Buying an upload component immediately

[Mike]

WOW. Big difference. I have been using ASPUpload for a good while. Looks
like I finally made a correct decision. and Ray please don't post
attachments;-)

Mike


"Ray at <%=sLocation%>" <myfirstname at lane34 dot com> wrote in message
news:Ow$SrBNmDHA.2012@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...

> I'm going to by hypocritical and post an attachment. Please don't kill

me.

>
> I did my "due-dilligence" (I hate that) and tested ASP Upload against a
> script so I can talk someone into spending a few hundred dollars on some
> licenses. I'm attaching the results for those who were arguing earlier.
> The results are ridiculous.
>
> FYI, Server specs:
> Compaq Proliant 1850R
> Dual PIII 500 MHz
> 384 MB RAM
> 3 9.1 GB SCSI drives in RAID 5
> Windows 2000 Server SP3
>
> Ray at work
>
>
>
>

[TomB]

How do you find those 5000 series faq's at aspfaq?

"Ray at <%=sLocation%>" <myfirstname at lane34 dot com> wrote in message
news:Ow$SrBNmDHA.2012@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...

> I'm going to by hypocritical and post an attachment. Please don't kill

me.

>
> I did my "due-dilligence" (I hate that) and tested ASP Upload against a
> script so I can talk someone into spending a few hundred dollars on some
> licenses. I'm attaching the results for those who were arguing earlier.
> The results are ridiculous.
>
> FYI, Server specs:
> Compaq Proliant 1850R
> Dual PIII 500 MHz
> 384 MB RAM
> 3 9.1 GB SCSI drives in RAID 5
> Windows 2000 Server SP3
>
> Ray at work
>
>
>
>

[Chris Barber]

Bugger me to coin a phrase, that's dramatic! I would never have expected
such a significant difference. Does the component pre-compress the upload
files perhaps?

Chris.

"Ray at <%=sLocation%>" <myfirstname at lane34 dot com> wrote in message
news:Ow$SrBNmDHA.2012@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
I'm going to by hypocritical and post an attachment. Please don't kill me.

I did my "due-dilligence" (I hate that) and tested ASP Upload against a
script so I can talk someone into spending a few hundred dollars on some
licenses. I'm attaching the results for those who were arguing earlier.
The results are ridiculous.

FYI, Server specs:
Compaq Proliant 1850R
Dual PIII 500 MHz
384 MB RAM
3 9.1 GB SCSI drives in RAID 5
Windows 2000 Server SP3

Ray at work

[Ray at]

What do you mean? How do I find them? I don't ever really look for them.
There's 5001, 5002, 5003, 5004, and 5005 that I know of. Are you going to
have a smart-ass reply? [:

Ray at work

"TomB" <shuckle@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:uKTxCjNmDHA.3288@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...

> How do you find those 5000 series faq's at aspfaq?
>

[TomB]

That was my intent. But they don't seem to be listed

"Ray at <%=sLocation%>" <myfirstname at lane34 dot com> wrote in message
news:uGNfmlNmDHA.2312@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...

> What do you mean? How do I find them? I don't ever really look for them.
> There's 5001, 5002, 5003, 5004, and 5005 that I know of. Are you going to
> have a smart-ass reply? [:
>
> Ray at work
>
> "TomB" <shuckle@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:uKTxCjNmDHA.3288@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...

> > How do you find those 5000 series faq's at aspfaq?
> >

>
>

[Aaron Bertrand - MVP]

> Bugger me to coin a phrase, that's dramatic! I would never have expected

> such a significant difference. Does the component pre-compress the upload
> files perhaps?

Impossible, the file is on the client, the component is on the server.
Further still, the file is merely sent to the server in the HTTP stream...
so the component can't do anything with it until it starts receiving it...

Perhaps it's the rebuilding of the file where the component excels?

[Ray at]

"Aaron Bertrand - MVP" <aaron@TRASHaspfaq.com> wrote in message
news:%23osxCHOmDHA.2436@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...

>
> Perhaps it's the rebuilding of the file where the component excels?

It's gotta be something like that, I guess. These numbers are insane, and I
didn't believe them at first, but sure enough the files were uploaded and
are fine.

Ray at work

[Aaron Bertrand - MVP]

> I'm attaching the results for those who were arguing earlier.

