Whilst waiting for a fix, would a temporary solution be to use sqlite to create an in-memory database and let sqlite do the sorting for you?
Regards, Bernard. On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 8:23 PM Ben Rubinstein via use-livecode < use-livecode@lists.runrev.com> wrote: > Thanks to Mark Waddingham's advice about using a buffer var when > accumulating > a large text variabel in stages, I've now got a script that took 8 hours > under > LC9, and (8 minutes under LC6) down by stages to just under 1 hour under > LC9. > > However I have some remaining issues not amenable to this approach; of > which > the most significant relates to the sort command. > > In all cases it seems to take much longer under LC9 than it did under LC6; > although the factor is quite variable. The most dramatic is one instance, > in > which this statement: > > sort lines of tNewTable by item iSortCol of each > > takes 35 minutes to execute. `tNewTable` is a variable consisting of some > 223,000 lines of text; approx 70MB. The exact same statement with the same > data on the same computer in LC6 takes just 1 second. > > Has anyone else noticed something of this sort? As I said, the effect > varies: > e.g. 54 seconds versus 1 second; 22 seconds versus 1 second. So it may not > be > so noticeable in all cases. > > TIA, > > Ben > > _______________________________________________ > use-livecode mailing list > use-livecode@lists.runrev.com > Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your > subscription preferences: > http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode > _______________________________________________ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
