Time to browse a large (kind of) table... 
Author Message
 Time to browse a large (kind of) table...

Hello,

I've got a table that has 375,000 records in it and it takes 9 seconds to
bring up a browse window (in VFP 5.0). On my same machine under FP 2.6
(dos), a browse window comes up instantaneously. I've checked my
Tools,Options but it seems that there are only record fetch parameters for
remote views. Is there any other way to speed up browse windows under VFP?

Thanks...

--
William Fields
US Bankruptcy Court
Phoenix, AZ



Mon, 28 Aug 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Time to browse a large (kind of) table...

William,.

If you have SET DELETED ON it is advised that you have an index tag on each
table on DELETED().

JimB


Quote:
>Hello,

>I've got a table that has 375,000 records in it and it takes 9 seconds to
>bring up a browse window (in VFP 5.0). On my same machine under FP 2.6
>(dos), a browse window comes up instantaneously. I've checked my
>Tools,Options but it seems that there are only record fetch parameters for
>remote views. Is there any other way to speed up browse windows under VFP?

>Thanks...

>--
>William Fields
>US Bankruptcy Court
>Phoenix, AZ



Tue, 29 Aug 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Time to browse a large (kind of) table...

Hi William.

What does the code look like for your view?

Why don't you use a select statement in code directly and let the Grid show
the contents of the cursor (by setting the row source property of the Grid
to the cursor you have just created).

Also ensure that any temporary files you create are stored on your local
hard disk.

Regards

Wayne Russell CEng



Quote:
> Hello,

> I've got a table that has 375,000 records in it and it takes 9 seconds to
> bring up a browse window (in VFP 5.0). On my same machine under FP 2.6
> (dos), a browse window comes up instantaneously. I've checked my
> Tools,Options but it seems that there are only record fetch parameters
for
> remote views. Is there any other way to speed up browse windows under
VFP?

> Thanks...

> --
> William Fields
> US Bankruptcy Court
> Phoenix, AZ



Wed, 30 Aug 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Time to browse a large (kind of) table...

All our tables have a DELETED() tag...

Thanks...

All I'm trying to do is issue a "BROWSE" from the command window under VFP
5.0a. When I use and browse the same table in FP 2.6 (DOS) - the records
are displayed instantaneously
--
William Fields
US Bankruptcy Court
Phoenix, AZ



Quote:
> William,.

> If you have SET DELETED ON it is advised that you have an index tag on
each
> table on DELETED().

> JimB



> >Hello,

> >I've got a table that has 375,000 records in it and it takes 9 seconds
to
> >bring up a browse window (in VFP 5.0). On my same machine under FP 2.6
> >(dos), a browse window comes up instantaneously. I've checked my
> >Tools,Options but it seems that there are only record fetch parameters
for
> >remote views. Is there any other way to speed up browse windows under
VFP?

> >Thanks...

> >--
> >William Fields
> >US Bankruptcy Court
> >Phoenix, AZ



Fri, 01 Sep 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Time to browse a large (kind of) table...

All I'm trying to do is issue a "BROWSE" from the command window under VFP
5.0a. When I use and browse the same table in FP 2.6 (DOS) - the records
are displayed instantaneously

--
William Fields
US Bankruptcy Court
Phoenix, AZ



Quote:
> Hi William.

> What does the code look like for your view?

> Why don't you use a select statement in code directly and let the Grid
show
> the contents of the cursor (by setting the row source property of the
Grid
> to the cursor you have just created).

> Also ensure that any temporary files you create are stored on your local
> hard disk.

> Regards

> Wayne Russell CEng



> > Hello,

> > I've got a table that has 375,000 records in it and it takes 9 seconds
to
> > bring up a browse window (in VFP 5.0). On my same machine under FP 2.6
> > (dos), a browse window comes up instantaneously. I've checked my
> > Tools,Options but it seems that there are only record fetch parameters
> for
> > remote views. Is there any other way to speed up browse windows under
> VFP?

> > Thanks...

> > --
> > William Fields
> > US Bankruptcy Court
> > Phoenix, AZ



Fri, 01 Sep 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Time to browse a large (kind of) table...

Hello,

I've got a table that has 375,000 records in it and it takes 9 seconds to
bring up a browse window (in VFP 5.0). On my same machine under FP 2.6
(dos), a browse window comes up instantaneously. I've checked my
Tools,Options but it seems that there are only record fetch parameters for
remote views. Is there any other way to speed up browse windows under VFP?

