Search Results

Search found 89090 results on 3564 pages for 'optimize code'.

Page 54/3564 | < Previous Page | 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61  | Next Page >

  • Mysql - help me optimize this query (improved question)

    - by sandeepan-nath
    About the system: - There are tutors who create classes and packs - A tags based search approach is being followed.Tag relations are created when new tutors register and when tutors create packs (this makes tutors and packs searcheable). For details please check the section How tags work in this system? below. Following is the concerned query SELECT SUM(DISTINCT( t.tag LIKE "%Dictatorship%" )) AS key_1_total_matches, SUM(DISTINCT( t.tag LIKE "%democracy%" )) AS key_2_total_matches, COUNT(DISTINCT( od.id_od )) AS tutor_popularity, CASE WHEN ( IF(( wc.id_wc > 0 ), ( wc.wc_api_status = 1 AND wc.wc_type = 0 AND wc.class_date > '2010-06-01 22:00:56' AND wccp.status = 1 AND ( wccp.country_code = 'IE' OR wccp.country_code IN ( 'INT' ) ) ), 0) ) THEN 1 ELSE 0 END AS 'classes_published', CASE WHEN ( IF(( lp.id_lp > 0 ), ( lp.id_status = 1 AND lp.published = 1 AND lpcp.status = 1 AND ( lpcp.country_code = 'IE' OR lpcp.country_code IN ( 'INT' ) ) ), 0) ) THEN 1 ELSE 0 END AS 'packs_published', td . *, u . * FROM tutor_details AS td JOIN users AS u ON u.id_user = td.id_user LEFT JOIN learning_packs_tag_relations AS lptagrels ON td.id_tutor = lptagrels.id_tutor LEFT JOIN learning_packs AS lp ON lptagrels.id_lp = lp.id_lp LEFT JOIN learning_packs_categories AS lpc ON lpc.id_lp_cat = lp.id_lp_cat LEFT JOIN learning_packs_categories AS lpcp ON lpcp.id_lp_cat = lpc.id_parent LEFT JOIN learning_pack_content AS lpct ON ( lp.id_lp = lpct.id_lp ) LEFT JOIN webclasses_tag_relations AS wtagrels ON td.id_tutor = wtagrels.id_tutor LEFT JOIN webclasses AS wc ON wtagrels.id_wc = wc.id_wc LEFT JOIN learning_packs_categories AS wcc ON wcc.id_lp_cat = wc.id_wp_cat LEFT JOIN learning_packs_categories AS wccp ON wccp.id_lp_cat = wcc.id_parent LEFT JOIN order_details AS od ON td.id_tutor = od.id_author LEFT JOIN orders AS o ON od.id_order = o.id_order LEFT JOIN tutors_tag_relations AS ttagrels ON td.id_tutor = ttagrels.id_tutor JOIN tags AS t ON ( t.id_tag = ttagrels.id_tag ) OR ( t.id_tag = lptagrels.id_tag ) OR ( t.id_tag = wtagrels.id_tag ) WHERE ( u.country = 'IE' OR u.country IN ( 'INT' ) ) AND CASE WHEN ( ( t.id_tag = lptagrels.id_tag ) AND ( lp.id_lp 0 ) ) THEN lp.id_status = 1 AND lp.published = 1 AND lpcp.status = 1 AND ( lpcp.country_code = 'IE' OR lpcp.country_code IN ( 'INT' ) ) ELSE 1 END AND CASE WHEN ( ( t.id_tag = wtagrels.id_tag ) AND ( wc.id_wc 0 ) ) THEN wc.wc_api_status = 1 AND wc.wc_type = 0 AND wc.class_date '2010-06-01 22:00:56' AND wccp.status = 1 AND ( wccp.country_code = 'IE' OR wccp.country_code IN ( 'INT' ) ) ELSE 1 END AND CASE WHEN ( od.id_od 0 ) THEN od.id_author = td.id_tutor AND o.order_status = 'paid' AND CASE WHEN ( od.id_wc 0 ) THEN od.can_attend_class = 1 ELSE 1 END ELSE 1 END GROUP BY td.id_tutor HAVING key_1_total_matches = 1 AND key_2_total_matches = 1 ORDER BY tutor_popularity DESC, u.surname ASC, u.name ASC LIMIT 0, 20 The problem The results returned by the above query are correct (AND logic working as per expectation), but the time taken by the query rises alarmingly for heavier data and for the current data I have it is like 25 seconds as against normal query timings of the order of 0.005 - 0.0002 seconds, which makes it totally unusable. It is possible that some of the delay is being caused because all the possible fields have not yet been indexed. The tag field of tags table is indexed. Is there something faulty with the query? What can be the reason behind 20+ seconds of execution time? How tags work in this system? When a tutor registers, tags are entered and tag relations are created with respect to tutor's details like name, surname etc. When a Tutors create packs, again tags are entered and tag relations are created with respect to pack's details like pack name, description etc. tag relations for tutors stored in tutors_tag_relations and those for packs stored in learning_packs_tag_relations. All individual tags are stored in tags table. The explain query output:- Please see this screenshot - http://www.test.examvillage.com/Explain_query.jpg

    Read the article

  • How do I optimize this query?

