Dynasty Question

randomlefty10 · 06-02-2005, 05:01 AM

Ok, so I had this grand idea to do a dynasty starting from 1800 going with 24 static teams and no financials up through about 1885 or so and then start importing real players all the way through to 2004 or so. This way
A) Using normalized DB, there's cross-era comparison
B) There's 100 years of history already on the books when the deadball era players begin

and do this all with catobase.

However, it seems that after logging in 85+ years of data, catobase really starts to slow down and now it takes the better part of 30 min to log in each season.

So please vote in poll.

Dagrims · 06-02-2005, 08:14 AM

30 minutes doesn't sound like a long time to me. I probably wouldn't feel as though Catobase was taking too long until it was about a four hour chore. It's crucial for my leagues.

Benno · 06-02-2005, 10:23 PM

I agree, 30 minutes isn't long (for Catobase that is). How long does it take for you to output the HTML? That's the real killer.

The concept is great so I say go for it. Be interesting to see how the "fictionals" stack up against real players.

canadiancreed · 06-02-2005, 10:25 PM

you're doing quite well actually. I've foudn teh killer is it's generation of all the static HTML pages

metsgeek · 06-02-2005, 10:56 PM

30 minutes? It was taking me 20+ hours per season after only 20 seasons. Keep going.

congobeast · 06-03-2005, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by metsgeek

30 minutes? It was taking me 20+ hours per season after only 20 seasons. Keep going.

Jeebus, Petey.
Private was not instructed and did not know that you could run Cato on a TRS-80, Commodore 64 or Lynx.

I guess they're making PC-emulators for those now?

randomlefty10 · 06-03-2005, 09:44 PM

well based on the response, I'll stick with it. I'm catoing 1892 right now, started in 1800 so after 1899 is when I'll pick up with the commentary. I should be able to get there tonight, however, it might take me an entire day of CPU time to do the HTML

View Poll Results: ?
Keep going with it, the idea sounds sweet	13	76.47%
Stop at 1900 or so, do a recap of the league then kill it	0	0%
Start over with less pre years to avoid the problem	2	11.76%
Eat a klondike bar	6	35.29%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 17. You may not vote on this poll

06-02-2005, 05:01 AM	#1
randomlefty10 All Star Starter Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 1,438	Dynasty Question Ok, so I had this grand idea to do a dynasty starting from 1800 going with 24 static teams and no financials up through about 1885 or so and then start importing real players all the way through to 2004 or so. This way A) Using normalized DB, there's cross-era comparison B) There's 100 years of history already on the books when the deadball era players begin and do this all with catobase. However, it seems that after logging in 85+ years of data, catobase really starts to slow down and now it takes the better part of 30 min to log in each season. So please vote in poll. __________________ Find your passion, embrace it, and leave the world a better place than you found it.

06-02-2005, 08:14 AM	#2
Dagrims Hall Of Famer Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Orlando, FL Posts: 3,827	30 minutes doesn't sound like a long time to me. I probably wouldn't feel as though Catobase was taking too long until it was about a four hour chore. It's crucial for my leagues. __________________ "Read books, get brain."

06-02-2005, 10:25 PM	#4
canadiancreed Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 11,660	you're doing quite well actually. I've foudn teh killer is it's generation of all the static HTML pages __________________ PT21 PT22

06-02-2005, 10:56 PM	#5
metsgeek Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Norwood, MA Posts: 5,450	30 minutes? It was taking me 20+ hours per season after only 20 seasons. Keep going. __________________ Commissioner - PBRL - Just finished 2009 109 seasons and still running strong!!!

06-02-2005, 10:23 PM	#3
Benno Bat Boy Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 2	I agree, 30 minutes isn't long (for Catobase that is). How long does it take for you to output the HTML? That's the real killer. The concept is great so I say go for it. Be interesting to see how the "fictionals" stack up against real players.

06-03-2005, 09:44 PM	#7
randomlefty10 All Star Starter Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 1,438	well based on the response, I'll stick with it. I'm catoing 1892 right now, started in 1800 so after 1899 is when I'll pick up with the commentary. I should be able to get there tonight, however, it might take me an entire day of CPU time to do the HTML