of RAM, so this is not an issue of getting into virtual memory.

>Under VFP 5, this same executable runs with completely acceptable
>performance, even with twice the number of forms. Changing pages takes at
>most anywhere from 2-10 seconds. It would appear that some sort of change
>was made between 5.0 and 6.0 that causes 6.0's interface performance to
>degrade much more rapidly as more and more objects are instantiated. If you
>run this same EXE side by side under VFP 5 and VFP 6, with only one form
>open you may not notice any difference. As you open more forms, and cause
>more and more objects to be instantiated, the difference becomes very
>obvious very quickly.

>From preliminary testing, building the EXE under 6.0 doesn't seem to make
>any difference in performance. An EXE built with 6.0 exhibits the same
>problem as one built with 5.0. I'm still working on coming up with a small
>sample that will demonstrate the problem. If I can do that, I'll post it
>here.



Tue, 16 Jan 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 Performance differences between VFP 5 and VFP 6
Doug,

But the best you can have in hand at the moment is a BETA of VFP 6.

I wouldn't trust that for *ANY* conclusions, least of all performance
stuff!

Good luck,

Jim N



Quote:
> We've got a very large application that supports multiple instances of
the
> same forms. A few of these forms have a large pageframe with about 18
pages,
> with anywhere from 10 to 50 controls per page. These controls are all
> contained within a container class that is not instantiated until the
first
> time that the user goes to the page. The EXE was built using VFP 5.0.

> If we open 5-6 of these forms, and then go to every page on every form,
the
> time that it takes to change pages becomes essentially unusable, anywhere
> from 45 seconds to as much as a minute or two. As you open more and more
of
> these forms, the performance continues to degrade further and further.

> Note that if you open 5-6 forms, but leave all but 1 of them on the first
> page and only cycle through the pages on one of the forms, performance is
> still not as good as when just one form is open, but it is acceptable. So
> this performance degradation appears to be directly related to the number
of
> objects that have been instantiated. This has been tested on machines
with
> 64+ MB of RAM, so this is not an issue of getting into virtual memory.

> Under VFP 5, this same executable runs with completely acceptable
> performance, even with twice the number of forms. Changing pages takes at
> most anywhere from 2-10 seconds. It would appear that some sort of change
> was made between 5.0 and 6.0 that causes 6.0's interface performance to
> degrade much more rapidly as more and more objects are instantiated. If
you
> run this same EXE side by side under VFP 5 and VFP 6, with only one form
> open you may not notice any difference. As you open more forms, and cause
> more and more objects to be instantiated, the difference becomes very
> obvious very quickly.

> From preliminary testing, building the EXE under 6.0 doesn't seem to make
> any difference in performance. An EXE built with 6.0 exhibits the same
> problem as one built with 5.0. I'm still working on coming up with a
small
> sample that will demonstrate the problem. If I can do that, I'll post it
> here.



Tue, 16 Jan 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 Performance differences between VFP 5 and VFP 6
Are you disabling all the controls on all pages except the first page, then
enabling them as the page is selected.  This will give you better
performance.

--
John Harvey
http://home.att.net/~john.harvey/vfpstuff.htm


Quote:
>We've got a very large application that supports multiple instances of the
>same forms. A few of these forms have a large pageframe with about 18
pages,
>with anywhere from 10 to 50 controls per page. These controls are all
>contained within a container class that is not instantiated until the first
>time that the user goes to the page. The EXE was built using VFP 5.0.

>If we open 5-6 of these forms, and then go to every page on every form, the
>time that it takes to change pages becomes essentially unusable, anywhere
>from 45 seconds to as much as a minute or two. As you open more and more of
>these forms, the performance continues to degrade further and further.

>Note that if you open 5-6 forms, but leave all but 1 of them on the first
>page and only cycle through the pages on one of the forms, performance is
>still not as good as when just one form is open, but it is acceptable. So
>this performance degradation appears to be directly related to the number
of
>objects that have been instantiated. This has been tested on machines with
>64+ MB of RAM, so this is not an issue of getting into virtual memory.

>Under VFP 5, this same executable runs with completely acceptable
>performance, even with twice the number of forms. Changing pages takes at
>most anywhere from 2-10 seconds. It would appear that some sort of change
>was made between 5.0 and 6.0 that causes 6.0's interface performance to
>degrade much more rapidly as more and more objects are instantiated. If you
>run this same EXE side by side under VFP 5 and VFP 6, with only one form
>open you may not notice any difference. As you open more forms, and cause
>more and more objects to be instantiated, the difference becomes very
>obvious very quickly.

>From preliminary testing, building the EXE under 6.0 doesn't seem to make
>any difference in performance. An EXE built with 6.0 exhibits the same
>problem as one built with 5.0. I'm still working on coming up with a small
>sample that will demonstrate the problem. If I can do that, I'll post it
>here.



Tue, 16 Jan 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 Performance differences between VFP 5 and VFP 6
Nope.
Quote:

>Doug,

>Are you using timers anywhere?

>--
>Brett Slattery




Sat, 27 Jan 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 Performance differences between VFP 5 and VFP 6
I've got the Release Candidate. According to MS, this is a bug, and it
exists in the version that will ship on 9/2 as well. Note that all debugging
code was removed from the release candidate. You can confirm this with
anyone close enough to Microsoft to know. (Lisa Slater Nichols, Jim Booth,
etc.)
Quote:

>Doug,

>But the best you can have in hand at the moment is a BETA of VFP 6.

>I wouldn't trust that for *ANY* conclusions, least of all performance
>stuff!



Sat, 27 Jan 2001 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 6 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. preview zoom performance difference in VFP 3.0B and VFP 6.0

2. Date differences between VFP 5 and VFP 6

3. big performance difference when

4. Performance Difference between NT4.0 and WIN95?

5. Difference VFP 6 & 7

6. Printing differences in VFP and FP

7. VFP Runtime differences

8. Difference between FoxPro and VFP Drivers

9. Wow, what a difference. VSS and VFP

10. Weird speed difference for VFP between NT and Netware

11. Tell me the difference VFP & VB

12. FPW / VFP difference

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software