[FX.php List] Showing last related record - sort in FM or just PHP?

[Joel Shapiro]

Hi Dan

I'd be happy to do it.  Any good ways to do a real time test  (other  
than counting one one thousand two one thousand... ;) ?

-Joel


On Oct 17, 2006, at 1:31 PM, DC wrote:

> hi joel,
>
> since you have your testing architecture set up already i'd love it  
> if you would take your testing one step further and enlighten us  
> all about this issue since we all seem to be guessing and  
> thumbnailing it and it would be cool to know exactly what the  
> tradeoffs are when you give certain jobs to FMP:
>
> speed comparison between an unstored calc field that plucks off the  
> 'last' record from a relationship and sending related records back  
> through FX.php's XML processing. the test would have to be made  
> with a range of different related record numbers starting at 1  
> related records and maybe going up to 1000.
>
> my assumption is that unstored calc field will be slightly slower  
> when there aren't too many related records, but with many related  
> records, the overhead of processing them in WPE and XML will start  
> to get slow.
>
> my question is at what number of related records does the XML  
> processing go slower than the unstored related calc field?
>
> thanks!
> dan
>
> On Oct 17, 2006, at 4:22 PM, Joel Shapiro wrote:
>
>> Thanks Dale
>>
>> I didn't know about end(), so that's great.
>>
>> In quick testing on my local development machine (running FMSA as  
>> well as FMP and everything else), I couldn't see any real time  
>> difference between FM's sending up to 1000 related records (just  
>> for testing) sorted vs. unsorted -- for 4 parent records returned.  
>> I had thought it'd be slower for FM to sort before sending, but it  
>> seems negligible.  (And I will sort the relationship -- or even  
>> just the portal(?) -- just to catch any out-of-order entries, as  
>> Steve warned of.)
>>
>> Thanks all!
>>
>> -Joel
>>
>>
>> On Oct 16, 2006, at 6:15 PM, Dale Bengston wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Joel,
>>>
>>> Well, if your relationship is sorted last-to-first, it will be  
>>> element 0 of the related field array, so you can just reference  
>>> that explicitly:
>>>
>>> 	echo $value['relationship::myField'][0];
>>>
>>> If your relationship is not sorted, you can easily find the last  
>>> element with the PHP end function:
>>>
>>> 	echo end($value['relationship::myField']);
>>>
>>> I like to use PHP to do as much of the work as possible. No  
>>> unstored calc fields necessary here.
>>>
>>> Dale
>>>
>>> On Oct 16, 2006, at 7:31 PM, Joel Shapiro wrote:
>>>
>>>> Great.  Thanks Steve!
>>>>
>>>> I'll plan on returning all related records (by default) and then  
>>>> sorting in php to display only the one I want.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> -Joel
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Oct 16, 2006, at 5:16 PM, Steve Winter wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Joel,
>>>>>
>>>>>>> my best advice, sort in fmp in the relationship definition.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> but if the WPE will spit back *all* related records regardless,
>>>>>> wouldn't it be faster to have FM return all the data unsorted  
>>>>>> and do
>>>>>> the sorting within PHP?
>>>>>
>>>>> Probably... if you were actually going to do some form of sort,  
>>>>> then it
>>>>> would most likely be quicker to do it in php. If it was a sort  
>>>>> order
>>>>> applied to the relationship I don't think it will make any  
>>>>> difference...
>>>>>
>>>>>>>  if you want to get really trick and you are sure you only ever
>>>>>>> need one (most recent) record you can make a calc field that  
>>>>>>> just
>>>>>>> returns the last record. that way PHP doesn't have to  
>>>>>>> transform a
>>>>>>> bunch of XML data that you'll never use.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've heard it's optimal to not have calc fields on the web  
>>>>>> layout if
>>>>>> possible (for speed), but do you think that in this case it could
>>>>>> still be faster than returning all related records?
>>>>>
>>>>> Personally I think this would be the slowest option... unstored
>>>>> calculation  fields are going to be slower for the wpe to  
>>>>> process than all
>>>>> of the related records (IMHO)
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers
>>>>> Steve
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> FX.php_List mailing list
>>>>> FX.php_List at mail.iviking.org
>>>>> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> FX.php_List mailing list
>>>> FX.php_List at mail.iviking.org
>>>> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> FX.php_List mailing list
>>> FX.php_List at mail.iviking.org
>>> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> FX.php_List mailing list
>> FX.php_List at mail.iviking.org
>> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list
>
> _______________________________________________
> FX.php_List mailing list
> FX.php_List at mail.iviking.org
> http://www.iviking.org/mailman/listinfo/fx.php_list