File access speed
-
In order copy a physical file to a ram file I opened the physical file and pushed each line into the ram file, then on subsequent accesses, used the ram file. While I didn't take my stop watch out, there seemed to be little if any, improvement in speed. Is the primary benefit to using a ram file, the safety of the physical file?
It seems that the 10,000 loop through the database is slower then the first. Why? Can I do anything about ir?
I also notice that when debugging, if I
putsto display enough, my system hangs (stack overflow perhaps?), especially when I switch to another application. -
Seems to me these days that most HardDrives have an integrated read-write (RAM) buffer on-board, that is enabled by default. So I'd think you may not notice a difference unless you disable the drive's buffer.
-
Thanks, Dan, That make sense.
-
@honoluludesktop said:
I also notice that when debugging, if I puts to display enough, my system hangs (stack overflow perhaps?), especially when I switch to another application.
If you're generating a lot of debug lines, better to write them to a file instead of the Ruby Console.
-
In the old days that was easy "my_application my_parameters > temp.dat". OK, guess the way to do that is to code it as part of my_script.
-
You can do that also.
-
I can "my_application my_parameters > temp.dat"? How? Not with the command window?
-
Yes, using a command window:
Sketchup.exe > log.txtIf working in another directory, you need the full path to sketchup.exe:
"C:\Program Files\Google\Google SketchUp 8\Sketchup.exe" > log.txtThis works as long as the Ruby Console stays closed. When it is open, output will go there instead of the to the file.
-
All this time I labored under the belief that only old programs up to Win98 ran in the command window, and didn't ever try.
Advertisement