I wasn't arguing... I merely suggested that it might not be the only place
you investigate speed issues. Then what's-his-head came in and told me I
was an idiot for suggesting that script will always beat a component (which
I never said) and that I am always running my mouth and a bunch of
unnecessary ad hominen attacks. Ah well.

We deal mainly with small files (1-20k), and we did a plethora of tests and
found very few performance deltas. The smaller files, as you found, were
actually faster with the script-based solution. I would bet it starts to
break down at one of the magic numbers, e.g. 16k or 32k. We had no reason
to test beyond that size, since we have limitations on file sizes for this
specific app anyway...

As someone else mentioned in the previous thread, there is no "this is THE
best way, I am smarter than you, nya nya" answer to any scenario in
development. There is always an "it depends..."

[Aaron Bertrand - MVP]

> It's gotta be something like that, I guess. These numbers are insane, and
I

> didn't believe them at first, but sure enough the files were uploaded and
> are fine.

Maybe what's-his-head tweaked the component to rig the tests, in a further
effort to try to make me look like an ass. :-)

[Ray at]

It worked. :P

Ray at work

"Aaron Bertrand - MVP" <aaron@TRASHaspfaq.com> wrote in message
news:OxfdgMOmDHA.688@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...

> > It's gotta be something like that, I guess. These numbers are insane,

and

> I

> > didn't believe them at first, but sure enough the files were uploaded

and

> > are fine.

>
> Maybe what's-his-head tweaked the component to rig the tests, in a further
> effort to try to make me look like an ass. :-)
>
>

[Chris Barber]

I did wonder and presumed that there wouldn't be anything funny going on on
the client side.
Still, amazing differences between script and component based.

Chris.

"Aaron Bertrand - MVP" <aaron@TRASHaspfaq.com> wrote in message
news:%23osxCHOmDHA.2436@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...

> Bugger me to coin a phrase, that's dramatic! I would never have expected
> such a significant difference. Does the component pre-compress the upload
> files perhaps?

Impossible, the file is on the client, the component is on the server.
Further still, the file is merely sent to the server in the HTTP stream...
so the component can't do anything with it until it starts receiving it...

Perhaps it's the rebuilding of the file where the component excels?

[Chris Barber]

I'd hardly call 22Kb (that includes the post) an attachment. :)
More like an addendum?

And ... it was an amazing result anyway.

Thanks for taking the time to do the test Ray.

Chris.

"Mike" <Mike@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:OgmjRJNmDHA.2432@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...
WOW. Big difference. I have been using ASPUpload for a good while. Looks
like I finally made a correct decision. and Ray please don't post
attachments;-)

Mike


"Ray at <%=sLocation%>" <myfirstname at lane34 dot com> wrote in message
news:Ow$SrBNmDHA.2012@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...

> I'm going to by hypocritical and post an attachment. Please don't kill

me.

>
> I did my "due-dilligence" (I hate that) and tested ASP Upload against a
> script so I can talk someone into spending a few hundred dollars on some
> licenses. I'm attaching the results for those who were arguing earlier.
> The results are ridiculous.
>
> FYI, Server specs:
> Compaq Proliant 1850R
> Dual PIII 500 MHz
> 384 MB RAM
> 3 9.1 GB SCSI drives in RAID 5
> Windows 2000 Server SP3
>
> Ray at work
>
>
>
>

[Mark Schupp]

"Chris Barber" <chris@blue-canoe.co.uk.NOSPAM> wrote in message
news:uyFZUhNmDHA.2820@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...

> Bugger me to coin a phrase, that's dramatic! I would never have expected
> such a significant difference. Does the component pre-compress the upload
> files perhaps?
>
> Chris.

Actually the results are to be expected if you look at all of the work being
done in script to get around the fact that VBScript cannot deal well with
binary data. I poked around a little for curiosity's sake in one of the
"pure ASP upload" scripts and saw the following:

Dim biData
biData = Request.BinaryRead(Request.TotalBytes)
'Careful! It's binary! So, let's change it into
`something a bit more manageable.
For nIndex = 1 to LenB(biData)
PostData = PostData & Chr(AscB(MidB(biData,nIndex,1)))
Next

That is plenty of evidence to me that the upload would be very very slow.

--
Mark Schupp
Head of Development
Integrity eLearning
[url]www.ielearning.com[/url]

>
> "Ray at <%=sLocation%>" <myfirstname at lane34 dot com> wrote in message
> news:Ow$SrBNmDHA.2012@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> I'm going to by hypocritical and post an attachment. Please don't kill

me.

