Search Results

Search found 14643 results on 586 pages for 'performance comparison'.

Page 10/586 | < Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >

• How to test the render speed of my solution in a web browser?

  - by Cuartico

  Ok, I need to test the speed of my solution in a web browser, but I have some problems, there are 2 versions of the web solution, the original one that is on server A and the "fixed" version that is on server B. I have VS2010 Ultimate, so I can make a web and load test on solution B, but I can't load the A solution on my IDE. I was trying to use fiddle2 and jmeter, but they only gave me the times of the request and response of the browsers with the server, I also want the time it takes to the browser to render the whole page. Maybe I'm misusing some of this tools... I don't know if this could be usefull but: Solution A is on VB 6.0 Solution B is on VB.Net Thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• Oracle TimesTen In-Memory Database Performance on SPARC T4-2

  - by Brian

  The Oracle TimesTen In-Memory Database is optimized to run on Oracle's SPARC T4 processor platforms running Oracle Solaris 11 providing unsurpassed scalability, performance, upgradability, protection of investment and return on investment. The following demonstrate the value of combining Oracle TimesTen In-Memory Database with SPARC T4 servers and Oracle Solaris 11: On a Mobile Call Processing test, the 2-socket SPARC T4-2 server outperforms: Oracle's SPARC Enterprise M4000 server (4 x 2.66 GHz SPARC64 VII+) by 34%. Oracle's SPARC T3-4 (4 x 1.65 GHz SPARC T3) by 2.7x, or 5.4x per processor. Utilizing the TimesTen Performance Throughput Benchmark (TPTBM), the SPARC T4-2 server protects investments with: 2.1x the overall performance of a 4-socket SPARC Enterprise M4000 server in read-only mode and 1.5x the performance in update-only testing. This is 4.2x more performance per processor than the SPARC64 VII+ 2.66 GHz based system. 10x more performance per processor than the SPARC T2+ 1.4 GHz server. 1.6x better performance per processor than the SPARC T3 1.65 GHz based server. In replication testing, the two socket SPARC T4-2 server is over 3x faster than the performance of a four socket SPARC Enterprise T5440 server in both asynchronous replication environment and the highly available 2-Safe replication. This testing emphasizes parallel replication between systems. Performance Landscape Mobile Call Processing Test Performance System Processor Sockets/Cores/Threads Tps SPARC T4-2 SPARC T4, 2.85 GHz 2 16 128 218,400 M4000 SPARC64 VII+, 2.66 GHz 4 16 32 162,900 SPARC T3-4 SPARC T3, 1.65 GHz 4 64 512 80,400 TimesTen Performance Throughput Benchmark (TPTBM) Read-Only System Processor Sockets/Cores/Threads Tps SPARC T3-4 SPARC T3, 1.65 GHz 4 64 512 7.9M SPARC T4-2 SPARC T4, 2.85 GHz 2 16 128 6.5M M4000 SPARC64 VII+, 2.66 GHz 4 16 32 3.1M T5440 SPARC T2+, 1.4 GHz 4 32 256 3.1M TimesTen Performance Throughput Benchmark (TPTBM) Update-Only System Processor Sockets/Cores/Threads Tps SPARC T4-2 SPARC T4, 2.85 GHz 2 16 128 547,800 M4000 SPARC64 VII+, 2.66 GHz 4 16 32 363,800 SPARC T3-4 SPARC T3, 1.65 GHz 4 64 512 240,500 TimesTen Replication Tests System Processor Sockets/Cores/Threads Asynchronous 2-Safe SPARC T4-2 SPARC T4, 2.85 GHz 2 16 128 38,024 13,701 SPARC T5440 SPARC T2+, 1.4 GHz 4 32 256 11,621 4,615 Configuration Summary Hardware Configurations: SPARC T4-2 server 2 x SPARC T4 processors, 2.85 GHz 256 GB memory 1 x 8 Gbs FC Qlogic HBA 1 x 6 Gbs SAS HBA 4 x 300 GB internal disks Sun Storage F5100 Flash Array (40 x 24 GB flash modules) 1 x Sun Fire X4275 server configured as COMSTAR head SPARC T3-4 server 4 x SPARC T3 processors, 1.6 GHz 512 GB memory 1 x 8 Gbs FC Qlogic HBA 8 x 146 GB internal disks 1 x Sun Fire X4275 server configured as COMSTAR head SPARC Enterprise M4000 server 4 x SPARC64 VII+ processors, 2.66 GHz 128 GB memory 1 x 8 Gbs FC Qlogic HBA 1 x 6 Gbs SAS HBA 2 x 146 GB internal disks Sun Storage F5100 Flash Array (40 x 24 GB flash modules) 1 x Sun Fire X4275 server configured as COMSTAR head Software Configuration: Oracle Solaris 11 11/11 Oracle TimesTen 11.2.2.4 Benchmark Descriptions TimesTen Performance Throughput BenchMark (TPTBM) is shipped with TimesTen and measures the total throughput of the system. The workload can test read-only, update-only, delete and insert operations as required. Mobile Call Processing is a customer-based workload for processing calls made by mobile phone subscribers. The workload has a mixture of read-only, update, and insert-only transactions. The peak throughput performance is measured from multiple concurrent processes executing the transactions until a peak performance is reached via saturation of the available resources. Parallel Replication tests using both asynchronous and 2-Safe replication methods. For asynchronous replication, transactions are processed in batches to maximize the throughput capabilities of the replication server and network. In 2-Safe replication, also known as no data-loss or high availability, transactions are replicated between servers immediately emphasizing low latency. For both environments, performance is measured in the number of parallel replication servers and the maximum transactions-per-second for all concurrent processes. See Also SPARC T4-2 Server oracle.com OTN Oracle TimesTen In-Memory Database oracle.com OTN Oracle Solaris oracle.com OTN Oracle Database 11g Release 2 Enterprise Edition oracle.com OTN Disclosure Statement Copyright 2012, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Oracle and Java are registered trademarks of Oracle and/or its affiliates. Other names may be trademarks of their respective owners. Results as of 1 October 2012.

