Real Software Forums

The forum for Real Studio and other Real Software products.
[ REAL Software Website | Board Index ]
It is currently Thu Sep 20, 2018 1:25 am
xojo

All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Web-Edition Performance...
PostPosted: Tue Apr 02, 2013 10:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 2:27 pm
Posts: 38
Why is WE soo slow? Even as standallone-version it's way slower than PHP, Python, Perl or AJAX based systems.
RS is marketing WE with the argument that it's faster than for example PHP because it's a compiled binary,
but that's not true.

Loading images, large ListBoxes, etc. is far too slow for productive use!
I guess it needs to be about 40x faster to be usable. 100x faster to compete with the competition.
Is this gonna change in the future? Which increase of speed can we expect?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Web-Edition Performance...
PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 12:36 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2011 3:02 am
Posts: 1236
Location: Jönköping, Sweden
The "speed" or responsiveness as I think you mean is largely dependent on the hardware it's hosted on and it's bandwidth :)
I'm currently developing an inhouse production system that's run on our Ubuntu VPS.
    2 x Intel Xeon
    CPU E5540 2.53Ghz
    1GB RAM
    Stand-Alone build
I'd say it's responsiveness is just fine :)

Could you elaborate on what's "slow" for you? :)

_________________
Image http://www.linkedin.com/in/albinkiland
Dev. iMac 27" + 2x22" LG (2.8GHz Intel Core i7, 12GB RAM, 120GB SSD) OS X 10.8
Xojo Pro 2013r1


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Web-Edition Performance...
PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 5:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 6:57 am
Posts: 569
Location: Sydney Australia
There is also a huge difference between a compiled web app and one you test by clicking run.

_________________
Regards

Chris Musty
http://www.specialised.net.au
-----------------------------------------------
if date.shortdate >= 4/6/2013 then
msgbox "I am using Xojo - YAY!!!"
else
msgbox "I am still using RS 12r2.1 - BOO!!!"
end if

Win 8 Pro, Ubuntu 13.04, Mint and Debian(gnome and KDE)
AWS for Hosting and TKL for AMI's


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Web-Edition Performance...
PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 7:44 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 2:27 pm
Posts: 38
We host the app on our Server, which is an Intel-Xeon 8 Core machine (2.7 GHz) with 64 GB RAM.
The Server is connected with a 1GBit Backbone.
It takes about 4 Seconds to show 16 Images.

http://mediareader.de


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Web-Edition Performance...
PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 7:53 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2012 4:54 am
Posts: 264
Location: Herts, UK
What are format (PNG,JPEG etc) and sizes are you images?

_________________
Real Studio 2012 R2
SysInfo
BackTrack Linux/BackBox Linux/Debian Lenny/Windows 7/Windows 8/OpenWRT/OpenBSD
& Yes it's me in the Avatar


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Web-Edition Performance...
PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 8:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2011 4:20 am
Posts: 84
offlinebouncer wrote:
Why is WE soo slow? Even as standallone-version it's way slower than PHP, Python, Perl or AJAX based systems.
RS is marketing WE with the argument that it's faster than for example PHP because it's a compiled binary,
but that's not true.

Loading images, large ListBoxes, etc. is far too slow for productive use!
I guess it needs to be about 40x faster to be usable. 100x faster to compete with the competition.
Is this gonna change in the future? Which increase of speed can we expect?



I presume the site you are talking about is: http://mediareader.de

It takes very long time to load your picture first time, but I also noticed lot of errors are displayed in Firebug (plugin for firefox).
But when I use the button on top < >. That seems to be very fast.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Web-Edition Performance...
PostPosted: Wed Apr 03, 2013 1:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 11:15 am
Posts: 712
Location: Southern California
It looks like you're loading images into Realbasic and then setting a WebImageView to a Picture. When you do this WebImageView automatically selects PNG format. Line art compresses very well in PNG, but photographs hardly compress at all. You're therefore sending image files that are probably 10x too large or larger.

Do one of the following instead:

* Store your images on your server as jpegs with the smallest size that's acceptable. Set the WebImageViews to the URLs.

* Load the images into Realbasic and explicitly create WebPicture objects using the constructor that lets you specify JPEG, and set the WebImageViews to those WebPictures. Unfortunately it looks like you can't set the quality level, though even a high quality level will result in a smaller image to download then PNG.

My Web Custom Controls toolkit includes a WebImageViewTD which lets you explicitly control JPEG quality, along with other enhancements over the built in control.

_________________
Daniel L. Taylor
Custom Controls for Real Studio WE!
Visit: http://www.webcustomcontrols.com/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Web-Edition Performance...
PostPosted: Thu Apr 04, 2013 8:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 2:27 pm
Posts: 38
Thanks for the Tipp. I've changed the code and it now loads the images faster.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group