1. Strings WAS: Question About Web Site Speed
Kat wrote:
>
>
> Perhaps the problem with using Eu as a web server database isn't with that
> per se, it's more with loading a 100megabyte db in Eu (making it 400megs
> for lack of a string type) each time someone does a search can quickly run
> out of memory on any reasonable (/ly priced) server shell. And doing gets()
> on a brute force search of a 100 meg file (RobC said his program does that!?)
> takes too long. But what do i know, i play with a 14 gigabyte database and
> want "goto" and string types added to Eu.
>
> Kat
>
Why whould 8 bit strings be better? It works ok if you are working only in
English,
but it doesn't do a good job on non-western languages.
2. Re: Strings WAS: Question About Web Site Speed
On 13 Jul 2005, at 18:17, Ken Orr wrote:
>
>
> posted by: Ken Orr <orr_kenneth at yahoo.ca>
>
> Kat wrote:
> >
> >
> > Perhaps the problem with using Eu as a web server database isn't with that
> > per
> > se, it's more with loading a 100megabyte db in Eu (making it 400megs for
> > lack
> > of a string type) each time someone does a search can quickly run out of
> > memory on any reasonable (/ly priced) server shell. And doing gets() on a
> > brute force search of a 100 meg file (RobC said his program does that!?)
> > takes
> > too long. But what do i know, i play with a 14 gigabyte database and want
> > "goto" and string types added to Eu.
> >
> > Kat
> >
>
> Why whould 8 bit strings be better? It works ok if you are working only in
> English, but it doesn't do a good job on non-western languages.
Because there's 8bit char maps that call non-western fonts, if you limit to
255 char displays. Which i realise is a problem with glyphs used in China,
etc, but even then there are various "simplified" fonts. There's a few people
on this list who are far more knowledgable about Unicode than i am, i'll leave
this to them.
Kat
