On 9/18/07, Bill Kelly <billk / cts.com> wrote:
>
> >> On Sep 18, 2007, at 4:00 AM, Matthias WçÄhter wrote:
> >
> > Here are the results of the supplied solutions so far, and it looks like my solution can take the 100k-performance victory :)
>
> If I've understood correctly, it looks like my solution seems
> to be the fastest (so far) of those that operate on the
> unmodified .csv file?
>

It depends what you mean by unmodified - my algorithm runs off the
original file, the only "modification" I am doing in the setup stage
is searching for and saving the byte offset of the first and last
records.  It looks like l could have done that every time my script
was run and only added 5 ms.

> I would have bet Simon's would be faster.  Strange!

I thought block file reads would be faster too, that was the next
thing I was planning to try.  Maybe it's the regexp that slowed it
down.


-Adam