>
> I did my "due-dilligence" (I hate that) and tested ASP Upload against a
> script so I can talk someone into spending a few hundred dollars on some
> licenses. I'm attaching the results for those who were arguing earlier.
> The results are ridiculous.
>
> FYI, Server specs:
> Compaq Proliant 1850R
> Dual PIII 500 MHz
> 384 MB RAM
> 3 9.1 GB SCSI drives in RAID 5
> Windows 2000 Server SP3
>
> Ray at work
>
>
>
>
>

[Adrian Forbes [ASP MVP]]

The thing to remember about script vs com is that anything that iterately
calls a COM object is going to have its performance destroyed by ASP, add to
that the fact that compiled code is faster anyway. I'd never recommend a
scripted upload for files over much more than 1mb.

"Ray at <%=sLocation%>" <myfirstname at lane34 dot com> wrote in message
news:Ow$SrBNmDHA.2012@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...

> I'm going to by hypocritical and post an attachment. Please don't kill

me.

>
> I did my "due-dilligence" (I hate that) and tested ASP Upload against a
> script so I can talk someone into spending a few hundred dollars on some
> licenses. I'm attaching the results for those who were arguing earlier.
> The results are ridiculous.
>
> FYI, Server specs:
> Compaq Proliant 1850R
> Dual PIII 500 MHz
> 384 MB RAM
> 3 9.1 GB SCSI drives in RAID 5
> Windows 2000 Server SP3
>
> Ray at work
>
>
>
>

[Adrian Forbes [ASP MVP]]

You can cheat and convert the binary data to ASCII data using ADO :) It
means processing the data is faster but you have an asp->ado->asp hit that,
for larger files, really slows you down.

"Mark Schupp" <mschupp@ielearning.com> wrote in message
news:%23GSZ3NPmDHA.1284@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...

> "Chris Barber" <chris@blue-canoe.co.uk.NOSPAM> wrote in message
> news:uyFZUhNmDHA.2820@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...

> > Bugger me to coin a phrase, that's dramatic! I would never have expected
> > such a significant difference. Does the component pre-compress the

upload

> > files perhaps?
> >
> > Chris.

>
> Actually the results are to be expected if you look at all of the work

being

> done in script to get around the fact that VBScript cannot deal well with
> binary data. I poked around a little for curiosity's sake in one of the
> "pure ASP upload" scripts and saw the following:
>
> Dim biData
> biData = Request.BinaryRead(Request.TotalBytes)
> 'Careful! It's binary! So, let's change it into
> `something a bit more manageable.
> For nIndex = 1 to LenB(biData)
> PostData = PostData & Chr(AscB(MidB(biData,nIndex,1)))
> Next
>
> That is plenty of evidence to me that the upload would be very very slow.
>
> --
> Mark Schupp
> Head of Development
> Integrity eLearning
> [url]www.ielearning.com[/url]
>
>

> >
> > "Ray at <%=sLocation%>" <myfirstname at lane34 dot com> wrote in message
> > news:Ow$SrBNmDHA.2012@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
> > I'm going to by hypocritical and post an attachment. Please don't kill

> me.

> >
> > I did my "due-dilligence" (I hate that) and tested ASP Upload against a
> > script so I can talk someone into spending a few hundred dollars on some
> > licenses. I'm attaching the results for those who were arguing earlier.
> > The results are ridiculous.
> >
> > FYI, Server specs:
> > Compaq Proliant 1850R
> > Dual PIII 500 MHz
> > 384 MB RAM
> > 3 9.1 GB SCSI drives in RAID 5
> > Windows 2000 Server SP3
> >
> > Ray at work
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

>
>

[Stefan Berglund]

On Thu, 23 Oct 2003 01:54:43 +0100, "Adrian Forbes [ASP MVP]"
<sorry@noemail.zzz> wrote:
in <uQWo#EQmDHA.2244@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl>

>You can cheat and convert the binary data to ASCII data using ADO :) It
>means processing the data is faster but you have an asp->ado->asp hit that,
>for larger files, really slows you down.

Is there some reason you can't just stream it in binary like you
can downloads?

[grw]

Interesting results, but what was the script? (:


"Ray at <%=sLocation%>" <myfirstname at lane34 dot com> wrote in message
news:Ow$SrBNmDHA.2012@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...