  Read the article

• Strange performance issue with Dell R7610 and LSI 2208 RAID controller

  - by GregC

  Connecting controller to any of the three PCIe x16 slots yield choppy read performance around 750 MB/sec Lowly PCIe x4 slot yields steady 1.2 GB/sec read Given same files, same Windows Server 2008 R2 OS, same RAID6 24-disk Seagate ES.2 3TB array on LSI 9286-8e, same Dell R7610 Precision Workstation with A03 BIOS, same W5000 graphics card (no other cards), same settings etc. I see super-low CPU utilization in both cases. SiSoft Sandra reports x8 at 5GT/sec in x16 slot, and x4 at 5GT/sec in x4 slot, as expected. I'd like to be able to rely on the sheer speed of x16 slots. What gives? What can I try? Any ideas? Please assist Cross-posted from http://en.community.dell.com/support-forums/desktop/f/3514/t/19526990.aspx Follow-up information We did some more performance testing with reading from 8 SSDs, connected directly (without an expander chip). This means that both SAS cables were utilized. We saw nearly double performance, but it varied from run to run: {2.0, 1.8, 1.6, and 1.4 GB/sec were observed, then performance jumped back up to 2.0}. The SSD RAID0 tests were conducted in a x16 PCIe slot, all other variables kept the same. It seems to me that we were getting double the performance of HDD-based RAID6 array. Just for reference: maximum possible read burst speed over single channel of SAS 6Gb/sec is 570 MB/sec due to 8b/10b encoding and protocol limitations (SAS cable provides four such channels).

