Search Results

Search found 13403 results on 537 pages for 'epm performance tuning'.

Page 108/537 | < Previous Page | 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115  | Next Page >

  • Super simple high performance http server

    - by masylum
    I´m building a url shortener web application and I would like to know the best architecture to do it in order to provide a fast and reliable service. I would like to have two separate servicies in different machines. The first machine will have the application itself with a apache, nginx, whatever.. The second one will contain the database. The third one will be the one that will be responsible to handle the short url petitions. For the third machine I just need to accept one kind of http petition (GET www.domain.com/shorturl), but it have to do it really fast and it should be stable enough. Which server do you recommend me? Thank's in advance and sorry for my english

    Read the article

  • Does a USB hub affect performance?

    - by user1018733
    I have two devices I want maximum throughput and latency with. (Midi drums and midi keyboard for example) Would connecting both to the same USB port via a hub effectively limit the maximum data transfer rate to 1/2 to each of them? I am assuming yes, but I didn't know if USB hubs had a handshaking and priority giving protocol available (e.g. let the device with the longer built up buffer of data communicate first) Thanks

    Read the article

  • Performance Bottleneck with Photoshop CS3 on XPSP3

    - by Doozer1979
    I have an intel core 2 4400, with 4GB of ram running on XP 32-BIT SP3. Photoshop CS3 becomes sluggish & unresponsive even after loading up small files, and this is with only Bridge open as well, plus McAffee AV. My photos are loaded in from a USB 2 external drive, and my c: drive is used only for programs and windows itself. Even with 4GB of RAM, i am seeing the pagefile increase to 1.6GB, whilst there appears to be 1.5GB of RAM free to use. I've defragged the drive, with defraggler, and after that the only file reported to be fragmented was the pagefile itself. Anyone have any ideas what i can do to improve/solve this?

    Read the article

  • Oracle redo log performance degradation when inserting

    - by Aldarund
    I have a oracle 11g database. I'm testing in for inserts. The database running in noarchive mode. I have 3 redo log configured, each 2gb. I'm trying to insert data into test table. At begin it goes fine with 15k ins/second. I make a commit after 200 inserts. But after about 1.3m inserted records it become really slow, about 1-2k ins/second. As i noticed in resource explorer at this point we have filled all redo logs and so the inserts from this points work slow. So my question is why it become so slow when it fills redo logs, even if i commit each 200 records. And how this situation can be fixed ( except the turning off logging completely at inserts)