> I'm going to by hypocritical and post an attachment. Please don't kill

me.

>
> I did my "due-dilligence" (I hate that) and tested ASP Upload against a
> script so I can talk someone into spending a few hundred dollars on some
> licenses. I'm attaching the results for those who were arguing earlier.
> The results are ridiculous.
>
> FYI, Server specs:
> Compaq Proliant 1850R
> Dual PIII 500 MHz
> 384 MB RAM
> 3 9.1 GB SCSI drives in RAID 5
> Windows 2000 Server SP3
>
> Ray at work
>
>
>
>

[Ray at]

Well, the script came from this link back when there was actually code
there. [url]http://www.aspzone.com/articles/john/aspUpload/[/url] Now it's like spam
for a cell phone page or something.

Ray at work

"grw" <none@none.com> wrote in message
news:ezkRdrRmDHA.1764@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...

> Interesting results, but what was the script? (:
>
>
> "Ray at <%=sLocation%>" <myfirstname at lane34 dot com> wrote in message
> news:Ow$SrBNmDHA.2012@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...

> > I'm going to by hypocritical and post an attachment. Please don't kill

> me.

> >
> > I did my "due-dilligence" (I hate that) and tested ASP Upload against a
> > script so I can talk someone into spending a few hundred dollars on some
> > licenses. I'm attaching the results for those who were arguing earlier.
> > The results are ridiculous.
> >
> > FYI, Server specs:
> > Compaq Proliant 1850R
> > Dual PIII 500 MHz
> > 384 MB RAM
> > 3 9.1 GB SCSI drives in RAID 5
> > Windows 2000 Server SP3
> >
> > Ray at work
> >
> >
> >
> >

>
>

[Jeff Cochran]

On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 15:12:19 -0400, "Ray at <%=sLocation%>"
<myfirstname at lane34 dot com> wrote:

>I'm going to by hypocritical and post an attachment. Please don't kill me.
>
>I did my "due-dilligence" (I hate that) and tested ASP Upload against a
>script so I can talk someone into spending a few hundred dollars on some
>licenses. I'm attaching the results for those who were arguing earlier.
>The results are ridiculous.
>
>FYI, Server specs:
>Compaq Proliant 1850R
>Dual PIII 500 MHz
>384 MB RAM
>3 9.1 GB SCSI drives in RAID 5
>Windows 2000 Server SP3

Wow. I'd have guessed an increase in speed, but that's pretty
dramatic. I'm assuming you didn't write a poor performing script to
do this of course... :)

FWIW, in completely anecdotal testing, we're not getting significant
differences to the end user between a script and ASPUpload. That's
likely because we're mostly using small text files, where the end user
wouldn't notice the slight difference in time. What we do get is a
cleaner programming environment with ASPUpload, and when we move to
larger files we'll be real happy.

Jeff

[grw]

Ahh - the old faithful :)
Heres the later code which I think evoloved from that:
[url]http://upload.lewismoten.com/[/url]


"Ray at <%=sLocation%>" <myfirstname at lane34 dot com> wrote in message
news:OsHVvOWmDHA.1884@TK2MSFTNGP09.phx.gbl...

> Well, the script came from this link back when there was actually code
> there. [url]http://www.aspzone.com/articles/john/aspUpload/[/url] Now it's like

spam

> for a cell phone page or something.
>
> Ray at work
>
> "grw" <none@none.com> wrote in message
> news:ezkRdrRmDHA.1764@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...

> > Interesting results, but what was the script? (:
> >
> >
> > "Ray at <%=sLocation%>" <myfirstname at lane34 dot com> wrote in message
> > news:Ow$SrBNmDHA.2012@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...

> > > I'm going to by hypocritical and post an attachment. Please don't

kill

> > me.

> > >
> > > I did my "due-dilligence" (I hate that) and tested ASP Upload against

a

> > > script so I can talk someone into spending a few hundred dollars on

some

> > > licenses. I'm attaching the results for those who were arguing

earlier.

> > > The results are ridiculous.
> > >
> > > FYI, Server specs:
> > > Compaq Proliant 1850R
> > > Dual PIII 500 MHz
> > > 384 MB RAM
> > > 3 9.1 GB SCSI drives in RAID 5
> > > Windows 2000 Server SP3
> > >
> > > Ray at work
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >

> >
> >

>
>