  Read the article

• Looking for application performance tracking software

  - by JavaRocky

  I have multiple java-based applications which produce statistics on how long method calls take. Right now the information is being written into a log file and I analyse performance that way. However with multiple apps and more monitoring requirements this is being becoming a bit overwhelming. I am looking for an application which will collect stats and graph them so I can analyse performance and be aware of performance degradation. I have looked at Solarwinds Application Performance Monitoring, however this polls periodically to gather information. My applications are totally event based and we would like to graph and track this accordingly. I almost started hacking together some scripts to produce Google Charts but surely there are applications which do this already. Suggestions?

  Read the article

• Hyper-V performance comparisons vs physical client?

  - by rwmnau

  Are there any comparisons between Hyper-V client machines and their physical equivalent? I've looked around and can find 4000 articles about improving Hyper-V performance, but I can't find any that actually do a side-by-side comparison or give benchmarking numbers. Ideally, I'm interested in a comparison of CPU, memory, disk, and graphics performance between something like the following: Some powerful workstation (with plenty of RAM) with Windows 7 installed on it directly Same exact worksation with Hyper-V Server 2008 R2 (the bare Server role) and a full-screen Windows 7 client machine Virtual Server 2005 had performance that didn't compare at all with actual hardware, but with the advances in CPU and hardware-level virtualization, has performance improved significantly? How obvious would it be to a user of the two above scenarios that one of them was virtualized, and does anybody know of actual benchmarking of this type?

  Read the article

• LTO 2 tape performance in LTO 3 drive

  - by hmallett

  I have a pile of LTO 2 tapes, and both an LTO 2 drive (HP Ultrium 460e), and an autoloader with an LTO 3 drive in (Tandberg T24 autoloader, with a HP drive). Performance of the LTO 2 tapes in the LTO 2 drive is adequate and consistent. HP L&TT tells me that the tapes can be read and written at 64 MB/s, which seems in line with the performance specifications of the drive. When I perform a backup (over the network) using Symantec Backup Exec, I get about 1700 MB/min backup and verify speeds, which is slower, but still adequate. Performance of the LTO 2 tapes in the LTO 3 drive in the autoloader is a different story. HP L&TT tells me that the tapes can be read at 82 MB/s and written at 49 MB/s, which seems unusual at the write speed drop, but not the end of the world. When I perform a backup (over the network) using Symantec Backup Exec though, I get about 331 MB/min backup speed and 205 MB/min verify speeds, which is not only much slower, but also much slower for reads than for writes. Notes: The comparison testing was done on the same server, SCSI card and SCSI cable, with the same backup data set and the same tape each time. The tape and drives are error-free (according to HP L&TT and Backup Exec). The SCSI card is a U160 card, which is not normally recommended for LTO 3, but we're not writing to LTO 3 tapes at LTO 3 speeds, and a U320 SCSI card is not available to me at the moment. As I'm scratching my head to determine the reason for the performance drop, my first question is: While LTO drives can write to the previous generation LTO tapes, does doing so normally incur a performance penalty?

  Read the article

• Raid-5 Performance per spindle scaling

  - by Bill N.

  So I am stuck in a corner, I have a storage project that is limited to 24 spindles, and requires heavy random Write (the corresponding read side is purely sequential). Needs every bit of space on my Drives, ~13TB total in a n-1 raid-5, and has to go fast, over 2GB/s sort of fast. The obvious answer is to use a Stripe/Concat (Raid-0/1), or better yet a raid-10 in place of the raid-5, but that is disallowed for reasons beyond my control. So I am here asking for help in getting a sub optimal configuration to be as good as it can be. The array built on direct attached SAS-2 10K rpm drives, backed by a ARECA 18xx series controller with 4GB of cache. 64k array stripes and an 4K stripe aligned XFS File system, with 24 Allocation groups (to avoid some of the penalty for being raid 5). The heart of my question is this: In the same setup with 6 spindles/AG's I see a near disk limited performance on the write, ~100MB/s per spindle, at 12 spindles I see that drop to ~80MB/s and at 24 ~60MB/s. I would expect that with a distributed parity and matched AG's, the performance should scale with the # of spindles, or be worse at small spindle counts, but this array is doing the opposite. What am I missing ? Should Raid-5 performance scale with # of spindles ? Many thanks for your answers and any ideas, input, or guidance. --Bill Edit: Improving RAID performance The other relevant thread I was able to find, discusses some of the same issues in the answers, though it still leaves me with out an answer on the performance scaling.