    - by InnateDev
    SELECT DISTINCT wposts.* FROM wp_2_posts wposts, wp_2_postmeta wpostmeta, wp_2_postmeta wpostmeta1, wp_2_term_taxonomy, wp_2_terms, wp_2_term_relationships WHERE wposts.ID = wpostmeta.post_id AND wp_2_terms.term_id = '8' AND wp_2_term_taxonomy.term_id = wp_2_terms.term_id AND wp_2_term_taxonomy.term_taxonomy_id = wp_2_term_relationships.term_taxonomy_id AND wp_2_term_relationships.object_id = wposts.ID AND wpostmeta.meta_key = 'validity' AND wpostmeta.meta_value > '".$logic_date."' AND wpostmeta1.meta_key != 'permanent' AND wposts.post_status = 'publish' AND wposts.post_type = 'post' ORDER BY wposts.post_date DESC

    Read the article

  • Splitting tables by field to optimize MySQL?

    - by AK
    Do splitting fields into multiple tables ever yield faster queries? Consider the following two scenarios: Table1 ----------- int PersonID text Value1 float Value2 or Table1 ----------- int PersonID text Value1 Table2 ----------- int PersonID float Value2 If Value1 and Value2 are always being displayed together, I imagine Table1 is always faster because the second schema would require two SELECT statements. But are there any situations where you would choose the second? If the number of records were expected to be really large?

    Read the article

  • Optimize included files and uses in Delphi

    - by Roland Bengtsson
    I try to increase performance of Delphi 2007 and Codeinsight. In the application there are 483 files added in the DPR file. I don't know if it is imagination but I feel that I got better performance from Codeinsight by simply readd all files in the DPR. I also think (correct me if I'm wrong) that all files that are included in a uses section also should be included in the DPR file for best performance. My question is, does it exists a tool that scan the whole project and give a list what files are missing in the DPR file and what files can be removed? Would also be nice to have a list of uses that can be removed in the PAS files. Regards

    Read the article

  • how to optimize an oracle query that has to_char in where clause for date

    - by panorama12
    I have a table that contains about 49403459 records. I want to query the table on a date range. say 04/10/2010 to 04/10/2010. However, the dates are stored in the table as format 10-APR-10 10.15.06.000000 AM (time stamp). As a result. When I do: SELECT bunch,of,stuff,create_date FROM myTable WHERE TO_CHAR (create_date,'MM/DD/YYYY)' >= '04/10/2010' AND TO_CHAR (create_date, 'MM/DD/YYYY' <= '04/10/2010' I get 529 rows but in 255.59 seconds! which is because I guess I am doing to_char on EACH record. However, When I do SELECT bunch,of,stuff,create_date FROM myTable WHERE create_date >= to_date('04/10/2010','MM/DD/YYYY') AND create_date <= to_date('04/10/2010','MM/DD/YYYY') then I get 0 results in 0.14 seconds. How can I make this query fast and still get valid (529) results?? At this point I can not change indexes. Right now I think index is created on create_date column

    Read the article

  • How Optimize sql query make it faster

    - by user502083
    Hello every one : I have a very simple small database, 2 of tables are: Node (Node_ID, Node_name, Node_Date) : Node_ID is primary key Citation (Origin_Id, Target_Id) : PRIMARY KEY (Origin_Id, Target_Id) each is FK in Node Now I write a query that first find all citations that their Origin_Id has a specific date and then I want to know what are the target dates of these records. I'm using sqlite in python the Node table has 3000 record and Citation has 9000 records, and my query is like this in a function: def cited_years_list(self, date): c=self.cur try: c.execute("""select n.Node_Date,count(*) from Node n INNER JOIN (select c.Origin_Id AS Origin_Id, c.Target_Id AS Target_Id, n.Node_Date AS Date from CITATION c INNER JOIN NODE n ON c.Origin_Id=n.Node_Id where CAST(n.Node_Date as INT)={0}) VW ON VW.Target_Id=n.Node_Id GROUP BY n.Node_Date;""".format(date)) cited_years=c.fetchall() self.conn.commit() print('Cited Years are : \n ',str(cited_years)) except Exception as e: print('Cited Years retrival failed ',e) return cited_years Then I call this function for some specific years, But it's crazy slowwwwwwwww :( (around 1 min for a specific year) Although my query works fine, it is slow. would you please give me a suggestion to make it faster? I'd appreciate any idea about optimizing this query :) I also should mention that I have indices on Origin_Id and Target_Id, so the inner join should be pretty fast, but it's not!!!

    Read the article

  • How to optimize this Python code?

    - by RandomVector
    def maxVote(nLabels): count = {} maxList = [] maxCount = 0 for nLabel in nLabels: if nLabel in count: count[nLabel] += 1 else: count[nLabel] = 1 #Check if the count is max if count[nLabel] > maxCount: maxCount = count[nLabel] maxList = [nLabel,] elif count[nLabel]==maxCount: maxList.append(nLabel) return random.choice(maxList) nLabels contains a list of integers. The above function returns the integer with highest frequency, if more than one have same frequency then a randomly selected integer from them is returned. E.g. maxVote([1,3,4,5,5,5,3,12,11]) is 5

    Read the article

  • VS2010 Code Analysis, any way to automatically fix certain warnings?