    Read the article

  • Linux/Apache performance very slow even on local network

    - by klausch
    I have an Ubuntu server machine running Apache and MYSQL. System and version info is as follows: Linux kernel 3.0.0.-12 Apache/2.2.20 MySQL Ver 14.14.Distrib 5.1.58 I am running a few websites on this server, some HTML only, some PHP/MySQL. THe [problem is that response time is very slow, both on static as well as the dynamic sites. Sometimes it takes more than 10 seconds before a response is given, this makes the sites very slow and almost unusable. The problem occurs even when requesting from the local network. I have added the involved subdomains to my /etc/hosts file, and abolve all the problem is not solved by using IP numbers instead of URL's. So there is no DNS lookup issue. I have modified the log format by showing the response times and sometimes a files takes 12 seconds to be served, see the jquery~.js file in the example screenshot. I have no explanation for this extremely long response time, but is is not even the only issue here, some other files takes a long time to be served too, but do not show a long response time in the log file. So probably different tissues are involved here. I cannot find a solution until now, any suggestions??? THanx in advance, Klaas link to screenshot picture from access logfile Some extra configuration info: apache2.conf (comment is removed) LockFile ${APACHE_LOCK_DIR}/accept.lock PidFile ${APACHE_PID_FILE} Timeout 300 KeepAlive On MaxKeepAliveRequests 100 KeepAliveTimeout 5 <IfModule mpm_prefork_module> StartServers 5 MinSpareServers 5 MaxSpareServers 10 MaxClients 150 MaxRequestsPerChild 0 </IfModule> <IfModule mpm_worker_module> StartServers 2 MinSpareThreads 25 MaxSpareThreads 75 ThreadLimit 64 ThreadsPerChild 25 MaxClients 150 MaxRequestsPerChild 0 </IfModule> <IfModule mpm_event_module> StartServers 2 MinSpareThreads 25 MaxSpareThreads 75 ThreadLimit 64 ThreadsPerChild 25 MaxClients 150 MaxRequestsPerChild 0 </IfModule> User ${APACHE_RUN_USER} Group ${APACHE_RUN_GROUP} AccessFileName .htaccess <Files ~ "^\.ht"> Order allow,deny Deny from all Satisfy all </Files> DefaultType text/plain HostnameLookups Off ErrorLog ${APACHE_LOG_DIR}/error.log LogLevel warn Include mods-enabled/*.load Include mods-enabled/*.conf Include httpd.conf Include ports.conf LogFormat "%v:%p %h %l %u %t \"%r\" %>s %O \"%{Referer}i\" \"%{User-Agent}i\"" vhost_combined LogFormat "%h %l %u %t \"%r\" %>s %O \"%{Referer}i\" \"%{User-Agent}i\" %T/%D" combined LogFormat "%h %l %u %t \"%r\" %>s %O" common LogFormat "%{Referer}i -> %U" referer LogFormat "%{User-agent}i" agent Include conf.d/ Include sites-enabled/ And the virtual hostfile for one of the slow sites, in fact it is pretty straightforward... <VirtualHost *:80> ServerAdmin [email protected] ServerSignature EMail ServerName toenjoy.drsklaus.nl DocumentRoot /var/www/toenjoy.drsklaus.nl <Directory /> Options FollowSymLinks AllowOverride None </Directory> <Directory /var/www/toenjoy.drsklaus.nl/> Options Indexes FollowSymLinks MultiViews AllowOverride AuthConfig AuthType Basic AuthName "To Enjoy" AuthUserFile /etc/.htpasswd Require user petraaa Order allow,deny allow from all </Directory> ScriptAlias /cgi-bin/ /usr/lib/cgi-bin/ <Directory "/usr/lib/cgi-bin"> AllowOverride None Options +ExecCGI -MultiViews +SymLinksIfOwnerMatch Order allow,deny Allow from all </Directory> ErrorLog /var/log/apache2/error.log # Possible values include: debug, info, notice, warn, error, crit, # alert, emerg. LogLevel warn CustomLog /var/log/apache2/access.log combined Alias /doc/ "/usr/share/doc/" <Directory "/usr/share/doc/"> Options Indexes MultiViews FollowSymLinks AllowOverride None Order deny,allow Deny from all Allow from 127.0.0.0/255.0.0.0 ::1/128 </Directory> </VirtualHost> And the output of free -m: klaas@ubuntu-server:/etc/apache2$ free -m total used free shared buffers cached Mem: 1997 1401 595 0 144 1017 -/+ buffers/cache: 238 1758 Swap: 2035 0 2035 and I have no indication that swapping occurs on the moments the site is slow. I have runned top and it does not appear to be a CPU issue. I have the impression that the spawning of a apache thread could maybe be the bottleneck but it is just a suggestion. Maybe this gives some extra information! EDIT: The problem seemed to be gone for some time but occurs again! And not only with Apache, also connecting using SSH takes a tremendous time, sometimes it takes up to 15 seconds before the keyphrase is asked for. Also scp works very slowly. The behavious is really unpredoctable and makes the server very hard to use. Any ideas...?