  Read the article

• How to limit disk performance?

  - by DrakeES

  I am load-testing a web application and studying the impact of some config tweaks (related to disk i/o) on the overall app performance, i.e. the amount of users that can be handled simultaneously. But the problem is that I hit 100% CPU before I can see any effect of the disk-related config settings. I am therefore wondering if there is a way I could deliberately limit the disk performance so that it becomes the bottleneck and the tweaks I am trying to play with actually start impacting performance. Should I just make the hard disk busy with something else? What would serve the best for this purpose? More details (probably irrelevant, but anyway): PHP/Magento/Apache, studying the impact of apc.stat. Setting it to 0 makes APC not checking PHP scripts for modification which should increase performance where disk is the bottleneck. Using JMeter for benchmarking.

  Read the article

• Good C++ books regarding Performance?

  - by Leon

  Besides the books everyone knows about, like Meyer's 3 Effective C++/STL books, are there any other really good C++ books specifically aimed towards performance code? Maybe this is for gaming, telecommunications, finance/high frequency etc? When I say performance I mean things where a normal C++ book wouldnt bother advising because the gain in performance isn't worthwhile for 95% of C++ developers. Maybe suggestions like avoiding virtual pointers, going into great depth about inlining etc? A book going into great depth on C++ memory allocation or multithreading performance would obviously be very useful.

  Read the article

• MySQL DATETIME format comparison - is strtotime needed?

  - by Steffan

  I've been doing something along the lines of.. $dt1 = '1000-01-01 00:00:00'; //really some val from db $dt2 = '1000-01-01 00:00:10'; //another val maybe db maybe formatted if(strtotime($dt1) > strtotime($dt2){ //do something } Is the strtotime needed? can i do a more direct comparison on the datetime formatted strings? i.e. if($dt1 > $dt2){ //do something } Will that always work?

  Read the article

• Integer comparison as string

  - by J Pollack

  Hi I have an integer column and I want to find numbers that start with specific digits. For example they do match if I look for '123': 1234567 123456 1234 They do not match: 23456 112345 0123445 Is the only way to handle the task by converting the Integers into Strings before doing string comparison? Also I am using Postgre regexp_replace(text, pattern, replacement) on numbers which is very slow and inefficient way doing it. The case is that I have large amount of data to handle this way and I am looking for the most economical way doing this.

  Read the article

• Search object array for matching possible multiple values using different comparison operators

  - by Sparkles

  I have a function to search an array of objects for a matching value using the eq operator, like so: sub find { my ( $self, %params ) = @_; my @entries = @{ $self->{_entries} }; if ( $params{filename} ) { @entries = grep { $_->filename eq $params{filename} } @entries; } if ( $params{date} ) { @entries = grep { $_->date eq $params{date} } @entries; } if ( $params{title} ) { @entries = grep { $_->title eq $params{title} } @entries; } .... I wanted to also be able to pass in a qr quoted variable to use in the comparison instead but the only way I can think of separating the comparisons is using an if/else block, like so: if (lc ref($params{whatever}) eq 'regexp') { #use =~ } else { #use eq } Is there a shorter way of doing it? Because of reasons beyond my control I'm using Perl 5.8.8 so I can't use the smart match operator. TIA