All I'm trying to do is issue a "BROWSE" from the command window under VFP
5.0a. When I use and browse the same table in FP 2.6 (DOS) - the records
are displayed instantaneously

Thanks...
--
William Fields
US Bankruptcy Court
Phoenix, AZ



Fri, 01 Sep 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Time to browse a large (kind of) table...

William,

What machine?  How much RAM?

Is SET DELETED ON?  Is there and index on DELETED()?  Is there any filter
set?  What is the filter?

What else is running at the same time?

Is the table in a DBC?  Are there any properties set for the table in the
DBC?

Are you typing Browse in the command window or choosing browse from the view
dialog or the project manager?

Is resource set on or off?  Try it with SET RESOURCE OFF?

Just a few ideas to try and get looking at the problem.

JimB


Quote:
>Hello,

>I've got a table that has 375,000 records in it and it takes 9 seconds to
>bring up a browse window (in VFP 5.0). On my same machine under FP 2.6
>(dos), a browse window comes up instantaneously. I've checked my
>Tools,Options but it seems that there are only record fetch parameters for
>remote views. Is there any other way to speed up browse windows under VFP?

>All I'm trying to do is issue a "BROWSE" from the command window under VFP
>5.0a. When I use and browse the same table in FP 2.6 (DOS) - the records
>are displayed instantaneously

>Thanks...
>--
>William Fields
>US Bankruptcy Court
>Phoenix, AZ



Fri, 01 Sep 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Time to browse a large (kind of) table...



Quote:
> William,

> What machine?  How much RAM?

        Dell Optiplex GXPro (Pent Pro 200), 128mb RAM

Quote:
> Is SET DELETED ON?  Is there and index on DELETED()?  Is there any filter
> set?  What is the filter?

        Yes, set deleted is on. Yes, there is a DELETED() tag. No filter set.

Quote:

> What else is running at the same time?

        VFP is the only open application

Quote:
> Is the table in a DBC?  Are there any properties set for the table in the
> DBC?

        Yes, it is part of a DBC. I'm not sure what properties you are asking
about.

Quote:
> Are you typing Browse in the command window or choosing browse from the
view
> dialog or the project manager?

        Same results either way

Quote:
> Is resource set on or off?  Try it with SET RESOURCE OFF?

        Yes, set resource is on. Same results with it off.

Quote:
> Just a few ideas to try and get looking at the problem.

        One thing, I'm trying it out this morning and the browse window is coming
up in less than 2 seconds. The only difference is that I'm trying it in the
morning when the network is not being utilized as much as it is later in
the day. Maybe this is a network traffic issue in addition to a VFP issue.
Funny thing though, the DOS version of FP brings up the browse window
instantly regardless of the network traffic.

Thanks for your suggestions...

--
William Fields
US Bankruptcy Court
Phoenix, AZ

Quote:
> JimB



> >Hello,

> >I've got a table that has 375,000 records in it and it takes 9 seconds
to
> >bring up a browse window (in VFP 5.0). On my same machine under FP 2.6
> >(dos), a browse window comes up instantaneously. I've checked my
> >Tools,Options but it seems that there are only record fetch parameters
for
> >remote views. Is there any other way to speed up browse windows under
VFP?

> >All I'm trying to do is issue a "BROWSE" from the command window under
VFP
> >5.0a. When I use and browse the same table in FP 2.6 (DOS) - the records
> >are displayed instantaneously

> >Thanks...
> >--
> >William Fields
> >US Bankruptcy Court
> >Phoenix, AZ



Sat, 02 Sep 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Time to browse a large (kind of) table...

Quote:
>> >All I'm trying to do is issue a "BROWSE" from the command window under
>VFP
>> >5.0a. When I use and browse the same table in FP 2.6 (DOS) - the records
>> >are displayed instantaneously

William,

Try this on a lark, in the command window type

?sys(3050,1,32000000)

then do your browse.

Actually you can ?sys(3050,1) first so you can put it back again later.

JimB



Sun, 03 Sep 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Time to browse a large (kind of) table...

?sys(3050,1)  returned 38866816

?sys(3050,1,32000000) didn't seem to make a difference...

Thanks Jim...
--
William Fields
US Bankruptcy Court
Phoenix, AZ



Quote:

> >> >All I'm trying to do is issue a "BROWSE" from the command window
under
> >VFP
> >> >5.0a. When I use and browse the same table in FP 2.6 (DOS) - the
records
> >> >are displayed instantaneously

> William,

> Try this on a lark, in the command window type

> ?sys(3050,1,32000000)

> then do your browse.

