hi. is there a way to maximize the cache to utilize "local power" to increase search performance?
i don't mind everything will be local, there is no security issue here in this case.
Hello,
Thank you for contacting us on that matter!
I do not believe this is currently possible, but let me verify with our engineering team just in case.
I will get back to you once I receive their response!
Best regards,
Gabriel Degrandpré
Hello,
Just to situate us a little bit, I would like to verify a few points.
Best regards,
Gabriel Degrandpré
thank you. i am talking about the quick search filter. it's very slow. we use sql.
when you search for something, you wait somewhere between 5 to 10 seconds to get a result. this is very tedious
Quick search shouldn't be so slow. To help me profile the performance and find the issue can you tell me about your data?
Best regards,
Stéfane Lavergne
Also, do you see a performance difference using the Quick Search vs the <Search> box (bottom left of the app)?
Stéfane Lavergne
Also, do you see a performance difference using the Quick Search vs the <Search> box (bottom left of the app)?
we have always used the quick search filter on the bottom left
this "heavy" search performance started a while ago. i can't put my finger onto when and why
Quick search shouldn't be so slow. To help me profile the performance and find the issue can you tell me about your data?
Best regards,
Thank you for the information.
By variables I'm talking about the usage of variables like $PARENT_NAME$ in entry names.
Is there a performance difference between a search text that filters down to only a few sessions vs many sessions (500+ sessions for example). By this I'm trying to figure out is your performance issue related to the tree view (refresh/display) or the actual search.
While I investigate can you please tell me what options you have checked in your quick search? Some of them may/will affect your performance.
Stéfane Lavergne
I think I figured it out.
I have a test repository where the search was taking about 5 seconds and now I got it down to sub-second (700ms). This will be available in the next v2021.2 release.
Best regards,
Stéfane Lavergne
OK, I'm done with all my performance changes. The upcoming release should be noticeably faster. In the case where it's not for your data set. I've added more profiling to help me narrow done the performance bottlenecks.
Give you an idea what I'm seeing on my end with somewhere 14000 folders & 4000 sessions.
Filter "test"
Before
TreeView.LoadConnectionList...
GetGroupInfos : 0 ms
BeginUpdate...
LoadConnectionInTreeNode...
ApplyFilter - Include : 0 ms
LoadConnectionInTreeNode : 6388 ms
PreCreateGroups : 0 ms
BeginUpdate : 6404 ms
TreeView.LoadConnectionList : 6405 ms
After
Apply Filter...
Filter : test
TreeView.LoadConnectionList...
GetGroupInfos : 0 ms
BeginUpdate...
LoadConnectionInTreeNode...
ApplyFilter - Include : 0 ms
LoadConnectionInTreeNode : 701 ms
PreCreateGroups : 0 ms
BeginUpdate : 728 ms
TreeView.LoadConnectionList : 728 ms
Apply Filter : 746 ms
As for the "clearing" of the filter (aka press the (x))
Before
TreeView.LoadConnectionList...
GetGroupInfos : 0 ms
BeginUpdate...
LoadConnectionInTreeNode : 940 ms
PreCreateGroups : 4567 ms - Count : 1
BeginUpdate : 5517 ms
TreeView.LoadConnectionList : 5517 ms
+ some other stuff not profiledAfter
Apply Filter...
Filter :
TreeView.LoadConnectionList...
GetGroupInfos : 0 ms
BeginUpdate...
LoadConnectionInTreeNode : 141 ms
PreCreateGroups : 496 ms - Count : 1
BeginUpdate : 650 ms
TreeView.LoadConnectionList : 650 ms
Load Expand States...
Expanded: 0 - Nodes : 18778
Nodes...
Expand : 4 ms - Count : 1
Collapse : 21 ms - Count : 20
Nodes : 26 ms
Load Expand States : 28 ms
Apply Filter : 682 msStéfane Lavergne
about this topic. the latest version is super fast! thank you!