  Read the article

• Floating point comparison in STL, BOOST

  - by Paul

  Is there in the STL or in Boost a set of generic simple comparison functions? The one I found are always requiring template parameters, and/or instantiation of a struct template. I'm looking for something with a syntax like : if ( is_greater(x,y) ) { ... } Which could be implemented as : template <typename T> bool is_greater(const T& x, const T& y) { return x > y + Precision<T>::eps; }

  Read the article

• comparison between string literal

  - by wiso

  This very simple code: #include <iostream> using namespace std; void exec(char* option) { cout << "option is " << option << endl; if (option == "foo") cout << "option foo"; else if (option == "bar") cout << "opzion bar"; else cout << "???"; cout << endl; } int main() { char opt[] = "foo"; exec(opt); return 0; } generate two warning: comparison with string literal results in unspecified behaviour. Can you explain why exactly this code doesn't work, but if I change char opt[] to char *opt it works, but generates the warning? Is it related to the \0 termination? What is the difference between the two declaration of opt? What if I use const qualifier? The solution is to use std::string?

  Read the article

• html5 vs flash - full comparison chart anywhere?

  - by iddqd

  So since Steve Jobs said Flash sucks and implied that HTML5 can do everything Flash can without the need for a Plugin, I keep hearing those exact words from a lot of People. I would really like to have a Chart somewhere (similar to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_layout_engines_%28HTML5%29#Form_elements_and_attributes ) that I can just show to those people. Showing all the little things that Flash can do right now, that HTML5/Ajax/CSS is not yet even thinking about. But of course also the things that HTML5 does better. I would like to see details compared like audio playback, realtime audio processing, byte level access, bitmap data manipulation, webcam access, binary sockets, stuff in the works such as P2P technology (adobe stratus) and all the stuff I don't know about myself. Ideally with examples of what can be accomplished with, lets say Binary Sockets (such as a POP3 client) because otherwise it won't mean a lot to non-programmers since they will just say "well we can do without Binary Sockets". And ideally with some current benchmarks and some examples of websites that use this technology. I've searched the web and am surprised not to find anything. So is there such a comparison somewhere? Or does anybody want to create this and post it to Wikipedia? ;-)

  Read the article

• puzzled with java if else performance

  - by user1906966

  I am doing an investigation on a method's performance and finally identified the overhead was caused by the "else" portion of the if else statement. I have written a small program to illustrate the performance difference even when the else portion of the code never gets executed: public class TestIfPerf { public static void main( String[] args ) { boolean condition = true; long time = 0L; int value = 0; // warm up test for( int count=0; count<10000000; count++ ) { if ( condition ) { value = 1 + 2; } else { value = 1 + 3; } } // benchmark if condition only time = System.nanoTime(); for( int count=0; count<10000000; count++ ) { if ( condition ) { value = 1 + 2; } } time = System.nanoTime() - time; System.out.println( "1) performance " + time ); time = System.nanoTime(); // benchmark if else condition for( int count=0; count<10000000; count++ ) { if ( condition ) { value = 1 + 2; } else { value = 1 + 3; } } time = System.nanoTime() - time; System.out.println( "2) performance " + time ); } } and run the test program with java -classpath . -Dmx=800m -Dms=800m TestIfPerf. I performed this on both Mac and Linux Java with 1.6 latest build. Consistently the first benchmark, without the else is much faster than the second benchmark with the else section even though the code is structured such that the else portion is never executed because of the condition. I understand that to some, the difference might not be significant but the relative performance difference is large. I wonder if anyone has any insight to this (or maybe there is something I did incorrectly). Linux benchmark (in nano) performance 1215488 performance 2629531 Mac benchmark (in nano) performance 1667000 performance 4208000

  Read the article

• Log 2 N generic comparison tree

  - by Morano88

  Hey! I'm working on an algorithm for Redundant Binary Representation (RBR) where every two bits represent a digit. I designed the comparator that takes 4 bits and gives out 2 bits. I want to make the comparison in log 2 n so If I have X and Y .. I compare every 2 bits of X with every 2 bits of Y. This is smooth if the number of bits of X or Y equals n where (n = 2^X) i.e n = 2,4,8,16,32,... etc. Like this : However, If my input let us say is 6 or 10 .. then it becomes not smooth and I have to take into account some odd situations like this : I have a shallow experience in algorithms .. is there a generic way to do it .. so at the end I get only 2 bits no matter what the input is ? I just need hints or pseudo-code. If my question is not appropriate here .. so feel free to flag it or tell me to remove it. I'm using VHDL by the way!

