From: Paul <tester.paul@...>
Date: 2010-09-24T12:50:11+09:00
Subject: Re: Sorting problem with an Array of Arrays

On Sep 23, 5:41 pm, Jeremy Bopp <jer...@bopp.net> wrote:

> > Wonder what the performance of this would be if there were 10,000
> > entries?
>
> Probably pretty poor overall.  The big problem is that timestamp search
> in the ever-growing sorted array.  Unfortunately, timestamps could well
> be out of order since they could be erroneous but ignored when the
> labels match up, so we can't do something more efficient like a binary
> search to find the insert location.
>
> Basically, this data is potentially pretty messy, and more effort should
> probably be spent earlier in the chain to ensure that high quality data
> is entered in the first place.  That way the error detection heuristic
> which needs this ordered array would likely be unnecessary.
>
> -Jeremy

Thanks Jeremy.  I will try the new methods tomorrow.

As for your latter point, I hear you!  I'm working on something to
hopefully address this point.  This script _is_ a temporary measure,
and it provides value to me right now.

Cheers!  Paul.