in reply to Evolving a faster filter?
It needs to run fast, fast, fast.
Hm. Not a lot to go on. A sanitised peak at one or two of your filters would be nice.
How does reducing 100,000 objects to 9193 by filtering them on each of 100 hundred fields in 3/4 second stack up?
C:\test>1011850 -O=100000 Dict read at C:\test\1011850.pl line 96. objects loaded at C:\test\1011850.pl line 106. App created at C:\test\1011850.pl line 112. Ovid: (optimal ordering) returned 9193 objs in 4.447958 seconds Ovid: (pessimal ordering) returned 9193 objs in 7.236690 seconds RichardK: (optimal ordering) returned 9193 objs in 4.065038 seconds RichardK: (pessimal ordering) returned 9193 objs in 6.219226 seconds BUK: returned 9193 objs in 0.760572 seconds Filters run at C:\test\1011850.pl line 138.
|
|---|