.NET (Core and Framework)

Ian McCaul wrote:

An array will work just fine for what youre trying to do. Datasets and Datatables will add a lot more overhead and processing then what is required for what you are trying to do. There isnt anything wrong with what you are trying to do but again datatables and especially datasets will take more resources.

glumlord wrote:

Processor - While storing to the Datatable the processor is at 15-30%

glumlord wrote:

Memory - Even after flushing the memory using a class I have my application is taking 6MB now instead of roughly 800k-1024k it was before.

Dave Kreskowiak wrote:

Memory as measured by what?? Please don't tell me you used TaskManager! It's kind of lying to you when it comes to .NET apps. You really have to understand what TaskManager is looking at. If you want more accurate numbers of what your APPLICATION is using, use Performance Monitor and the .NET Memory counters.

Public Class MemoryManagement<br />
<br />
    Private Declare Function SetProcessWorkingSetSize Lib "kernel32.dll" ( _<br />
      ByVal process As IntPtr, _<br />
      ByVal minimumWorkingSetSize As Integer, _<br />
      ByVal maximumWorkingSetSize As Integer) As Integer<br />
<br />
    Public Shared Sub FlushMemory()<br />
        GC.Collect()<br />
        GC.WaitForPendingFinalizers()<br />
        If (Environment.OSVersion.Platform = PlatformID.Win32NT) Then<br />
            SetProcessWorkingSetSize(Process.GetCurrentProcess().Handle, -1, -1)<br />
        End If<br />
    End Sub<br />
<br />
End Class

Dave Kreskowiak wrote:

glumlord wrote:
Processor - While storing to the Datatable the processor is at 15-30%

30%?? Who cares??

Dave Kreskowiak wrote:

The DataTable class has quite a large overhead compared to an Array. So, if an array works for you, great! If not, you may want to look into a Generic collection solution.

glumlord wrote:

I do use Task Manager and I added all the columns that refer to Memory. I compared that to the previous version of my application using Arrays. It may not be accurate completely but I would beg to differ if you think it's useless

Dave Kreskowiak wrote:

30%?? Who cares??

Luc Pattyn wrote:

it only took 2 seconds; so everything exceeding that needs scrutinized.

Dave Kreskowiak wrote:

I wonder about his users! If they're complaining that it takes 2 seconds longer to get a Desktop they can use, they really need professional mental help!

Where I work, it can take upwards of 10 minutes (worst case) to get into a machine on the first login! My laptop takes 5 minutes to get to the point where I can use it! 23 seconds is nothing...