Search Results

Search found 14719 results on 589 pages for 'optimization level'.

Page 93/589 | < Previous Page | 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100  | Next Page >

• Will the compiler optimize escaping an inner loop?

  - by BCS

  The code I have looks like this (all uses of done shown): bool done = false; for(int i = 0; i < big; i++) { ... for(int j = 0; j < wow; j++) { ... if(foo(i,j)) { done = true; break; } ... } if(done) break; ... } will any compilers convert it to this: for(int i = 0; i < big; i++) { ... for(int j = 0; j < wow; j++) { ... if(foo(i,j)) goto __done; // same as a labeled break if we had it ... } ... } __done:;

  Read the article

• I'm on a 2MBPS internet connection but i want to check a website like i'm on a 256 KBPS connection o

  - by metal-gear-solid

  Does anyone know how to test? I'm on Windows XP? and Firefox , IE7 installed

  Read the article

• 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

• Script Speed vs Memory Usage

  - by Doug Neiner

  I am working on an image generation script in PHP and have gotten it working two ways. One way is slow but uses a limited amount of memory, the second is much faster, but uses 6x the memory . There is no leakage in either script (as far as I can tell). In a limited benchmark, here is how they performed: -------------------------------------------- METHOD | TOTAL TIME | PEAK MEMORY | IMAGES -------------------------------------------- One | 65.626 | 540,036 | 200 Two | 20.207 | 3,269,600 | 200 -------------------------------------------- And here is the average of the previous numbers (if you don't want to do your own math): -------------------------------------------- METHOD | TOTAL TIME | PEAK MEMORY | IMAGES -------------------------------------------- One | 0.328 | 540,036 | 1 Two | 0.101 | 3,269,600 | 1 -------------------------------------------- Which method should I use and why? I anticipate this being used by a high volume of users, with each user making 10-20 requests to this script during a normal visit. I am leaning toward the faster method because though it uses more memory, it is for a 1/3 of the time and would reduce the number of concurrent requests.

  Read the article

• How can I Query only __key__ on a Google Appengine PolyModel child?

  - by Gabriel

  So the situation is: I want to optimize my code some for doing counting of records. So I have a parent Model class Base, a PolyModel class Entry, and a child class of Entry Article: How would I query Article.key so I can reduce the query load but only get the Article count. My first thought was to use: q = db.GqlQuery("SELECT __key__ from Article where base = :1", i_base) but it turns out GqlQuery doesn't like that because articles are actually stored in a table called Entry. Would it be possible to Query the class attribute? something like: q = db.GqlQuery("select __key__ from Entry where base = :1 and :2 in class", i_base, 'Article') neither of which work. Turns out the answer is even easier. But I am going to finish this question because I looked everywhere for this. q = db.GqlQuery("select __key__ from Entry where base = :1 and class = :2", i_base, 'Article')

  Read the article

• Is there a faster TList implementation ?

  - by dmauric.mp

  My application makes heavy use of TList, so I was wondering if there are any alternative implementations that are faster or optimized for particular use case. I know of RtlVCLOptimize.pas 2.77, which has optimized implementations of several TList methods. But I'd like to know if there is anything else out there. I also don't require it to be a TList descendant, I just need the TList functionality regardless of how it's implemented. It's entirely possible, given the rather basic functionality TList provides, that there is not much room for improvement, but would still like to verify that, hence this question.

  Read the article

• MySQL won't use index for query?

  - by Jack Sleight

  I have this table: CREATE TABLE `point` ( `id` INT(11) NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT, `siteid` INT(11) NOT NULL, `lft` INT(11) DEFAULT NULL, `rgt` INT(11) DEFAULT NULL, `level` SMALLINT(6) DEFAULT NULL, PRIMARY KEY (`id`), KEY `point_siteid_site_id` (`siteid`), CONSTRAINT `point_siteid_site_id` FOREIGN KEY (`siteid`) REFERENCES `site` (`id`) ON DELETE CASCADE ) ENGINE=INNODB AUTO_INCREMENT=35 DEFAULT CHARSET=utf8 COLLATE=utf8_unicode_ci And this query: SELECT * FROM `point` WHERE siteid = 1; Which results in this EXPLAIN information: +----+-------------+-------+------+----------------------+------+---------+------+------+-------------+ | id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra | +----+-------------+-------+------+----------------------+------+---------+------+------+-------------+ | 1 | SIMPLE | point | ALL | point_siteid_site_id | NULL | NULL | NULL | 6 | Using where | +----+-------------+-------+------+----------------------+------+---------+------+------+-------------+ Question is, why isn't the query using the point_siteid_site_id index?

