Better (?) <txp:link_to_prev/next />

etc · 2013-01-15 15:32:11

Current (4.5.4) <txp:link_to_prev/next /> tags do not respect advanced sort orders, like sort="Section, Posted desc" or sort="DATE(LastMod)". Following this discussion, I have made some modifications in getNextPrev() and getNeighbour() functions to fix this issue.

It seems to work and is even faster than before on my server (but slower on my laptop). ~~If someone is interested, the code (wrapped in a plugin) is below.~~

Last edited by etc (2013-03-16 11:17:45)

etc · 2013-01-21 14:41:01

OK, let it stay in the territory of plugins for the moment.

jstubbs · 2013-01-21 14:48:38

Hasn’t Robert confirmed it as a defect? Did you send in a patch?

jstubbs · 2013-01-21 14:52:17

Mmmm. My own “issue” regarding if_section problems on 4.5.4 seems to have been removed..

Bloke · 2013-01-21 14:59:01

jstubbs wrote:

Mmmm. My own “issue” regarding if_section problems on 4.5.4 seems to have been removed..

Seems it was invalid markup that might have been causing it.

etc · 2013-01-21 15:06:16

jstubbs wrote:

Hasn’t Robert confirmed it as a defect? Did you send in a patch?

He did, and I have proposed a patch, but this is a new, more powerful solution, that respects any sort order. I have not submitted it as a patch because it needs some performance testing before. On fast servers its faster than the native one, but slower on my laptop. If some dev people are reading, I find that retrieving all IDs with

SELECT ID FROM textpattern ORDER BY some_sort

in some sorted_list takes about the same time that

SELECT ID, other_stuff FROM textpattern WHERE some_field>threshold ORDER BY some_sort

Seeking for the current article position $pos with array_seek and for its neighbors with SELECT ... WHERE ID IN ($sorted_list[$pos-1], $sorted_list[$pos+1]) is lightning fast, using the primary index.

But many testers are better than one.

jstubbs · 2013-01-21 15:13:52

Bloke wrote:

Seems it was invalid markup that might have been causing it.

That’s funny, changing the status of an issue to invalid renders it invisible, so I never saw Jukka’s reply. Some markup may have been invalid but I had strange results even with a very basic if - else scenario. Maybe I’m getting old! Anyway, back on topic. Sorry Oleg.

wet · 2013-01-21 15:56:59

etc wrote:

because it needs some performance testing before.

You might want to try your approach for varying amounts of articles.

If I’ve read your code correctly, it employs array_search to lookup neighbours in an array of all articles matching the current list criteria like section, time, keywords.

It seems that array_search’s runtime depends on the size of the $haystack array and grows linear with the size of the haystack. I.e., more articles, less performance.

It might be interesting how the current core approach compares to your plugin when it has to look into large article sets.

etc · 2013-01-21 17:00:57

wet wrote:

It seems that array_search’s runtime depends on the size of the $haystack array and grows linear with the size of the haystack.

Probably, but isn’t that true for SELECT ... WHERE ... ORDER BY ... query? The core approach uses two of them, the plugin takes one SELECT and one array_search.

It might be interesting how the current core approach compares to your plugin when it has to look into large article sets.

I did some testing, in a “typical” case (good LAMP server, about 250 articles) the plugin is ~25% faster, but slower on my laptop site copy. In average, the runtimes are of the same magnitude, but I have no very large site at hand to test.

colak · 2013-01-21 17:27:48

etc wrote:

… but I have no very large site at hand to test.

Hi Oleg, one of my sites has over 1500 entries. If you want and promise you will not bring it to its knees I can grand you access. The problem is that it is not using the latest txp due to the postmaster plugin.

Last edited by colak (2013-01-21 17:29:50)

Textpattern CMS

Textpattern CMS support forum

#1 2013-01-15 15:32:11

Better (?) <txp:link_to_prev/next />

#2 2013-01-21 14:41:01

Re: Better (?) <txp:link_to_prev/next />

#3 2013-01-21 14:48:38

Re: Better (?) <txp:link_to_prev/next />

#4 2013-01-21 14:52:17

Re: Better (?) <txp:link_to_prev/next />

#5 2013-01-21 14:59:01

Re: Better (?) <txp:link_to_prev/next />

#6 2013-01-21 15:06:16

Re: Better (?) <txp:link_to_prev/next />

#7 2013-01-21 15:13:52

Re: Better (?) <txp:link_to_prev/next />

#8 2013-01-21 15:56:59

Re: Better (?) <txp:link_to_prev/next />

#9 2013-01-21 17:00:57

Re: Better (?) <txp:link_to_prev/next />

#10 2013-01-21 17:27:48

Re: Better (?) <txp:link_to_prev/next />

Board footer