No such thing as a random result when you have static selection boxes defining specific input. The results are obviously restrained by what letter combinations you pick (ie finite).
You could make an argument that caching all the possible combinations would be unreasonable for what's likely a low cost setup. However, I'd argue in favor of caching with both a popular and a simple reduction scheme.
Could speed it up radically by just caching on the first letter / number.
Comments
Takes so long to generate first 50 names even when searching with just the defaults... looks like they don't really cache anything..
Cache random results?
No such thing as a random result when you have static selection boxes defining specific input. The results are obviously restrained by what letter combinations you pick (ie finite).
You could make an argument that caching all the possible combinations would be unreasonable for what's likely a low cost setup. However, I'd argue in favor of caching with both a popular and a simple reduction scheme.
Could speed it up radically by just caching on the first letter / number.