  Read the article

• MySQL Paritioning performance

  - by Imran Pathan

  Measured performance on key partitioned tables and normal tables separately. But we couldn't find any performance improvement with partitioning. Queries are pruned. Using MySQL 5.1.47 on RHEL 4. Table details: UserUsage - Will have entries for user mobile number and data usage for each date. Mobile number and Date as PRI KEY. UserProfile - Queries prev table and stores summary for each mobile number. Mobile number PRI KEY. CREATE TABLE `UserUsage` ( `Msisdn` decimal(20,0) NOT NULL, `Date` date NOT NULL, . . PRIMARY KEY USING BTREE (`Msisdn`,`Date`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 PARTITION BY KEY(Msisdn) PARTITIONS 50; CREATE TABLE `UserProfile` ( `Msisdn` decimal(20,0) NOT NULL, . . PRIMARY KEY (`Msisdn`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 PARTITION BY KEY(Msisdn) PARTITIONS 50; Second table is updated by query select and order by date in first table in a perl program, query is select * from UserUsage where Msisdn=number order by Date desc limit 7 [Process data in perl] update UserProfile values(....) where Msisdn=number explain partition for select, shows row being scanned in a particular partition only. Is something wrong with partition design or queries as partitioning is taking almost same or more time compared to normal tables?

  Read the article

• Why is doing a top(1) on an indexed column in SQL Server slow?

  - by reinier

  I'm puzzled by the following. I have a DB with around 10 million rows, and (among other indices) on 1 column (campaignid_int) is an index. Now I have 700k rows where the campaignid is indeed 3835 For all these rows, the connectionid is the same. I just want to find out this connectionid. use messaging_db; SELECT TOP (1) connectionid FROM outgoing_messages WITH (NOLOCK) WHERE (campaignid_int = 3835) Now this query takes approx 30 seconds to perform! I (with my small db knowledge) would expect that it would take any of the rows, and return me that connectionid If I test this same query for a campaign which only has 1 entry, it goes really fast. So the index works. How would I tackle this and why does this not work? edit: estimated execution plan: select (0%) - top (0%) - clustered index scan (100%)

  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

• Queries within queries: Is there a better way?

  - by mririgo

  As I build bigger, more advanced web applications, I'm finding myself writing extremely long and complex queries. I tend to write queries within queries a lot because I feel making one call to the database from PHP is better than making several and correlating the data. However, anyone who knows anything about SQL knows about JOINs. Personally, I've used a JOIN or two before, but quickly stopped when I discovered using subqueries because it felt easier and quicker for me to write and maintain. Commonly, I'll do subqueries that may contain one or more subqueries from relative tables. Consider this example: SELECT (SELECT username FROM users WHERE records.user_id = user_id) AS username, (SELECT last_name||', '||first_name FROM users WHERE records.user_id = user_id) AS name, in_timestamp, out_timestamp FROM records ORDER BY in_timestamp Rarely, I'll do subqueries after the WHERE clause. Consider this example: SELECT user_id, (SELECT name FROM organizations WHERE (SELECT organization FROM locations WHERE records.location = location_id) = organization_id) AS organization_name FROM records ORDER BY in_timestamp In these two cases, would I see any sort of improvement if I decided to rewrite the queries using a JOIN? As more of a blanket question, what are the advantages/disadvantages of using subqueries or a JOIN? Is one way more correct or accepted than the other?

  Read the article

• SEO Google - Navigation Title vs. Page Heading

  - by louism

  Hi, i was wondering if anyone knows if theres a connection between what a navigation item is named and the page heading it goes to - does this have an impact on SEO? so for example, if i had in my navigation menu an item called About Us, but when you click it you come to a page with the heading Learn Who We Are (i.e. wrapped in [h1] heading tags) because there isnt an exact one-to-one match, is that a bad thing in terms of SEO? thanks

  Read the article

• Why is Javascript's Math.floor the slowest way to calculate floor in Javascript?

