how to optimize a for loop... looping through a DataTable

Question

0.00/5 (No votes)

See more:

I have the following loop in my program :

dtPertdata is a DataTable.

for (int a = 0; a < dtPertdata.Rows.Count; a++)
{
	DataRow dr2 = dtPertdata.Rows[a];
	if (a >= 10)
	{
		DataRow dr1 = dtPertdata.Rows[a - 10];
		double rt2 = Convert.ToDouble(dr2["value"]);
		double rt1 = Convert.ToDouble(dr1["value"]);

		double shock10 = rt2 - rt1;
		double pertYield = shock10 + Convert.ToDouble(dr2["cur_yield"]);

		dr2["shock10"] = shock10.ToString();
		dr2["pertYield"] = pertYield.ToString();		
	}	
}
dtPertdata.AcceptChanges();

Please suggest how to do this operation without using loop, for eg using linq or some other method.

Posted 20-May-15 2:50am

pparya27

Updated 20-May-15 2:56am

v6

Add a Solution

Comments

Tomas Takac 20-May-15 9:12am

Why? What's wrong with the loop?

Code For You 20-May-15 9:21am

How many rows will be there in dtPertdata table on given point of time.

pparya27 20-May-15 11:03am

30 thousand rows at a time. :(

2 solutions

Solution 2

As already noted by others using Linq would not be faster. It only hides the loops that it uses internally.

However, there is one optimisation:
Just start your loop at index 10.

Posted 20-May-15 3:17am

Jochen Arndt

Comments

pparya27 20-May-15 11:04am

yes I've done that, actually I raised this question before doing that optimization.

Add a Solution

Add your solution here

Treat my content as plain text, not as HTML

Preview 0

…

Existing Members

Sign in to your account

...or Join us

Download, Vote, Comment, Publish.

Your Email
Password
Forgot your password?

Your Email
This email is in use. Do you need your password?
Optional Password

I have read and agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy
Please subscribe me to the CodeProject newsletters

When answering a question please:

Read the question carefully.
Understand that English isn't everyone's first language so be lenient of bad spelling and grammar.
If a question is poorly phrased then either ask for clarification, ignore it, or edit the question and fix the problem. Insults are not welcome.
Don't tell someone to read the manual. Chances are they have and don't get it. Provide an answer or move on to the next question.

Let's work to help developers, not make them feel stupid.

This content, along with any associated source code and files, is licensed under The Code Project Open License (CPOL)

Sascha Lefèvre · Accepted Answer · 2015-05-20T03:14:00

Solution 1

There is nothing to optimize. Linq is not inherently more performant than a "conventional" approach. It's just often more compact, faster to write and easier to read. Theoretically it would be possible to write your code in some extension method syntax but it would not be faster because it would just do the same loop "under the hoods". And in this case (assingning new values to an existing object) it would not be easier to read and also barely more compact. Your code is fine (if it works like it should).

Posted 20-May-15 3:14am

Sascha Lefèvre

Updated 20-May-15 3:15am

v2

Comments

pparya27 20-May-15 11:10am

Sascha Lefèvre thanks for the reply, this code is working fine. Actually there will be some 30 thousand records in dtPertdata DataTable, so this loops takes a few minutes to run. I'am now planning to move this logic into a stored procedure in oracle, I think that will take less time... will give it a try !

Sascha Lefèvre 20-May-15 11:19am

You're welcome! :)

What you could do (but that's not related to Linq) is to parallelize it: Break it into batches of maybe 5000 rows each and execute this loop on those batches in parallel.
But the stored procedure-approach will probably also make it a lot faster.

pparya27 22-May-15 12:18pm

Hie Sascha Lefèvre, I actually managed to do this even without stored procedure, with a simple merge statement in oracle. I have took an additional column "srno" in table, indicating the row number. Here the merge statement used :

merge into dtpertdata a using dtpertdata b
on ( a.srno>=11 and b.srno= a.srno-10 )
when matched then
update set a.shocks10= (a.value - b.value), a.pertyield= a.cur_yield + (a.value - b.value)
;

and it runs in just a fraction of second !!

Sascha Lefèvre 22-May-15 12:40pm

Thank you for your feedback! Glad you found a good solution for this - cheers! :)