in reply to faster access times
I think the main bottle neck in this situation will be connecting to the database in the first place. As far as normalizing the data into seperate tables vs. storing it in flat files, the cost should be negligible compared to the cost of the db hit. My advice: If you are going to the database anyway, just grab all of the data there. If you use inteligent indexing, it should be no problem.
Hope this helps,
-malloc
Re: faster access times
by Abigail (Deacon) on Jun 21, 2001 at 04:04 UTC
|
What you are giving is some very bad, unfounded advice.
What the bottleneck will be depends on several factors,
including which database is being used, and how large the
dataset will be. If you have a billion records fetched
over a slow link from dark Africa, your connection time
will be dwarved if you grab all the data. If you just have
five records and 5000 simultanious connections to your
database server running on a Sparc Classic,
setting up the connection will be the bottleneck.
But none of this is known. Any claims on
what will be the "best" or "fastest" solution without any
further disclaimers is misleading at best, and just shows
you not understanding databases.
My advice: implement several solutions and test. And make
sure you test on well choosen data sets. And for futher
advice, you are much better off at a database forum than at
a Perl forum, as this is a database problem - not a Perl one.
-- Abigail | [reply] |
|
1- I find your tone insulting, and it takes away from this community and marks you as someone with problems.
2- I made some assumptions here based upon the nature of this post:
i. do you think this person has a billion users on there website when they are posting here for advice?
ii. do you think this person operates a web site with 5000 simultaneous connections and is posting here for advice?
iii.do you think that this person is african?
now, silly me, trying to be helpful, made some educated guesses as to this persons goals. i assumed they wanted to grab ONE users info from a database. I said that if they are establishing a connection, the cost will not be that much greater to store and retrieve all data there compared to the cost of making the connection. Once again, i am assuming that this person is not storing the persons genome. Does this show me "not understanding databases"? If it does, maybe you could point out SOME FACTS WITH BASIS IN REALITY in a non-snide manner, not conjecture about Africa.
-malloc
| [reply] |
|
With all due respect, I have to agree with Abigail on this one. There is no way, given the limited information that the Anonymous Monk shared, to determine what the appropriate course of action is. Regarding your 'do you think' list: Abigail was using the differing extremes to show that the appropriate response to the Seeker would depend upon what his or her real situation was. These were clearly hypothetical extremes that were crafted to show the the answer is not cut and dried.
In fact, Abigail's main point is the following:
What you are giving is some very bad, unfounded advice.
Abigail has made it clear that your advice is unfounded. I think that's reasonable because trying to make decisions with incomplete specs is a recipe for failure. This was not saying anything about you, just about your advice in this situation. I realize that, later in the post, the comment about you not understanding databases was personal and not fair as it appears to only be based on one post, but I don't think that it's reasonable to start a flame over this. I've seen this too many times. Nothing good ever comes of it.
Please, let's leave personal attacks behind. We're all just here to learn and share knowledge, right?
Cheers,
Ovid
Join the Perlmonks Setiathome Group or just click on the the link and check out our stats.
| [reply] |
|
I find your tone insulting, and it takes away from this community
and marks you as someone with problems.
Do you really think I care what your opinion of me is?
No, I don't think the person has a billion users, nor do I think he
has 5000 simultaneous connections. I do think he has something between
those two extremes. Where he is cannot be determined from the post.
One could make a guess, but calling that guess educated is
just plain stupid. There's no information to make an educated guess
with. And what's worse, you are not even indicating you're just guessing.
The person has no idea your guess might be totally wrong.
You claim I am taking away from this community, but it's actually posts
like yours that are doing so. Far worse than not answering a question
is replying with false information or wrong answers. Specially in a forum
like this where all posts are being archived.
You claim I have to base myself on facts - and I do. In fact (no pun
intended) there are no facts to base a founded answer on. If only your
answer was based on facts instead of guesses....
-- Abigail
| [reply] |
|
|