<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Re: Scheduling speed in Collaboration with other software</title>
    <link>https://community.graphisoft.com/t5/Collaboration-with-other/Scheduling-speed/m-p/238999#M30708</link>
    <description>Hi All, &lt;BR /&gt;
The order of the criteria does indeed matter. It is recommended to do the bigger filterings first (element type, layer, etc.) so ARCHICAD could rule out most unrelevant elements first. This way AC doesn't have to look through all the project elements very detailed (eg. fire rating property value) but only have to check a smaller amount of elements.  Usually this is why the schedule listing is a bit more slow when we are listing IFC properties. This is a quite detailed criteria which have to be looked through in every element. If we rule out all unnecessary elements which we know are irrelevant, then this would be faster as well. best, k</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2016 10:56:25 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Katalin Borszeki</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2016-11-23T10:56:25Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Scheduling speed</title>
      <link>https://community.graphisoft.com/t5/Collaboration-with-other/Scheduling-speed/m-p/238997#M30706</link>
      <description>&lt;DIV class="actalk-migrated-content"&gt;&lt;R&gt;Hi&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
I was wondering, as there certain parameters take noticeably longer to schedule (ifc attributes at least), &lt;B&gt;is there a recommended order of filtering objects rapidly for scheduling?&lt;/B&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
So for example, is it important to specify conditions like layer or object type first, and then more detailed attributes, in the schedule settings? Or does the order have any effect on the performance?&lt;/R&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Oct 2016 09:58:07 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.graphisoft.com/t5/Collaboration-with-other/Scheduling-speed/m-p/238997#M30706</guid>
      <dc:creator>pejotu</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-10-24T09:58:07Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Scheduling speed</title>
      <link>https://community.graphisoft.com/t5/Collaboration-with-other/Scheduling-speed/m-p/238998#M30707</link>
      <description>I faced same speed issues when I set IFC rules in a low/medium size model ... I tried some combination but it seems that it's just IFC rules that slow down the scheduling process</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 24 Oct 2016 13:35:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.graphisoft.com/t5/Collaboration-with-other/Scheduling-speed/m-p/238998#M30707</guid>
      <dc:creator>alemanda</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-10-24T13:35:17Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Scheduling speed</title>
      <link>https://community.graphisoft.com/t5/Collaboration-with-other/Scheduling-speed/m-p/238999#M30708</link>
      <description>Hi All, &lt;BR /&gt;
The order of the criteria does indeed matter. It is recommended to do the bigger filterings first (element type, layer, etc.) so ARCHICAD could rule out most unrelevant elements first. This way AC doesn't have to look through all the project elements very detailed (eg. fire rating property value) but only have to check a smaller amount of elements.  Usually this is why the schedule listing is a bit more slow when we are listing IFC properties. This is a quite detailed criteria which have to be looked through in every element. If we rule out all unnecessary elements which we know are irrelevant, then this would be faster as well. best, k</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2016 10:56:25 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.graphisoft.com/t5/Collaboration-with-other/Scheduling-speed/m-p/238999#M30708</guid>
      <dc:creator>Katalin Borszeki</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-11-23T10:56:25Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