    - by JL
    I must say I really like the new code analysis with VS 2010, I have a lot of areas in my code where I am not using CultureInfo.InvariantCultureand code analysis is warming me about this. I am pretty sure I want to use CultureInfo.InvariantCulturewhere ever code analysis has detected it is missing on Convert.ToString operations. Is there anyway to get VS to automatically fix warnings of this type?

    Read the article

  • Any way to optimize this MySQL query?

    - by manyxcxi
    My table looks like this: `MyDB`.`Details` ( `id` bigint(20) NOT NULL, `run_id` int(11) NOT NULL, `element_name` varchar(255) NOT NULL, `value` text, `line_order` int(11) default NULL, `column_order` int(11) default NULL ); I have the following SELECT statement in a stored procedure SELECT RULE ,TITLE ,SUM(IF(t.PASSED='Y',1,0)) AS PASS ,SUM(IF(t.PASSED='N',1,0)) AS FAIL FROM ( SELECT a.line_order ,MAX(CASE WHEN a.element_name = 'PASSED' THEN a.`value` END) AS PASSED ,MAX(CASE WHEN a.element_name = 'RULE' THEN a.`value` END) AS RULE ,MAX(CASE WHEN a.element_name = 'TITLE' THEN a.`value` END) AS TITLE FROM Details a WHERE run_id = runId GROUP BY line_order ) t GROUP BY RULE, TITLE; *runId is an input parameter to the stored procedure. This query takes about 14 seconds to run. The table has 214856 rows, and the particular run_id I am filtering on has 162204 records. It's not on a super high power machine, but I feel like I could be doing this more efficiently. My main goal is to summarize by Rule and Title and show Pass and Fail count columns.

    Read the article

  • Google Jam 2009. C. Welcome to Code Jam. Can't understand Dynamic programming

    - by vibneiro
    The original link of the problem is here: https://code.google.com/codejam/contest/90101/dashboard#s=p2&a=2 In simple words we need to find how many times the string S="welcome to code jam" appears as a sub-sequence of given string S, e.g. S="welcome to code jam" T="wweellccoommee to code qps jam" I know the theory but not good at DP in practice. Would you please explain step-by-step process to solve this DP problem on example and why it works?

    Read the article

  • what is the best way to optimize my json on an asp.net-mvc site

    - by ooo
    i am currently using jqgrid on an asp.net mvc site and we have a pretty slow network (internal application) and it seems to be taking the grid a long time to load (the issue is both network as well as parsing, rendering) I am trying to determine how to minimized what i send over to the client to make it as fast as possible. Here is a simplified view of my controller action to load data into the grid: [AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Get)] public ActionResult GridData1(GridData args) { var paginatedData = applications.GridPaginate(args.page ?? 1, args.rows ?? 10, i => new { i.Id, Name = "<div class='showDescription' id= '" + i.id+ "'>" + i.Name + "</div>", MyValue = GetImageUrl(_map, i.value, "star"), ExternalId = string.Format("<a href=\"{0}\" target=\"_blank\">{1}</a>", Url.Action("Link", "Order", new { id = i.id }), i.Id), i.Target, i.Owner, EndDate = i.EndDate, Updated = "<div class='showView' aitId= '" + i.AitId + "'>" + GetImage(i.EndDateColumn, "star") + "</div>", }) return Json(paginatedData); } So i am building up a json data (i have about 200 records of the above) and sending it back to the GUI to put in the jqgrid. The one thing i can thihk of is Repeated data. In some of the json fields i am appending HTML on top of the raw "data". This is the same HTML on every record. It seems like it would be more efficient if i could just send the data and "append" the HTML around it on the client side. Is this possible? Then i would just be sending the actual data over the wire and have the client side add on the rest of the HTML tags (the divs, etc) be put together. Also, if there are any other suggestions on how i can minimize the size of my messages, that would be great. I guess at some point these solution will increase the client side load but it may be worth it to cut down on network traffic.

    Read the article

  • How to optimize shopping carts for minimal prices?

    - by tangens
    I have a list of items I want to buy. The items are offered by different shops and different prices. The shops have individual delivery costs. I'm looking for an optimal shopping strategy (and a java library supporting it) to purchase all of the items with a minimal total price. Example: Item1 is offered at Shop1 for $100, at Shop2 for $111. Item2 is offered at Shop1 for $90, at Shop2 for $85. Delivery cost of Shop1: $10 if total order < $150; $0 otherwise Delivery cost of Shop2: $5 if total order < $50; $0 otherwise If I buy Item1 and Item2 at Shop1 the total cost is $100 + $90 +$0 = $190. If I buy Item1 and Item2 at Shop2 the total cost is $111 + $85 +$0 = $196. If I buy Item1 at Shop1 and Item2 at Shop2 the total cost is $100 + $10 + $85 + $0 = 195. I get the minimal price if I order Item1 at Shop1 and Item2 at Shop2: $195 Question I need some hints which algorithms may help me to solve optimization problems of this kind for number of items about 100 and number of shops about 20. I already looked at apache-math and its optimization package, but I have no idea what algorithm to look for.

