Re: reasons for modperl declines? ... pagination

2024-08-09 Thread Guido Brugnara
I apologize that we are using this mail-list dedicated to mod_perl. Normally the page to be returned to the frontend for display has a few rows (tens) and therefore perform Join with a table of keys or use IN (...) m but also key = X OR key = Y OR ... makes little difference. In my case the rec

Re: reasons for modperl declines? ... pagination

2024-08-09 Thread Mithun Bhattacharya
True - it will not return enough results if it is a sparse matrix. I might be biased because in my work it is ok to give less results if it is significantly faster. If exact numbers are required and the count is significantly higher then I would suggest keeping the select on primary keys but switc

Re: reasons for modperl declines? ... pagination

2024-08-09 Thread Mithun Bhattacharya
First one is expensive and s cond is inefficient. Instead get the max and min and split the numbers into appropriate batch. So if it is 345 to 25636 then 345 - 1345, 1346-2345 and so on and so forth. Why is the second querry inefficient because the IN clause is much slower than doing a between on t

Re: *** SPAM *** Re: reasons for modperl declines? ... pagination

2024-08-09 Thread Vincent Veyron
On Thu, 8 Aug 2024 16:21:09 +0200 Guido Brugnara wrote: > > I evaluate the query but returning only Primary Keys [*] using > OFFSET/LIMIT limiting to a multiple of rows to display but not too > large, which I save in cache. Thanks for the info. How do you do the caching? -- vv.lists