  - by z5h

  I'm generally not a fan of microbenchmarks. But this one has a very interesting result. http://ernestdelgado.com/archive/benchmark-on-the-floor/ It suggests that Math.floor is the SLOWEST way to calculate floor in Javascript. ~~n, n|n, n&n all being faster. This seems pretty shocking as I would expect that people implementing Javascript in today's modern browsers would be some pretty smart people. Does floor do something important that the other methods fail to do? Is there any reason to use it?

  Read the article

• Optimizing BeautifulSoup (Python) code

  - by user283405

  I have code that uses the BeautifulSoup library for parsing, but it is very slow. The code is written in such a way that threads cannot be used. Can anyone help me with this? I am using BeautifulSoup for parsing and than save into a DB. If I comment out the save statement, it still takes a long time, so there is no problem with the database. def parse(self,text): soup = BeautifulSoup(text) arr = soup.findAll('tbody') for i in range(0,len(arr)-1): data=Data() soup2 = BeautifulSoup(str(arr[i])) arr2 = soup2.findAll('td') c=0 for j in arr2: if str(j).find("<a href=") > 0: data.sourceURL = self.getAttributeValue(str(j),'<a href="') else: if c == 2: data.Hits=j.renderContents() #and few others... c = c+1 data.save() Any suggestions? Note: I already ask this question here but that was closed due to incomplete information.

  Read the article

• Which fieldtype is best for storing PRICE values?

  - by BerggreenDK

  Hi there I am wondering whats the best "price field" in MSSQL for a shoplike structure? Looking at this overview: http://www.teratrax.com/sql_guide/data_types/sql_server_data_types.html We have datatypes called money, smallmoney, then we have decimal/numeric and lastly float and real Name, memory/disk-usage and value ranges: Money: 8 bytes (values: -922,337,203,685,477.5808 to +922,337,203,685,477.5807) Smallmoney: 4 bytes (values: -214,748.3648 to +214,748.3647) Decimal: 9 [default, min. 5] bytes (values: -10^38 +1 to 10^38 -1 ) Float: 8 bytes (values: -1.79E+308 to 1.79E+308 ) Real: 4 bytes (values: -3.40E+38 to 3.40E+38 ) My question is: is it really wise to store pricevalues in those types? what about eg. INT? Int: 4 bytes (values: -2,147,483,648 to 2,147,483,647) Lets say a shop uses dollars, they have cents, but I dont see prices being $49.2142342 so the use of a lot of decimals showing cents seems waste of SQL bandwidth. Secondly, most shops wouldn't show any prices near 200.000.000 (not in normal webshops at least... unless someone is trying to sell me a famous tower in Paris) So why not go for an int? An int is fast, its only 4 bytes and you can easily make decimals, by saving values in cents instead of dollars and then divide when you present the values. The other approach would be to use smallmoney which is 4 bytes too, but this will require the math part of the CPU to do the calc, where as Int is integer power... on the downside you will need to divide every single outcome. Are there any "currency" related problems with regionalsettings when using smallmoney/money fields? what will these transfer too in C#/.NET ? Any pros/cons? Go for integer prices or smallmoney or some other? Whats does your experience tell?

  Read the article

• Where is the bottleneck in this code?

  - by Mikhail

  I have the following tight loop that makes up the serial bottle neck of my code. Ideally I would parallelize the function that calls this but that is not possible. //n is about 60 for (int k = 0;k < n;k++) { double fone = z[k*n+i+1]; double fzer = z[k*n+i]; z[k*n+i+1]= s*fzer+c*fone; z[k*n+i] = c*fzer-s*fone; } Are there any optimizations that can be made such as vectorization or some evil inline that can help this code? I am looking into finding eigen solutions of tridiagonal matrices. http://www.cimat.mx/~posada/OptDoglegGraph/DocLogisticDogleg/projects/adjustedrecipes/tqli.cpp.html

  Read the article

• How to make Visual C++ 9 not emit code that is actually never called?