    Read the article

  • Slow performance with WAMP localhost access from other devices

    - by Adam
    I setup a localhost WAMP server and other device can access my localhost site on my win8 laptop with computer name instead of IP (bc I have use DCIP so that the wireless router can assign me IP otherwise it will not work). However, problem is that the website (WordPress), access speed is extremely slow on other devices other than my localhost computer, usually a 3s task take at least 10 seconds. (i.e. view my localhost site with computer name in a phone within the same wireless network.) Is that normal? What could be the reason causing it? Thank You

    Read the article

  • Query Performance Degrades with High Number of Logical Reads

    - by electricsk8
    I'm using Confio Ignite8 to derive this information, and monitor waits. I have one query that runs frequently, and I notice that on some days there is an extremely high number of logical reads incurred, +300,000,000 for 91,000 executions. On a good day, the logical reads are much lower, 18,000,000 for 94,000 executions. The execution plan for the query utilizes clustered index seeks, and is below. StmtText |--Nested Loops(Inner Join, OUTER REFERENCES:([f].[ParentId])) |--Clustered Index Seek(OBJECT:([StructuredFN].[dbo].[Folder].[PK_Folders] AS [f]), SEEK:([f].[FolderId]=(8125)), WHERE:([StructuredFN].[dbo].[Folder].[DealId] as [f].[DealId]=(300)) ORDERED FORWARD) |--Clustered Index Seek(OBJECT:([StructuredFN].[dbo].[Folder].[PK_Folders] AS [p]), SEEK:([p].[FolderId]=[StructuredFN].[dbo].[Folder].[ParentId] as [f].[ParentId]), WHERE:([StructuredFN].[dbo].[Folder].[DealId] as [p].[DealId]=(300)) ORDERED FORWARD) Output from showstatistics io ... Table 'Folder'. Scan count 0, logical reads 4, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0, lob logical reads 0, lob physical reads 0, lob read-ahead reads 0. Any ideas on how to troubleshoot where these high logical reads come from on certain days, and others nothing?

    Read the article

  • Prioritize file sharing performance in Windows Server 2008

    - by cmbrnt
    I've got a server running Windows Server 2008, and use it mainly for sharing files throughout the domain from a number of disks. It's running on VMware ESXi 4.0, in case that matters. My problem is that when I log in to the server to check user permissions etc, the access speed the files on the remote disks almost grinds to a halt. I havn't been able to measure the speeds, but I would guess it slows down to about 100kB/s as soon as I log in. This is on a gigabit network and the problems are equal for all users, even the ones connected to the same switch as the server. I've assigned 2 GB RAM to the server, and reserved it 1,5Ghz processor power. I don't have to do anything special on the server for this halt to occur. How can I make sure file sharing is prioritized on the server, so no matter what applications I'm using it will always make sure file sharing works properly? Could this be a VMware issue?

    Read the article

  • Site's performance slows over time until Apache is restarted

    - by udbhav
    I'm running a Django app w/ Nginx and Apache. All our static media is stored on S3, and basically it takes a while for the app to check if thumbnails have been created every time a page is loaded. To alleviate this problem, I'm caching the output of the templates w/ memcached. Over the course of an hour or two, the site's speed goes down significantly, until I restart apache, and then all is good for a little while. I have very little sysadmin experience, and was hoping somebody could at least point me in the right direction.

    Read the article

  • windows 8 on macbook locks after 2 mins despite high performance settings

    - by Mark
    I am running my Macbook Prop as a Windows 8 machine using bootcamp and for some reason, when I leave the keyboard/mouse alone for 2 mins it locks the PC (i.e. goes to the lock screen). I have (of course) checked the power settings and I can assure you that it is not set to these settings. I did notice that when I added my work's Mail Account the computer asked me to accept some group policy settings, which I did, so I suspect that this is a group policy setting, but I cannot find it. Can someone help? P.S. I have searched these forums first, and this is different to the PC going to sleep once locked, this is locking while logged in after 2 mins. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Solr performance (tomcat) - High load

    - by Ward Loockx
    I'm relatively new to solr. I have a production site running on a VPS, but now I'm having serious load issues. I don't know where to start in order to get the load down... VPS specs (linode.com 512) 512 MB RAM 4 CPU (1x priority) Looks like my solr server (tomcat) is using a lot of CPU power You can find my solrconfig.xml on http://pastebin.com/qdfi8Med and my schema.xml on http://pastebin.com/rRusDP8b I've tried to increaese the cache size, but this didn't do anything on the load. You can see the stats page below. EDIT - Because the screenshot was unclear, I took smaller screenshots if what (I think) is important. Dismax query handler stats Caches stats Thanks for the help!

