Web Design Discussion > General Web Design Discussion
region.php and system.php
bejacob:
I tend to ignore the map when looking at the region.php page. I use all the existing tables depending on what info I'm seeking at any given time, but will open a separate mapview.php tab for the same region and switch back and forth as needed. On the system.php page, I tend to look at the map a little more, but since there is an option to click "View Larger Map" at the top of the page, I think it may better to ignore the map at the top of the page too. The wait time to load a large system or region in mapview isn't really a concern for me. It takes as long as it takes (which so far hasn't been too long). Having a link that will open the mapview with the system or region would be good enough for me instead of having the map load in the frame a the top. That would save a few steps to open another browser tab and find the region/system map I want (which is what I usually do now anyway).
In both the region and system pages, the most important thing for me is to find out which routes I'm closest to clinching or haven't driven at all. The map at the top of the page doesn't help much with that.
I'll have to give a bit more thought as to whether there is additional info that might be useful on either page. Nothing immediately comes to mind.
Jim:
--- Quote from: yakra on December 31, 2020, 02:56:22 am ---Jim, ISTR you posted in the last couple days about changing some MySQL settings and getting faster load times (on findroute?) but I can't find the thread. Got a link? What did you change?
--- End quote ---
Within the last month, I turned off some logging that was resulting in a large DB table I was never going to look at and taking up valuable space on the /var partition.
yakra:
--- Quote from: Jim on December 31, 2020, 10:52:32 am ---Within the last month, I turned off some logging that was resulting in a large DB table I was never going to look at and taking up valuable space on the /var partition.
--- End quote ---
It's probably something I don't need either. What setting was it?
Jim:
--- Quote from: yakra on December 31, 2020, 12:08:26 pm ---
--- Quote from: Jim on December 31, 2020, 10:52:32 am ---Within the last month, I turned off some logging that was resulting in a large DB table I was never going to look at and taking up valuable space on the /var partition.
--- End quote ---
It's probably something I don't need either. What setting was it?
--- End quote ---
I set slow-query-log to 0 in my.cnf. The table it created was several GB in size.
There are probably other settings to be optimized in there based on TM's usage patterns.
vdeane:
--- Quote from: yakra on December 31, 2020, 02:56:22 am ---It's been enough years since I've looked at CHM that I can't remember how it was laid out. ISTR the map .gifs (generated by PHP) being 700x700 and that's about it.
I was almost thinking something along the lines of frames or iframes or divs or however it's done, to keep the map in place while the user scrolls around the table(s), but...
Keeping the map its current height would leave little to no room below for the table.
I'm unsure how practicable displaying map & table side-by-side would be, especially for those running lower resolutions. I was at 1280x960 for many years.
I don't have a good solution to offer. Maybe CHM worked as TM does now, where we would just scroll the map off the top of the screen.
--- End quote ---
CHM only required the map to be scrolled past once it was displayed. There was a drop-down for which map to display (as the CHM maps couldn't be zoomed in or out, one had to select between the statewide map and closer-in maps from around the region).
I like the idea of using a check-box to show/hide the map, but maybe that's a bit much? When michih proposed his tabs, I was originally thinking switching what was displayed with JavaScript, but it seems that he's actually envisioning separate pages.
Yeah, displaying it sideways wouldn't work, unless the CSS was responsive enough to be able to switch to the current view if there isn't a certain width available (FYI, the resolution on my desktop (Antares) is "only" 1600 x 900, and I don't keep Chrome maximized, either; my laptop (Vista) has more room with 1920 x 1080).
--- Quote ---Comparing loading times between region.php & mapview.php for a couple large states, the newer mapview code loads a lot faster. (More efficient SQL queries?) It'd be nice to similarly improve region.php.
Mapview does redline one CPU core on my client machine the entire time it's loading, whereas region.php just has a short burst of activity after the data comes over the network and it renders the map & table.
If we could get the faster loading times along without all the CPU use, that'd be gravy. (Or is the CPU use a necessary side effect of JSON/AJAX?) If we can't have that, then I'll take the faster load times of course.
Any performance improvement from using MySQL 8.0? Unclear. Mapview load times vary quite a bit on lab2 between successive loads.
--- End quote ---
Interesting. I wonder when that happened. I remember Mapview taking a significantly longer time than region/system for everything, so I've been avoiding unless I wanted to use the color by traveler count feature or the scrollable version. I did some tests today for various regions/systems and put the results below (the results are the same for both Antares and Vista, at least for NY; I didn't feel the need to re-run everything, and quite frankly, I have no desire to ever load usaus in mapview ever again).
--- Code: ---KY R - 1m 15s
KY M - 31s
NY R - 17s
NY M - 10s
DC R - 2s
DC M - 1s
usaus S - 15s
usaus M - 8m 18s
usai S - 10s
usai M - 50s
usaky S - 2s
usaky M - 20s
usany S - 2s
usany M - 5s
canqca S - 0s
canqca M - 1s
--- End code ---
Looks like region is now significantly faster in mapview, but system is still significantly slower. Given how long it takes to load usai and especially usaus (which resulted in multiple Chrome popups asking me to kill the page (!)), I do not think it would be a good idea to remove maps from system at this time.
I also decided to do a test on my phone. NY took 1m 45s to load with Mapview and only 24s to load with region. Given this, and that Mapview isn't exactly phone accessible (not that TM as a whole is, but Mapview is especially bad), it would be a good idea for the maps to remain in region as well.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version