  - by sharptooth

  My native C++ COM component uses ATL. In DllRegisterServer() I call CComModule::RegisterServer(): STDAPI DllRegisterServer() { return _Module.RegisterServer(FALSE); // <<< notice FALSE here } FALSE is passed to indicate to not register the type library. ATL is available as sources, so I in fact compile the implementation of CComModule::RegisterServer(). Somewhere down the call stack there's an if statement: if( doRegisterTypeLibrary ) { //<< FALSE goes here // do some stuff, then call RegisterTypeLib() } The compiler sees all of the above code and so it can see that in fact the if condition is always false, yet when I inspect the linker progress messages I see that the reference to RegisterTypeLib() is still there, so the if statement is not eliminated. Can I make Visual C++ 9 perform better static analysis and actually see that some code is never called and not emit that code?

  Read the article

• Alternate User select interface in django admin to reduce page size on large site?

  - by David Eyk

  I have a Django-based site with roughly 300,000 User objects. Admin pages for objects with a ForeignKey field to User take a very long time to load as the resulting form is about 6MB in size. Of course, the resulting dropdown isn't particularly useful, either. Are there any off-the-shelf replacements for handling this case? I've been googling for a snippet or a blog entry, but haven't found anything yet. I'd like to have a smaller download size and a more usable interface.

  Read the article

• Optimize slow ranking query

  - by Juan Pablo Califano

  I need to optimize a query for a ranking that is taking forever (the query itself works, but I know it's awful and I've just tried it with a good number of records and it gives a timeout). I'll briefly explain the model. I have 3 tables: player, team and player_team. I have players, that can belong to a team. Obvious as it sounds, players are stored in the player table and teams in team. In my app, each player can switch teams at any time, and a log has to be mantained. However, a player is considered to belong to only one team at a given time. The current team of a player is the last one he's joined. The structure of player and team is not relevant, I think. I have an id column PK in each. In player_team I have: id (PK) player_id (FK -> player.id) team_id (FK -> team.id) Now, each team is assigned a point for each player that has joined. So, now, I want to get a ranking of the first N teams with the biggest number of players. My first idea was to get first the current players from player_team (that is one record top for each player; this record must be the player's current team). I failed to find a simple way to do it (tried GROUP BY player_team.player_id HAVING player_team.id = MAX(player_team.id), but that didn't cut it. I tried a number of querys that didn't work, but managed to get this working. SELECT COUNT(*) AS total, pt.team_id, p.facebook_uid AS owner_uid, t.color FROM player_team pt JOIN player p ON (p.id = pt.player_id) JOIN team t ON (t.id = pt.team_id) WHERE pt.id IN ( SELECT max(J.id) FROM player_team J GROUP BY J.player_id ) GROUP BY pt.team_id ORDER BY total DESC LIMIT 50 As I said, it works but looks very bad and performs worse, so I'm sure there must be a better way to go. Anyone has any ideas for optimizing this? I'm using mysql, by the way. Thanks in advance Adding the explain. (Sorry, not sure how to format it properly) id select_type table type possible_keys key key_len ref rows Extra 1 PRIMARY t ALL PRIMARY NULL NULL NULL 5000 Using temporary; Using filesort 1 PRIMARY pt ref FKplayer_pt77082,FKplayer_pt265938,new_index FKplayer_pt77082 4 t.id 30 Using where 1 PRIMARY p eq_ref PRIMARY PRIMARY 4 pt.player_id 1 2 DEPENDENT SUBQUERY J index NULL new_index 8 NULL 150000 Using index

  Read the article

• Avoid the use of loops (for) with R

  - by albergali

  Hi, I'm working with R and I have a code like this: i<-1 j<-1 for (i in 1:10) for (j in 1:100) if (data[i] == paths[j,1]) cluster[i,4] <- paths[j,2] where : data is a vector with 100 rows and 1 column paths is a matrix with 100 rows and 5 columns cluster is a matrix with 100 rows and 5 columns My question is: how could I avoid the use of "for" loops to iterate through the matrix? I don't know whether apply functions (lapply, tapply...) are useful in this case. This is a problem when j=10000 for example, because execution time is very long. Thank you

  Read the article

• Efficient implementation of natural logarithm (ln) and exponentiation

  - by Donotalo

  Basically, I'm looking for implementation of log() and exp() functions provided in C library <math.h>. I'm working with 8 bit microcontrollers (OKI 411 and 431). I need to calculate Mean Kinetic Temperature. The requirement is that we should be able to calculate MKT as fast as possible and with as little code memory as possible. The compiler comes with log() and exp() functions in <math.h>. But calling either function and linking with the library causes the code size to increase by 5 Kilobytes, which will not fit in one of the micro we work with (OKI 411), because our code already consumed ~12K of available ~15K code memory. The implementation I'm looking for should not use any other C library functions (like pow(), sqrt() etc). This is because all library functions are packed in one library and even if one function is called, the linker will bring whole 5K library to code memory.