    Read the article

  • db2 tablespace size and performance impact

    - by jrhickey
    Originally when we began moving to db2 LUW we ran into some issues where our tables were too big to fit into the default 4K table space. As a result of "pressure" to get it done we just went with a 32K default table space and put ALL of our tables there. What impact would that have if any? I talked to one person who said that it would possible make out database MUCH larger than it needed to be. Is that true? What about memory? Would there be any benefit to moving the smaller tables back to a 4K table space? I have looked around in forums and what not but cannot seem to find a good answer.

    Read the article

  • Accessing local variable doesn't improve performance

    - by NicMagnier
    The short version Why is this code: var index = (Math.floor(y / scale) * img.width + Math.floor(x / scale)) * 4; More performant than this one? var index = Math.floor(ref_index) * 4; The long version This week, the author of Impact js published an article about some rendering issue: http://www.phoboslab.org/log/2012/09/drawing-pixels-is-hard In the article there was the source of a function to scale an image by accessing pixels in the canvas. I wanted to suggest some traditional ways to optimize this kind of code so that the scaling would be shorter at loading time. But after testing it my result was most of the time worst that the original function. Guessing this was the JavaScript engine that was doing some smart optimization I tried to understand a bit more what was going on so I did a bunch of test. But my results are quite confusing and I would need some help to understand what's going on. I have a test page here: http://www.mx981.com/stuff/resize_bench/test.html jsPerf: http://jsperf.com/local-variable-due-to-the-scope-lookup To start the test, click the picture and the results will appear in the console. There are three different versions: The original code: for( var y = 0; y < heightScaled; y++ ) { for( var x = 0; x < widthScaled; x++ ) { var index = (Math.floor(y / scale) * img.width + Math.floor(x / scale)) * 4; var indexScaled = (y * widthScaled + x) * 4; scaledPixels.data[ indexScaled ] = origPixels.data[ index ]; scaledPixels.data[ indexScaled+1 ] = origPixels.data[ index+1 ]; scaledPixels.data[ indexScaled+2 ] = origPixels.data[ index+2 ]; scaledPixels.data[ indexScaled+3 ] = origPixels.data[ index+3 ]; } } jsPerf: http://jsperf.com/so-accessing-local-variable-doesn-t-improve-performance One of my attempt to optimize it: var ref_index = 0; var ref_indexScaled = 0 var ref_step = 1 / scale; for( var y = 0; y < heightScaled; y++ ) { for( var x = 0; x < widthScaled; x++ ) { var index = Math.floor(ref_index) * 4; scaledPixels.data[ ref_indexScaled++ ] = origPixels.data[ index ]; scaledPixels.data[ ref_indexScaled++ ] = origPixels.data[ index+1 ]; scaledPixels.data[ ref_indexScaled++ ] = origPixels.data[ index+2 ]; scaledPixels.data[ ref_indexScaled++ ] = origPixels.data[ index+3 ]; ref_index+= ref_step; } } jsPerf: http://jsperf.com/so-accessing-local-variable-doesn-t-improve-performance The same optimized code but with recalculating the index variable each time (Hybrid) var ref_index = 0; var ref_indexScaled = 0 var ref_step = 1 / scale; for( var y = 0; y < heightScaled; y++ ) { for( var x = 0; x < widthScaled; x++ ) { var index = (Math.floor(y / scale) * img.width + Math.floor(x / scale)) * 4; scaledPixels.data[ ref_indexScaled++ ] = origPixels.data[ index ]; scaledPixels.data[ ref_indexScaled++ ] = origPixels.data[ index+1 ]; scaledPixels.data[ ref_indexScaled++ ] = origPixels.data[ index+2 ]; scaledPixels.data[ ref_indexScaled++ ] = origPixels.data[ index+3 ]; ref_index+= ref_step; } } jsPerf: http://jsperf.com/so-accessing-local-variable-doesn-t-improve-performance The only difference in the two last one is the calculation of the 'index' variable. And to my surprise the optimized version is slower in most browsers (except opera). Results of personal testing (not the jsPerf tests): Opera Original: 8668ms Optimized: 932ms Hybrid: 8696ms Chrome Original: 139ms Optimized: 145ms Hybrid: 136ms Safari Original: 433ms Optimized: 853ms Hybrid: 451ms Firefox Original: 343ms Optimized: 422ms Hybrid: 350ms After digging around, it seems an usual good practice is to access mainly local variable due to the scope lookup. Because The optimized version only call one local variable it should be faster that the Hybrid code which call multiple variable and object in addition to the various operation involved. So why the "optimized" version is slower? I thought that it might be because some JavaScript engine don't optimize the Optimized version because it is not hot enough but after using --trace-opt in chrome, it seems all version are properly compiled by V8. At this point I am a bit clueless and wonder if somebody would know what is going on? I did also some more test cases in this page: http://www.mx981.com/stuff/resize_bench/index.html