  Read the article

• Performance Testing Versus Unit Testing

  - by Mystagogue

  I'm reading Osherove's "The Art of Unit Testing," and though I've not yet seen him say anything about performance testing, two thoughts still cross my mind: Performance tests generally can't be unit tests, because performance tests generally need to run for long periods of time. Performance tests generally can't be unit tests, because performance issues too often manifest at an integration or system level (or at least the logic of a single unit test needed to re-create the performance of the integration environment would be too involved to be a unit test). Particularly for the first reason stated above, I doubt it makes sense for performance tests to be handled by a unit testing framework (such as NUnit). My question is: do my findings / leanings correspond with the thoughts of the community?

  Read the article

• What do you think of a performance engineer should have?

  - by Vance

  I believe performance tuning (or even testing) is one the most challenging for an engineer. Well, in lots of company, this is the lowest priority than others "important" thing. My purpose of opening this post is to know what do you think*good* performance engineer should have. I can list some things like: Solid database,programming knowledge. Do single thread performance testing. Good knowledge of using the load generator tools to simulate the concurrent loads. Use different tools to monitor/measure the app/db server performance status Understand and can debug the codes. Even tune the codes. Any more ideas are always appreciated!

  Read the article

• In MATLAB, how can 'preallocating' cell arrays improve performance?

  - by Alex McMurray

  I was reading this article on MathWorks about improving MATLAB performance and you will notice that one of the first suggestions is to preallocate arrays, which makes sense. But it also says that preallocating Cell arrays (that is arrays which may contain different, unknown datatypes) will improve performance. But how will doing so improve performance because the datatypes are unknown so it doesn't know how much contiguous memory it will require even if it knows the shape of the cell array, and therefore it can't preallocate the memory surely? So how does this result in any improvement in performance? I apologise if this question is better suited for StackOverflow than Programmers but it isn't asking about a specific problem so I thought it fit better here, please let me know if I am mistaken though. Any explanation would be greatly appreciated :)

  Read the article

• Does software rot refer primarily to performance, or to messy code?

  - by Kazark

  Wikipedia's definition of software rot focuses on the performance of the software. This is a different usage than I am used to; I had thought of it much more in terms of the cleanliness and design of the code—in terms of the code's having all the standard quality characteristics: readability, maintainability, etc. Now, performance is likely to go down when the code becomes unreadable, because no one knows what is going on. But does the term software rot have special reference to performance? or am I right in thinking it refers to the cleanliness of the code? or is this perhaps a case of multiple senses of the term being in common usage—from the user's perspective, it has do with performance; but for the software craftsman, it has to do more specifically with how the code reads?

  Read the article

• Simple vs Complex (but performance efficient) solution - which one to choose and when?

  - by ManojGumber

  I have been programming for a couple of years and have often found myself at a dilemma. There are two solutions - one is simple one i.e. simple approach, easier to understand and maintain. It involves some redundancy, some extra work (extra IO, extra processing) and therefore is not the most optimal solution. but other uses a complex approach,difficult to implement, often involving interaction between lot of modules and is a performance efficient solution. Which solution should I strive for when I do not have hard performance SLA to meet and even the simple solution can meet the performance SLA? I have felt disdain among my fellow developers for simple solution. Is it good practice to come up with most optimal complex solution if your performance SLA can be met by a simple solution?

  Read the article

• In the days of modern computing, in 'typical business apps' - why does performance matter?

