[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Lua Socket
- From: gary ng <garyng2000@...>
- Date: Sat, 21 Jul 2007 06:28:02 -0700 (PDT)
--- Ketmar Dark <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> yes. but there can be a way to process dataset row
> by row in the
> client, for example (it depends of task, of course).
> so you'll have 1M
> in SQL helper and couple of KB in client...
> or something like this. just process data chunk by
> chunk and don't keep
> the whole data in memory.
Yes, that would reduce the overall memory footprint at
the expense of the protocol overhead becomes even
greater and the performance even worse.
> and you always can write the time-consuming parts in
> the `real'
> language, where Lua `hooks' calls here and there...
Yes, but this really is not a case of "expensive"
operation that I need to out source to another process
but more about the possibility of having the whole
process blocked by one case in 100(or 1000). If it is
8/10 that it is going to be time-consuming, of course
the overhead becomes a non-issue.
Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us. http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7