Re: Storing Data for Web Site
Robert Craig wrote:
>
> Vincent wrote:
> >
> > Robert Craig wrote:
> > >
> > > A Euphoria database is pretty efficient. It stores
> > > small integers in one byte, not four. The overhead
> > > on sequences is also pretty low.
> > > I think you'll run into trouble at around 2Gb.
> > > You would have to store your data in multiple databases at that point.
> > > Someday I (or someone else) should try to make the limit
> > > much larger.
> > >
> >
> > Rob how would someone go about increasing the limit to 4 GB max? According
> > to the EDS
> > docs, the limited it caused by C file routines used in the interpreter
> > internally?
>
> You'd think the limit would be 4GB, but I recall that some of the
> C library routines will fail after 2GB.
>
> Windows/Linux/FreeBSD have newer file routines that go beyond
> 4-byte file offsets. I would need to start using those.
> EDS would also have to be adjusted to use greater than
> 4-byte offsets.
>
Well if it isn't to difficult to use newer routines, that would be quite useful
for EDS (2x larger limit), and reading & writing huge files. Maybe you can
consider it for the next release?
> > Also, how is that PD-source going, almost ready to release it for community
> > testing?
>
> The new cooperative multitasking feature is working fine.
> It was used in the game of Language War that I just won (expert level
)
>
So did I, except the Euphoria ship had 5 million units of energy instead of
50,000 8^D.
> I'll release it pretty soon, maybe next week.
> I'm just mulling over possible improvements,
> and thinking of other demos I could write to show it off.
>
You said that last week but ok
. It's more possible for issues to arise when
implemented in the C backend.
> As you recall, it goes beyond what has been done already
> in Language War, and other multitasking systems in User Contributions,
> since each task gets its own separate call stack, program counter
> and private variables. For example, a task can be buried many levels deep
> in subroutine calls, and easily transfer control back and forth
> with other tasks, while maintaining its own private data.
> I have an example where two instances of quick sort run in parallel
> with two instances of shell sort, and everything comes out correct in
> the end.
>
I'll be interested what routines this cooperative tasking system comprises of,
and it's performance.
> Regards,
> Rob Craig
> Rapid Deployment Software
> <a href="http://www.RapidEuphoria.com">http://www.RapidEuphoria.com</a>
>
Regards,
Vincent
----------------------------------------------
___ __________ ___
/__/\ /__________\ |\ _\
\::\'\ //::::::::::\\ |'|::|
\::\'\ //:::_::::_:::\\ |'|::|
\::\'\ //::/ |::| \::\\ |'|::|
\::\'\ //::/ |::| \::\\|'|::|
\::\'\__//::/ |::| \::\|'|::|
\::\','/::/ |::| \::\\|::|
\::\_/::/ |::| \::\|::|
\::,::/ |::| \:::::|
\___/ |__| \____|
.``.
',,'
----------------------------------------------
|
Not Categorized, Please Help
|
|