cards in a stack
bvlahos at mac.com
Wed Jan 2 18:33:23 EST 2008
I believe the performance hit is because Rev loads everything into
ram. HyperCard didn't.
In HyperCard you had to periodically compact the stack because of the
fragmentation caused by the swapping to and from disk.
Rev never needs to compact because a Save saves the entire stack again.
Sent from my iPhone
On Jan 2, 2008, at 12:40 PM, Joe Lewis Wilkins <pepetoo at cox.net> wrote:
> Thanks, Paul. I didn't realize that there was a performance hit
> using Rev. How about searching in Rev? HC's searching was amazingly
> fast, even in the days of SE30s, although I do recall implementing
> an indexing protocol to make sure account cards were found as fast
> as I wanted them to be found.
> Joe Wilkins
> On Jan 2, 2008, at 12:23 PM, SimPLsol at aol.com wrote:
>> We have had Rev stacks with well over 10,000 cards.
>> They open, close, and save much more slowly than the same data in a
>> stack with the same cards. They also require much more memory than
>> equivalent HC stacks.
>> The speed and memory usage problems seem to be exponential (the
>> more cards,
>> the greater the problem). Based on my experience, you should be
>> able to manage
>> stacks with less than 2500 cards in Rev - but don't expect HC
>> Paul Looney
>> See AOL's top rated recipes
>> use-revolution mailing list
>> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
>> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
>> subscription preferences:
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
More information about the use-livecode