> Actually you can ?sys(3050,1) first so you can put it back again later.

> JimB



Sun, 03 Sep 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Time to browse a large (kind of) table...

William,

You are  remembering that bringing up what? maybe 20 rows in DOS, causing 4k bytes of data
to be transferred from the CPU into video memory, is usually faster than bringing up (how
many rows depending on resolution) and having the CPU transfer 500k to video for a
640x480x64k color window.

df    - (Microsoft FoxPro MVP) http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/9834/

Quote:
>> >> >All I'm trying to do is issue a "BROWSE" from the command window
>under
>> >VFP
>> >> >5.0a. When I use and browse the same table in FP 2.6 (DOS) - the
>records
>> >> >are displayed instantaneously



Mon, 04 Sep 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Time to browse a large (kind of) table...

Hi,
I've been following this thread and lo and behold, a similar problem
occured at work.
We have 100BaseT NT4 workstation as a file server with a W95 workstation.
Today, the W95 workstation started up before the server, so the network
logon dialog box paused until the server was finally up, and then it
auto-logged on. Upon starting our VFP app, the entire app was running at
least 5 times slower than normal. The browse windows that normally popped
up instantly, took 8-9 seconds. Opening records and screen refresh crawled
along.

So..., closed the exe and brought it up a second time.... same
problem...slowwws!
Finally, restarted the workstation, it logged on in normal fashion, and we
started the exe again.
Whoa..... lightening speed demon again.

Don't understand it. But I'm glad I saw it, in case a user calls with the
slows.

Wade



Quote:
> William,

> You are  remembering that bringing up what? maybe 20 rows in DOS, causing
4k bytes of data
> to be transferred from the CPU into video memory, is usually faster than
bringing up (how
> many rows depending on resolution) and having the CPU transfer 500k to
video for a
> 640x480x64k color window.>



Tue, 05 Sep 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Time to browse a large (kind of) table...

Hi David,

I didn't see your reply until W. Davis replied to it. I guess my newsreader
or the server got confused (seems to do that fairly often, I always see
replies to messages that I don't remember seeing)....

I agree with the fact that the GUI interface is inherently slower than the
'ol DOS screens, there's no way around that.

But the video overhead issue doesn't explain the browse window delay.
Here's why I believe it is, for the most part, a VFP issue. I timed how
long it takes from issuing a "browse" at the command window to when I get
control of the command window again (because, even though the browse window
is displayed, it still takes some time before my command window is
available again). All the tables were loaded with the same size window so
it would be a fair test of the video refresh speed.

Browse time VS. Table size...

2min 13sec      -        5million records
4sec            -       277thousand records
0sec            -       7records

Now, these tables are located on our Novell 3.12 server and everyone is
using the network at the time of the test, here's the # when accessing the
tables from my local drive..

4sec            -       5million records
0sec            -       277thousand records
0sec            -       7records.

When I use FP 2.6, these tables come up instantly regardless of where they
are being loaded from. There has got to be some background processing that
is happening in VFP that prevents the system from returning control till it
is done. What it is, I don't know but I'd like to be able to optimize it if
I could.

--
William Fields
US Bankruptcy Court
Phoenix, AZ

Quote:


> > William,

> > You are  remembering that bringing up what? maybe 20 rows in DOS,
causing
> 4k bytes of data
> > to be transferred from the CPU into video memory, is usually faster
than
> bringing up (how
> > many rows depending on resolution) and having the CPU transfer 500k to
> video for a
> > 640x480x64k color window.>



Tue, 05 Sep 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Time to browse a large (kind of) table...

I would not completely discount the GUI
I have seen a fast machine brought to its knees when the user selected hi
color definition - and who needs hi color for data ?
Try selecting a lower - or lowest - color - worth a try.
--
Andrew Stapleton
andrew_at_nor_dot_com_dot_au


Quote:
>Hi David,

>I didn't see your reply until W. Davis replied to it. I guess my newsreader
>or the server got confused (seems to do that fairly often, I always see
>replies to messages that I don't remember seeing)....

>I agree with the fact that the GUI interface is inherently slower than the
>'ol DOS screens, there's no way around that.

>But the video overhead issue doesn't explain the browse window delay.
>Here's why I believe it is, for the most part, a VFP issue. I timed how
>long it takes from issuing a "browse" at the command window to when I get
>control of the command window again (because, even though the browse window
>is displayed, it still takes some time before my command window is
>available again). All the tables were loaded with the same size window so
>it would be a fair test of the video refresh speed.