  - by Prog

  This may seem like an odd question to some of you. I'm a hobbyist Java programmer. I have developed several games, an AI program that creates music, another program for painting, and similar stuff. This is to tell you that I have an experience in programming, but not in professional development of business applications. I see a lot of talk on this site about performance. People often debate what would be the most efficient algorithm in C# to perform a task, or why Python is slow and Java is faster, etc. What I'm trying to understand is: why does this matter? There are specific areas of computing where I see why performance matters: games, where tens of thousands of computations are happening every second in a constant-update loop, or low level systems which other programs rely on, such as OSs and VMs, etc. But for the normal, typical high-level business app, why does performance matter? I can understand why it used to matter, decades ago. Computers were much slower and had much less memory, so you had to think carefully about these things. But today, we have so much memory to spare and computers are so fast: does it actually matter if a particular Java algorithm is O(n^2)? Will it actually make a difference for the end users of this typical business app? When you press a GUI button in a typical business app, and behind the scenes it invokes an O(n^2) algorithm, in these days of modern computing - do you actually feel the inefficiency? My question is split in two: In practice, today does performance matter in a typical normal business program? If it does, please give me real-world examples of places in such an application, where performance and optimizations are important.

  Read the article

• Performance of ClearCase servers on VMs?

  - by Garen

  Where I work, we are in need of upgrading our ClearCase servers and it's been proposed that we move them into a new (yet-to-be-deployed) VMmare system. In the past I've not noticed a significant problem with performance with most applications when running in VMs, but given that ClearCase "speed" (i.e. dynamic-view response times) is so latency sensitive I am concerned that this will not be a good idea. VMWare has numerous white-papers detailing performance related issues based on network traffic patterns that re-inforces my hypothesis, but nothing particularly concrete for this particular use case that I can see. What I can find are various forum posts online, but which are somewhat dated, e.g.: ClearCase clients are supported on VMWare, but not for performance issues. I would never put a production server on VM. It will work but will be slower. The more complex the slower it gets. accessing or building from a local snapshot view will be the fastest, building in a remote VM stored dynamic view using clearmake will be painful..... VMWare is best used for test environments (via http://www.cmcrossroads.com/forums?func=view&catid=31&id=44094&limit=10&start=10) and: VMware + ClearCase = works but SLUGGISH!!!!!! (windows)(not for production environment) My company tried to mandate that all new apps or app upgrades needed to be on/moved VMware instances. The VMware instance could not handle the demands of ClearCase. (come to find out that I was sharing a box with a database server) Will you know what else would be on that box besides ClearCase? Karl (via http://www.cmcrossroads.com/forums?func=view&id=44094&catid=31) and: ... are still finding we can't get the performance using dynamic views to below 2.5 times that of a physical machine. Interestingly, speaking to a few people with much VMWare experience and indeed from running builds, we are finding that typically, VMWare doesn't take that much longer for most applications and about 10-20% longer has been quoted. (via http://www.cmcrossroads.com/forums?func=view&catid=31&id=44094&limit=10&start=10) Which brings me to the more direct question: Does anyone have any more recent experience with ClearCase servers on VMware (if not any specific, relevant performance advice)?

  Read the article

• Ambiguous Comparison Hint

  - by Ondrej Brejla

  Hi everybody! Today we would like to show you some new hint which will be available in NetBeans 7.3. It's called Ambiguous Comparison hint. Its name seems to be quite fuzzy, but it describes exactly what the hint does. It tries to check all comparisons whether they are intended. Because sometimes you want to make a simple assignment, but you make a typo and comparison appears. It's really dangerous mistake because then your code doesn't work as expected. Your application can produce buggy results. So here is how it looks like: But sometimes a comparison is really intended. E.g. in return statements when you want to return a boolean, so then the hint works as expected and no warning appears. That's all for today and as usual, please test it and if you find something strange, don't hesitate to file a new issue (component php, subcomponent Editor). Thanks.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >