Thanks Igor for your answer.
If calculating a MagmaCollectionReader size is costly, then why not forward #size to its MagmaCollection? My problem is I'm sending #size to a MagmaCollectionReader because I need to paginate the collection for showing its contents in the UI. Any suggestions?
Thanks Juan M.
On 8/31/07, Igor Stasenko siguctua@gmail.com wrote:
use collection. a #size for MagmaCollectionReader is not something which can be fast, because collectionreader designed for reading/filtering collections with provided filter query. It's impossible to determine the number of items in filtered collection in other way than reading and testing full collection, thats why #size is bad practice for using with collectionreader. It designed for sequential reading, not for random access.
On 31/08/2007, Burella Juan M. juan.burella@gmail.com wrote:
Hi list,
I have a indexed MagmaCollection ( it has about 11,000 objects). Ihave noticed that requesting the size to a MagmaCollectionReader takes a long time whereas the same requesting to a MagmaCollection doesn´t
For example:
"MagmaCollection>>size - fiirst evaluation" [ (magmaSession root at: #Serial) size ] timeToRun "answer about 525 milliseconds" "Note: magmaSession root at: #Serial answer a MagmaCollection"
"second evaluation" [ (magmaSession root at: #Serial) size ] timeToRun "answer about 1milliseconds"
"MagmaCollectionReader>>size first evaluation" [ ((magmaSession root at: #Serial) read: #issnString) size ] timeToRun "answer about 9798 milliseconds"
"second evaluation" [ ((magmaSession root at: #Serial) read: #issnString) size ] timeToRun "answer about 8992 milliseconds"
Any suggestions for reducing this time?
Thanks in advance. Juan Matias.
Magma mailing list Magma@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/magma
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.