    Read the article

  • How to optimize frame rate in Flash/Actionscript?

    - by LillyWolf
    I'm building an application in Actionscript using Flash assets, and my frame rate becomes very low (~7 fps) when I attempt to render 20+ assets on the screen, even though most of those assets are stopped movie clips. I've tried setting .cacheAsBitmap to true, which helps a bit, but not enough. What else can I do to get the frame rate up? I've noticed that some movie clips seem to impact it more than others, but I'm not sure how to alter them to make them easier to render. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How to optimize paging for large in memory database

    - by snakefoot
    I have an application where the entire database is implemented in memory using a stl-map for each table in the database. Each item in the stl-map is a complex object with references to other items in the other stl-maps. The application works with a large amount of data, so it uses more than 500 MByte RAM. Clients are able to contact the application and get a filtered version of the entire database. This is done by running through the entire database, and finding items relevant for the client. When the application have been running for an hour or so, then Windows 2003 SP2 starts to page out parts of the RAM for the application (Eventhough there is 16 GByte RAM on the machine). After the application have been partly paged out then a client logon takes a long time (10 mins) because it now generates a page fault for each pointer lookup in the stl-map. I can see it is possible to tell Windows to lock memory in RAM, but this is generally only recommended for device drivers, and only for "small" amounts of memory. I guess a poor mans solution could be to loop through the entire memory database, and thus tell Windows we are still interested in keeping the datamodel in RAM. I guess another poor mans solution could be to disable the pagefile completely on Windows. I guess the expensive solution would be a SQL database, and then rewrite the entire application to use a database layer. Then hopefully the database system will have implemented means to for fast access. Are there other more elegant solutions ?

    Read the article

  • How to optimize the login option in android?

    - by Praween k
    HI, I want to create Login option in my application , so that once a person gets login that device creates token which is saved over server. From next time whenever he/she operates the application, directly goes to next label by checking that token keyvalue pair over server.IT requires login page only when that keyvalue pair is deleted from the server. Can anyone help me from this.I will be very grateful to you. Looking for reply. Regards, Praween

    Read the article

  • How to optimize dynamic programming?

