New Software SpadeEye: Tableselection (@PP)

[dtan05]

Is there a way to add multiple names to the list? and also, I'd like a way for the software to show when you're on the waiting list for a table, so you dont have to always go to it.

Also, PP scans for me take like 15 sec, while FT scans take a couple min

[Mr_Snood]

4 Minutes sounds not bad.

It may take a second until the PartPoker client delivers the playerlist of a table and then again 1-3 seconds to search your database for the statistics of the players.
So to scan a table may take 1-5 seconds (or more if your database is realy big).
Now you can compute how long a FullScan may take if there are 20-30 tables available...

In fact the first scan should be always the slowest,
but later scans should be a lot faster, because the data from the first scan is "reused"...

The only way i can think of what is causing your "later" scans to be much longer is, that the data from the first scans is compromising your CPU too much.

[Mr_Snood]

Sorry didn't get the context.
Add multiple names to what list?

Showing the tables, where one is on the waiting list is no that easy.
My fear is that this can not be done reliably.
I do not get any feedback by the client if one has successfully joined the waitinglist, or if one has left the waiting list...

Regarding speed on FT in contrast to PP:
Do you use for both sites the same database?

[Kimpan]

is it recomended to have a seperate database for observed hands? Right now I have only one database with ~350K hands I have played combined with observed hands from partypoker and fulltilt.. these are from various limits..

[dtan05]

yes, I do use both sites same database.

[Mr_Snood]

Seperating observed and own hands makes no difference for SpadeEye.
What should be helpfull is seperating between pokerrooms.

What kind of database do you have (Pokertracker Access or PostgreSQL, or PokerOffice)?

[Mr_Snood]

If you are using the same database on both sites then im a bit clueless.

-Can you think of any reason for the difference?
I mean you can partition the "Scan" into two parts:
1. Get the table/playernames
2. Get the statistics from the database
Can you think of where you loose the time, in step 1 or 2?
-Maybe you observed something strange while scanning?
For examlpe the way SpadeEye moves through the tablelist of the pokerclient?
-What stakes are you trying to scan?

[dtan05]

I dunno, it just moves from table to table slower, it seems. I use PostgreSQL. My # of hands on one site is significantly less than on the other - maybe that's why?

[HalvSame]

Did the latest Party upgrade break SpadeEye for anyone else?

[Abramovic]

OOPs my mistake.