Bugzilla searches went down from "so-so" to "unusable"

[Michael Schwendt]

On Sun, 10 Aug 2008 09:29:30 -0500, Jerry Amundson wrote:

> On 8/10/08, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> > On Sat, 09 Aug 2008 21:21:07 -0430, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> >
> >> > > > With the older bugzilla, one also encountered those time-outs when
> >> > > > using machines with less than 2 GHz clock rates. With the new
> >> > > > bugzilla, the requirement for processor power has increased a lot.
> >> > >
> >> > > Processor power in the *client*?
> >> >
> >> > Yes.
> >>
> >> It's a web interface to a database. Is the database bigger or more
> >> complex than Expedia or Travelocity or Amazon? Does the interaction
> >> require more complex Javascript than Google Docs? I don't get it.
> >
> > It's not the database size. It's the complexity of the dynamic search
> > form. Multiple thousands of package names per several product versions,
> > for example.
> 
> I'll venture to guess that Expedia and Travelocity and Amazon have
> complex searches. ;-)

You don't understand. I don't refer the searching, but the web forms
and the client-side processing power that is needed to build them
dynamically with Ajax.

> There's more to it. Non-optimized code or SQL? Hardware? OS tuning?

We're talking past eachother. The problems with bugzilla are on the
_client_.