>Browse time VS. Table size...

>2min 13sec - 5million records
>4sec - 277thousand records
>0sec - 7records

>Now, these tables are located on our Novell 3.12 server and everyone is
>using the network at the time of the test, here's the # when accessing the
>tables from my local drive..

>4sec - 5million records
>0sec - 277thousand records
>0sec - 7records.

>When I use FP 2.6, these tables come up instantly regardless of where they
>are being loaded from. There has got to be some background processing that
>is happening in VFP that prevents the system from returning control till it
>is done. What it is, I don't know but I'd like to be able to optimize it if
>I could.

>--
>William Fields
>US Bankruptcy Court
>Phoenix, AZ



>> > William,

>> > You are  remembering that bringing up what? maybe 20 rows in DOS,
>causing
>> 4k bytes of data
>> > to be transferred from the CPU into video memory, is usually faster
>than
>> bringing up (how
>> > many rows depending on resolution) and having the CPU transfer 500k to
>> video for a
>> > 640x480x64k color window.>



Thu, 07 Sep 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 Time to browse a large (kind of) table...

William,

Just got into this thread. I have a PPro 200 with 128MB RAM, under NT 4.0.
The LAN is a test network, just me and a Pentium (non-MMX) 133 NT 4.0
Server. 100BaseT, but running at 10 just now. Should be somewhat similar to
yours, without the network overhead.

I have a table of 1.14 Million records (6 fields, 95 bytes). The table is
part of a DBC, and is related to a couple of other tables. All data resides
on the server.

When I browse, the table comes up instantly (< 0.5 seconds). Same if I
select * from the table. This is not affected by having just started
VFP5.0a.

The commands I am using, from a clean start, are:
OPEN DATABASE <x>
USE <y>
BROWSE (or SELECT * FROM <y>

My desktop settings are:
Diamond Stealth64 Video 3400XL (4MB VRAM PCI)
1152 x 864 screen by 65536 colors
Small fonts

The disks (both workstation and server) are Mode 4 PCI on a Mode 4 PCI
motherboard controller.

From these results I would look at your network traffic. Note that the cache
mechanism is significantly different in NT than Novel.

Hope this helps.
Dag


Quote:
>Hi David,

>I didn't see your reply until W. Davis replied to it. I guess my newsreader
>or the server got confused (seems to do that fairly often, I always see
>replies to messages that I don't remember seeing)....

>I agree with the fact that the GUI interface is inherently slower than the
>'ol DOS screens, there's no way around that.

>But the video overhead issue doesn't explain the browse window delay.
>Here's why I believe it is, for the most part, a VFP issue. I timed how
>long it takes from issuing a "browse" at the command window to when I get
>control of the command window again (because, even though the browse window
>is displayed, it still takes some time before my command window is
>available again). All the tables were loaded with the same size window so
>it would be a fair test of the video refresh speed.

>Browse time VS. Table size...

>2min 13sec - 5million records
>4sec - 277thousand records
>0sec - 7records

>Now, these tables are located on our Novell 3.12 server and everyone is
>using the network at the time of the test, here's the # when accessing the
>tables from my local drive..

>4sec - 5million records
>0sec - 277thousand records
>0sec - 7records.

>When I use FP 2.6, these tables come up instantly regardless of where they
>are being loaded from. There has got to be some background processing that
>is happening in VFP that prevents the system from returning control till it
>is done. What it is, I don't know but I'd like to be able to optimize it if
>I could.

>--
>William Fields
>US Bankruptcy Court
>Phoenix, AZ



>> > William,

>> > You are  remembering that bringing up what? maybe 20 rows in DOS,
>causing
>> 4k bytes of data
>> > to be transferred from the CPU into video memory, is usually faster
>than
>> bringing up (how
>> > many rows depending on resolution) and having the CPU transfer 500k to
>> video for a
>> > 640x480x64k color window.>



Thu, 07 Sep 2000 03:00:00 GMT  
 
 [ 16 post ]  Go to page: [1] [2]

 Relevant Pages 

1. Browsing 2 tables at the same time?

2. What kind of table should I design ?

3. What kind of table should I design ?

4. large .dbfs time problem when sorting

5. Browsing large datasets.

6. Date/Time bug in SQL/browse ?

7. Large Oracle table

8. Large number of table in DBC

9. multiple disks, large tables

10. Large Oracle Table

11. Adding large # records to remote table

12. Indexing technique needed for large table lookup

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software