    - by Chan
    Problem A number is called lucky if the sum of its digits, as well as the sum of the squares of its digits is a prime number. How many numbers between A and B are lucky? Input: The first line contains the number of test cases T. Each of the next T lines contains two integers, A and B. Output: Output T lines, one for each case containing the required answer for the corresponding case. Constraints: 1 <= T <= 10000 1 <= A <= B <= 10^18 Sample Input: 2 1 20 120 130 Sample Output: 4 1 Explanation: For the first case, the lucky numbers are 11, 12, 14, 16. For the second case, the only lucky number is 120. The problem is quite simple if we use brute force, however the running time is so critical that my program failed most test cases. My current idea is to use dynamic programming by storing the previous sum in a temporary array, so for example: sum_digits(10) = 1 -> sum_digits(11) = sum_digits(10) + 1 The same idea is applied for sum square but with counter equals to odd numbers. Unfortunately, it still failed 9 of 10 test cases which makes me think there must be a better way to solve it. Any idea would be greatly appreciated. #include <iostream> #include <vector> #include <string> #include <algorithm> #include <unordered_map> #include <unordered_set> #include <cmath> #include <cassert> #include <bitset> using namespace std; bool prime_table[1540] = { 0, 0, 1, 1, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 }; unsigned num_digits(long long i) { return i > 0 ? (long) log10 ((double) i) + 1 : 1; } void get_sum_and_sum_square_digits(long long n, int& sum, int& sum_square) { sum = 0; sum_square = 0; int digit; while (n) { digit = n % 10; sum += digit; sum_square += digit * digit; n /= 10; } } void init_digits(long long n, long long previous_sum[], const int size = 18) { int current_no_digits = num_digits(n); int digit; for (int i = 0; i < current_no_digits; ++i) { digit = n % 10; previous_sum[i] = digit; n /= 10; } for (int i = current_no_digits; i <= size; ++i) { previous_sum[i] = 0; } } void display_previous(long long previous[]) { for (int i = 0; i < 18; ++i) { cout << previous[i] << ","; } } int count_lucky_number(long long A, long long B) { long long n = A; long long end = B; int sum = 0; int sum_square = 0; int lucky_counter = 0; get_sum_and_sum_square_digits(n, sum, sum_square); long long sum_counter = sum; long long sum_square_counter = sum_square; if (prime_table[sum_counter] && prime_table[sum_square_counter]) { lucky_counter++; } long long previous_sum[19] = {1}; init_digits(n, previous_sum); while (n < end) { n++; if (n % 100000000000000000 == 0) { previous_sum[17]++; sum_counter = previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18]; sum_square_counter = previous_sum[17] * previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18] * previous_sum[18]; previous_sum[16] = 0; previous_sum[15] = 0; previous_sum[14] = 0; previous_sum[13] = 0; previous_sum[12] = 0; previous_sum[11] = 0; previous_sum[10] = 0; previous_sum[9] = 0; previous_sum[8] = 0; previous_sum[7] = 0; previous_sum[6] = 0; previous_sum[5] = 0; previous_sum[4] = 0; previous_sum[3] = 0; previous_sum[2] = 0; previous_sum[1] = 0; previous_sum[0] = 0; } else if (n % 10000000000000000 == 0) { previous_sum[16]++; sum_counter = previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18]; sum_square_counter = previous_sum[16] * previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] * previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18] * previous_sum[18]; previous_sum[15] = 0; previous_sum[14] = 0; previous_sum[13] = 0; previous_sum[12] = 0; previous_sum[11] = 0; previous_sum[10] = 0; previous_sum[9] = 0; previous_sum[8] = 0; previous_sum[7] = 0; previous_sum[6] = 0; previous_sum[5] = 0; previous_sum[4] = 0; previous_sum[3] = 0; previous_sum[2] = 0; previous_sum[1] = 0; previous_sum[0] = 0; } else if (n % 1000000000000000 == 0) { previous_sum[15]++; sum_counter = previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18]; sum_square_counter = previous_sum[15] * previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] * previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] * previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18] * previous_sum[18]; previous_sum[14] = 0; previous_sum[13] = 0; previous_sum[12] = 0; previous_sum[11] = 0; previous_sum[10] = 0; previous_sum[9] = 0; previous_sum[8] = 0; previous_sum[7] = 0; previous_sum[6] = 0; previous_sum[5] = 0; previous_sum[4] = 0; previous_sum[3] = 0; previous_sum[2] = 0; previous_sum[1] = 0; previous_sum[0] = 0; } else if (n % 100000000000000 == 0) { previous_sum[14]++; sum_counter = previous_sum[14] + previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18]; sum_square_counter = previous_sum[14] * previous_sum[14] + previous_sum[15] * previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] * previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] * previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18] * previous_sum[18]; previous_sum[13] = 0; previous_sum[12] = 0; previous_sum[11] = 0; previous_sum[10] = 0; previous_sum[9] = 0; previous_sum[8] = 0; previous_sum[7] = 0; previous_sum[6] = 0; previous_sum[5] = 0; previous_sum[4] = 0; previous_sum[3] = 0; previous_sum[2] = 0; previous_sum[1] = 0; previous_sum[0] = 0; } else if (n % 10000000000000 == 0) { previous_sum[13]++; sum_counter = previous_sum[13] + previous_sum[14] + previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18]; sum_square_counter = previous_sum[13] * previous_sum[13] + previous_sum[14] * previous_sum[14] + previous_sum[15] * previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] * previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] * previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18] * previous_sum[18]; previous_sum[12] = 0; previous_sum[11] = 0; previous_sum[10] = 0; previous_sum[9] = 0; previous_sum[8] = 0; previous_sum[7] = 0; previous_sum[6] = 0; previous_sum[5] = 0; previous_sum[4] = 0; previous_sum[3] = 0; previous_sum[2] = 0; previous_sum[1] = 0; previous_sum[0] = 0; } else if (n % 1000000000000 == 0) { previous_sum[12]++; sum_counter = previous_sum[12] + previous_sum[13] + previous_sum[14] + previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18]; sum_square_counter = previous_sum[12] * previous_sum[12] + previous_sum[13] * previous_sum[13] + previous_sum[14] * previous_sum[14] + previous_sum[15] * previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] * previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] * previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18] * previous_sum[18]; previous_sum[11] = 0; previous_sum[10] = 0; previous_sum[9] = 0; previous_sum[8] = 0; previous_sum[7] = 0; previous_sum[6] = 0; previous_sum[5] = 0; previous_sum[4] = 0; previous_sum[3] = 0; previous_sum[2] = 0; previous_sum[1] = 0; previous_sum[0] = 0; } else if (n % 100000000000 == 0) { previous_sum[11]++; sum_counter = previous_sum[11] + previous_sum[12] + previous_sum[13] + previous_sum[14] + previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18]; sum_square_counter = previous_sum[11] * previous_sum[11] + previous_sum[12] * previous_sum[12] + previous_sum[13] * previous_sum[13] + previous_sum[14] * previous_sum[14] + previous_sum[15] * previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] * previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] * previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18] * previous_sum[18]; previous_sum[10] = 0; previous_sum[9] = 0; previous_sum[8] = 0; previous_sum[7] = 0; previous_sum[6] = 0; previous_sum[5] = 0; previous_sum[4] = 0; previous_sum[3] = 0; previous_sum[2] = 0; previous_sum[1] = 0; previous_sum[0] = 0; } else if (n % 10000000000 == 0) { previous_sum[10]++; sum_counter = previous_sum[10] + previous_sum[11] + previous_sum[12] + previous_sum[13] + previous_sum[14] + previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18]; sum_square_counter = previous_sum[10] * previous_sum[10] + previous_sum[11] * previous_sum[11] + previous_sum[12] * previous_sum[12] + previous_sum[13] * previous_sum[13] + previous_sum[14] * previous_sum[14] + previous_sum[15] * previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] * previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] * previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18] * previous_sum[18]; previous_sum[9] = 0; previous_sum[8] = 0; previous_sum[7] = 0; previous_sum[6] = 0; previous_sum[5] = 0; previous_sum[4] = 0; previous_sum[3] = 0; previous_sum[2] = 0; previous_sum[1] = 0; previous_sum[0] = 0; } else if (n % 1000000000 == 0) { previous_sum[9]++; sum_counter = previous_sum[9] + previous_sum[10] + previous_sum[11] + previous_sum[12] + previous_sum[13] + previous_sum[14] + previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18]; sum_square_counter = previous_sum[9] * previous_sum[9] + previous_sum[10] * previous_sum[10] + previous_sum[11] * previous_sum[11] + previous_sum[12] * previous_sum[12] + previous_sum[13] * previous_sum[13] + previous_sum[14] * previous_sum[14] + previous_sum[15] * previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] * previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] * previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18] * previous_sum[18]; previous_sum[8] = 0; previous_sum[7] = 0; previous_sum[6] = 0; previous_sum[5] = 0; previous_sum[4] = 0; previous_sum[3] = 0; previous_sum[2] = 0; previous_sum[1] = 0; previous_sum[0] = 0; } else if (n % 100000000 == 0) { previous_sum[8]++; sum_counter = previous_sum[8] + previous_sum[9] + previous_sum[10] + previous_sum[11] + previous_sum[12] + previous_sum[13] + previous_sum[14] + previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18]; sum_square_counter = previous_sum[8] * previous_sum[8] + previous_sum[9] * previous_sum[9] + previous_sum[10] * previous_sum[10] + previous_sum[11] * previous_sum[11] + previous_sum[12] * previous_sum[12] + previous_sum[13] * previous_sum[13] + previous_sum[14] * previous_sum[14] + previous_sum[15] * previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] * previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] * previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18] * previous_sum[18]; previous_sum[7] = 0; previous_sum[6] = 0; previous_sum[5] = 0; previous_sum[4] = 0; previous_sum[3] = 0; previous_sum[2] = 0; previous_sum[1] = 0; previous_sum[0] = 0; } else if (n % 10000000 == 0) { previous_sum[7]++; sum_counter = previous_sum[7] + previous_sum[8] + previous_sum[9] + previous_sum[10] + previous_sum[11] + previous_sum[12] + previous_sum[13] + previous_sum[14] + previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18]; sum_square_counter = previous_sum[7] * previous_sum[7] + previous_sum[8] * previous_sum[8] + previous_sum[9] * previous_sum[9] + previous_sum[10] * previous_sum[10] + previous_sum[11] * previous_sum[11] + previous_sum[12] * previous_sum[12] + previous_sum[13] * previous_sum[13] + previous_sum[14] * previous_sum[14] + previous_sum[15] * previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] * previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] * previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18] * previous_sum[18]; previous_sum[6] = 0; previous_sum[5] = 0; previous_sum[4] = 0; previous_sum[3] = 0; previous_sum[2] = 0; previous_sum[1] = 0; previous_sum[0] = 0; } else if (n % 1000000 == 0) { previous_sum[6]++; sum_counter = previous_sum[6] + previous_sum[7] + previous_sum[8] + previous_sum[9] + previous_sum[10] + previous_sum[11] + previous_sum[12] + previous_sum[13] + previous_sum[14] + previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18]; sum_square_counter = previous_sum[6] * previous_sum[6] + previous_sum[7] * previous_sum[7] + previous_sum[8] * previous_sum[8] + previous_sum[9] * previous_sum[9] + previous_sum[10] * previous_sum[10] + previous_sum[11] * previous_sum[11] + previous_sum[12] * previous_sum[12] + previous_sum[13] * previous_sum[13] + previous_sum[14] * previous_sum[14] + previous_sum[15] * previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] * previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] * previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18] * previous_sum[18]; previous_sum[5] = 0; previous_sum[4] = 0; previous_sum[3] = 0; previous_sum[2] = 0; previous_sum[1] = 0; previous_sum[0] = 0; } else if (n % 100000 == 0) { previous_sum[5]++; sum_counter = previous_sum[5] + previous_sum[6] + previous_sum[7] + previous_sum[8] + previous_sum[9] + previous_sum[10] + previous_sum[11] + previous_sum[12] + previous_sum[13] + previous_sum[14] + previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18]; sum_square_counter = previous_sum[5] * previous_sum[5] + previous_sum[6] * previous_sum[6] + previous_sum[7] * previous_sum[7] + previous_sum[8] * previous_sum[8] + previous_sum[9] * previous_sum[9] + previous_sum[10] * previous_sum[10] + previous_sum[11] * previous_sum[11] + previous_sum[12] * previous_sum[12] + previous_sum[13] * previous_sum[13] + previous_sum[14] * previous_sum[14] + previous_sum[15] * previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] * previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] * previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18] * previous_sum[18]; previous_sum[4] = 0; previous_sum[3] = 0; previous_sum[2] = 0; previous_sum[1] = 0; previous_sum[0] = 0; } else if (n % 10000 == 0) { previous_sum[4]++; sum_counter = previous_sum[4] + previous_sum[5] + previous_sum[6] + previous_sum[7] + previous_sum[8] + previous_sum[9] + previous_sum[10] + previous_sum[11] + previous_sum[12] + previous_sum[13] + previous_sum[14] + previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18]; sum_square_counter = previous_sum[4] * previous_sum[4] + previous_sum[5] * previous_sum[5] + previous_sum[6] * previous_sum[6] + previous_sum[7] * previous_sum[7] + previous_sum[8] * previous_sum[8] + previous_sum[9] * previous_sum[9] + previous_sum[12] * previous_sum[12] + previous_sum[13] * previous_sum[13] + previous_sum[14] * previous_sum[14] + previous_sum[15] * previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] * previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] * previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18] * previous_sum[18]; previous_sum[3] = 0; previous_sum[2] = 0; previous_sum[1] = 0; previous_sum[0] = 0; } else if (n % 1000 == 0) { previous_sum[3]++; sum_counter = previous_sum[3] + previous_sum[4] + previous_sum[5] + previous_sum[6] + previous_sum[7] + previous_sum[8] + previous_sum[9] + previous_sum[10] + previous_sum[11] + previous_sum[12] + previous_sum[13] + previous_sum[14] + previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18]; sum_square_counter = previous_sum[3] * previous_sum[3] + previous_sum[4] * previous_sum[4] + previous_sum[5] * previous_sum[5] + previous_sum[6] * previous_sum[6] + previous_sum[7] * previous_sum[7] + previous_sum[8] * previous_sum[8] + previous_sum[9] * previous_sum[9] + previous_sum[10] * previous_sum[10] + previous_sum[11] * previous_sum[11] + previous_sum[12] * previous_sum[12] + previous_sum[13] * previous_sum[13] + previous_sum[14] * previous_sum[14] + previous_sum[15] * previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] * previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] * previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18] * previous_sum[18]; previous_sum[2] = 0; previous_sum[1] = 0; previous_sum[0] = 0; } else if (n % 100 == 0) { previous_sum[2]++; sum_counter = previous_sum[2] + previous_sum[3] + previous_sum[4] + previous_sum[5] + previous_sum[6] + previous_sum[7] + previous_sum[8] + previous_sum[9] + previous_sum[10] + previous_sum[11] + previous_sum[12] + previous_sum[13] + previous_sum[14] + previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18]; sum_square_counter = previous_sum[2] * previous_sum[2] + previous_sum[3] * previous_sum[3] + previous_sum[4] * previous_sum[4] + previous_sum[5] * previous_sum[5] + previous_sum[6] * previous_sum[6] + previous_sum[7] * previous_sum[7] + previous_sum[8] * previous_sum[8] + previous_sum[9] * previous_sum[9] + previous_sum[10] * previous_sum[10] + previous_sum[11] * previous_sum[11] + previous_sum[12] * previous_sum[12] + previous_sum[13] * previous_sum[13] + previous_sum[14] * previous_sum[14] + previous_sum[15] * previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] * previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] * previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18] * previous_sum[18]; previous_sum[1] = 0; previous_sum[0] = 0; } else if (n % 10 == 0) { previous_sum[1]++; sum_counter = previous_sum[1] + previous_sum[2] + previous_sum[3] + previous_sum[4] + previous_sum[5] + previous_sum[6] + previous_sum[7] + previous_sum[8] + previous_sum[9] + previous_sum[10] + previous_sum[11] + previous_sum[12] + previous_sum[13] + previous_sum[14] + previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18]; sum_square_counter = previous_sum[1] * previous_sum[1] + previous_sum[2] * previous_sum[2] + previous_sum[3] * previous_sum[3] + previous_sum[4] * previous_sum[4] + previous_sum[5] * previous_sum[5] + previous_sum[6] * previous_sum[6] + previous_sum[7] * previous_sum[7] + previous_sum[8] * previous_sum[8] + previous_sum[9] * previous_sum[9] + previous_sum[10] * previous_sum[10] + previous_sum[11] * previous_sum[11] + previous_sum[12] * previous_sum[12] + previous_sum[13] * previous_sum[13] + previous_sum[14] * previous_sum[14] + previous_sum[15] * previous_sum[15] + previous_sum[16] * previous_sum[16] + previous_sum[17] * previous_sum[17] + previous_sum[18] * previous_sum[18]; previous_sum[0] = 0; } else { sum_counter++; sum_square_counter += ((n - 1) % 10) * 2 + 1; } // get_sum_and_sum_square_digits(n, sum, sum_square); // assert(sum == sum_counter && sum_square == sum_square_counter); if (prime_table[sum_counter] && prime_table[sum_square_counter]) { lucky_counter++; } } return lucky_counter; } void inout_lucky_numbers() { int n; cin >> n; long long a; long long b; while (n--) { cin >> a >> b; cout << count_lucky_number(a, b) << endl; } } int main() { inout_lucky_numbers(); return 0; }