  Read the article

• Building static (but complicated) lookup table using templates.

  - by MarkD

  I am currently in the process of optimizing a numerical analysis code. Within the code, there is a 200x150 element lookup table (currently a static std::vector < std::vector < double ) that is constructed at the beginning of every run. The construction of the lookup table is actually quite complex- the values in the lookup table are constructed using an iterative secant method on a complicated set of equations. Currently, for a simulation, the construction of the lookup table is 20% of the run time (run times are on the order of 25 second, lookup table construction takes 5 seconds). While 5-seconds might not seem to be a lot, when running our MC simulations, where we are running 50k+ simulations, it suddenly becomes a big chunk of time. Along with some other ideas, one thing that has been floated- can we construct this lookup table using templates at compile time? The table itself never changes. Hard-coding a large array isn't a maintainable solution (the equations that go into generating the table are constantly being tweaked), but it seems that if the table can be generated at compile time, it would give us the best of both worlds (easily maintainable, no overhead during runtime). So, I propose the following (much simplified) scenario. Lets say you wanted to generate a static array (use whatever container suits you best- 2D c array, vector of vectors, etc..) at compile time. You have a function defined- double f(int row, int col); where the return value is the entry in the table, row is the lookup table row, and col is the lookup table column. Is it possible to generate this static array at compile time using templates, and how?

  Read the article

• Drawbacks of Dynamic Query in Sqlserver 2005 ?

  - by KuldipMCA

  I have using the many dynamic Query in my database for the procedures because my filter is not fix so i have taken @filter as parameter and pass in the procedure. Declare @query as varchar(8000) Declare @Filter as varchar(1000) set @query = 'Select * from Person.Address where 1=1 and ' + @Filter exec(@query) Like that my filter contain any Field from the table for comparison. It will affect my performance or not ? is there any alternate way to achieve this type of things

  Read the article

• Resize an image and maintain quality?

  - by JasonS

  Hi, I have a problem with resizing images. What happens is that if you upload a file larger than the stated parameters, the image is cropped, then saved at 100% quality. So if I upload a large jpeg which is 272Kb. The image is cropped by 100 odd pixels. The file size then goes up to 1.2Mb. We are saving images at a 100% quality. I assume that this is what is causing the problem. The image is exported from Photoshop at 30% quality which reduces the file size. Resaving the image at 100% quality creates the same image but I assume with a lot of redundant file data. Has anyone encountered this before? Does anyone have a solution? This is what we are using. $source_im = imagecreatefromjpeg ($file); $dest_im = imagecreatetruecolor ($newsize_x, $newsize_y); imagecopyresampled ( $dest_im, $source_im, 0, 0, $offset_x, $offset_y, $newsize_x, $newsize_y, $sourceWidth, $sourceHeight ); imagedestroy ($source_im); if ($greyscale) { $dest_im = $this->imageconvertgreyscale ($dest_im); } imagejpeg($dest_im, $save_to_file, $quality); break;

  Read the article

• How to increase query speed without using full-text search?

  - by andre matos

  This is my simple query; By searching selectnothing I'm sure I'll have no hits. SELECT nome_t FROM myTable WHERE nome_t ILIKE '%selectnothing%'; This is the EXPLAIN ANALYZE VERBOSE Seq Scan on myTable (cost=0.00..15259.04 rows=37 width=29) (actual time=2153.061..2153.061 rows=0 loops=1) Output: nome_t Filter: (nome_t ~~* '%selectnothing%'::text) Total runtime: 2153.116 ms myTable has around 350k rows and the table definition is something like: CREATE TABLE myTable ( nome_t text NOT NULL, ) I have an index on nome_t as stated below: CREATE INDEX idx_m_nome_t ON myTable USING btree (nome_t); Although this is clearly a good candidate for Fulltext search I would like to rule that option out for now. This query is meant to be run from a web application and currently it's taking around 2 seconds which is obviously too much; Is there anything I can do, like using other index methods, to improve the speed of this query?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100  | Next Page >