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to optimize maven dependencies automatically?

    - by AlexR
    I am working on a big project that consists of about 40 sub-projects with very not optimized dependencies. There are declared dependencies that are not in use as well as used but undeclared dependencies. The second case is possible when dependency is added via other dependency. I want to remove redundant and add required dependencies. I ran mvn dependency:analyze and got a long list of warnings I have to fix now. I wonder whether there is maven plugin or any other utility that can update my pom.xml files automatically. I tried to do it manually but it takes a lot of time. It seems it will take a couple of days of copy/paste to complete the task. In worse case I can write such script myself but probably ready stuff exists? Here is how mvn dependency:analyze reports dependency warnings: [WARNING] Used undeclared dependencies found: [WARNING] org.apache.httpcomponents:httpcore:jar:4.1:compile [WARNING] Unused declared dependencies found: [WARNING] commons-lang:commons-lang:jar:2.4:compile [WARNING] org.json:json:jar:20090211:compile

    Read the article

  • optimize a string.Format + replace.

    - by acidzombie24
    I have this function. The visual studio profile marked the line with string.Format as hot and were i spend much of my time. How can i write this loop more efficiently? public string EscapeNoPredicate(string sz) { var s = new StringBuilder(sz); s.Replace(sepStr, sepStr + sepStr); foreach (char v in IllegalChars) { string s2 = string.Format("{0}{1:X2}", seperator, (Int16)v); s.Replace(v.ToString(), s2); } return s.ToString(); }

    Read the article

  • How to Optimize Combined Graphical Operations?

    - by Sunny
    Hi, Here is a Scenario, A series of operations that I will call for painting, QPainter p(this); 1). p.fillRect(0,0,320,240, RED_COLOR) 2) p.drawLine(0,0,100,100, BLUE_COLOR) 3) p.fillRect(0,0,320,240, YELLOW_COLOR) Now I want that painter should not draw first FillRect Function. It should not draw line. It should only perform last operation. Is there any way to achive this optimization in Qt. Is this type of drawing/painting optimizations are supported by any library?

    Read the article

  • Optimize SQL connection?

    - by user1484035
    I am building a multi-page web project in HTML and Javascript that is constantly reading from AND writing to an SQL database. I can connect to the database and successfully run my project with this type of connection. var connection = new ActiveXObject("ADODB.Connection") ; var connectionstring="Data Source=<server>;Initial Catalog=<catalog>;User ID=<user>; Password=<password>;Provider=SQLOLEDB"; connection.Open(connectionstring); var rs = new ActiveXObject("ADODB.Recordset"); rs.Open("SELECT * FROM table", connection); rs.MoveFirst while(!rs.eof) { document.write(rs.fields(1)); rs.movenext; } rs.close; connection.close; Works great and runs fine. BUT, the first 5 lines (from var connection = to var rs =) causes the whole browser to freeze for a few seconds while it establishes the connection. I need to speed that up since I am constantly connecting to the database throughout my project. Is there a more effective way of connecting to a SQL database? or is my computer just bad and this should run faster?

    Read the article

  • Please help me optimize my Python code

    - by Haidon
    Beginner here! Forgive me in advance for raising what is probably an incredibly simple problem. I've been trying to put together a Python script that runs multiple find-and-replace actions and a few similar things on a specified plain-text file. It works, but from a programming perspective I doubt it works well. How would I best go about optimizing the actions made upon the 'outtext' variable? At the moment it's basically doing a very similar thing four times over... import binascii import re import struct import sys infile = sys.argv[1] charenc = sys.argv[2] outFile=infile+'.tex' findreplace = [ ('TERM1', 'TERM2'), ('TERM3', 'TERM4'), ('TERM5', 'TERM6'), ] inF = open(infile,'rb') s=unicode(inF.read(),charenc) inF.close() # THIS IS VERY MESSY. for couple in findreplace: outtext=s.replace(couple[0],couple[1]) s=outtext for couple in findreplace: outtext=re.compile('Title: (.*)', re.I).sub(r'\\title'+ r'{\1}', s) s=outtext for couple in findreplace: outtext=re.compile('Author: (.*)', re.I).sub(r'\\author'+ r'{\1}', s) s=outtext for couple in findreplace: outtext=re.compile('Date: (.*)', re.I).sub(r'\\date'+ r'{\1}', s) s=outtext # END MESSY SECTION. outF = open(outFile,'wb') outF.write(outtext.encode('utf-8')) outF.close()

    Read the article

  • SQL Database dilemma : Optimize for Querying or Writing?

    - by Harry
    I'm working on a personal project (Search engine) and have a bit of a dilemma. At the moment it is optimized for writing data to the search index and significantly slow for search queries. The DTA (Database Engine Tuning Adviser) recommends adding a couple of Indexed views inorder to speed up search queries. But this is to the detriment of writing new data to the DB. It seems I can't have one without the other! This is obviously not a new problem. What is a good strategy for this issue?

    Read the article

  • Java - Optimize finding a string in a list

    - by Mark
    I have an ArrayList of objects where each object contains a string 'word' and a date. I need to check to see if the date has passed for a list of 500 words. The ArrayList could contain up to a million words and dates. The dates I store as integers, so the problem I have is attempting to find the word I am looking for in the ArrayList. Is there a way to make this faster? In python I have a dict and mWords['foo'] is a simple lookup without looping through the whole 1 million items in the mWords array. Is there something like this in java? for (int i = 0; i < mWords.size(); i++) { if ( word == mWords.get(i).word ) { mLastFindIndex = i; return mWords.get(i); } }

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61  | Next Page >