    Read the article

  • Is HTML5/WebGL performance bad on low-end Android tablets and phones?

    - by Boris van Schooten
    I've developed a couple of WebGL games, and am trying them out on Android. I found that they run very slowly on my tablet, however. For example, a game with 10 sprites or so runs as 5fps. I tried Chrome and CocoonJS, but they are comparably slow. I also tried other games, and even games with only 5 or so moving sprites are this slow. This seems inconsistent with reports from others, such as this benchmark. Typically, when people talk about HTML5 game performance, they mention well-known and higher-end phones and tables. While my 7" tablet is cheap (I believe it's a relabeled Allwinner tablet, apparently with the Mali 400 GPU), I found it generally has a good gaming performance. All the games I tried run smoothly. I also developed an OpenGL ES 2 demo with 200 shaded 3D objects, and it ran at 50fps. My suspicion is that many low-end and white-label devices may have unacceptable HTML5/WebGL support, which means there may be a large section of gamers you will not reach when you choose this as your platform. I've heard rumors about inconsistent performance of HTML5 and WebGL on different devices, but no clear picture emerges. I would like to hear if any of you have had similar experiences with HTML5 or WebGL, or whether I can find information about the percentage of devices I can expect to have decent performance.

    Read the article

  • Is HTML5/WebGL performance unreliable on low-end Android tablets and phones?

    - by Boris van Schooten
    I've developed a couple of WebGL games, and am trying them out on Android. I found that they run very slowly on my tablet, however. For example, a game with 10 sprites or so runs as 5fps. I tried Chrome and CocoonJS, but they are comparably slow. I also tried other games, and even games with only 5 or so moving sprites are this slow. This seems inconsistent with reports from others, such as this benchmark. Typically, when people talk about HTML5 game performance, they mention well-known and higher-end phones and tables. While my 7" tablet is cheap (I believe it's a relabeled Allwinner tablet, apparently with the Mali 400 GPU), I found it generally has a good gaming performance. All the games I tried run smoothly. I also developed an OpenGL ES 2 demo with 200 shaded 3D objects, and it ran at 50fps. My suspicion is that many low-end and white-label devices may have unacceptable HTML5/WebGL support, which means there may be a large section of gamers you will not reach when you choose this as your platform. I've heard rumors about inconsistent performance of HTML5 and WebGL on different devices, but no clear picture emerges. I would like to hear if any of you have had similar experiences with HTML5 or WebGL, or whether I can find information about the percentage of devices I can expect to have decent performance.

    Read the article

  • Why do we get a sudden spike in response times?

    - by Christian Hagelid
    We have an API that is implemented using ServiceStack which is hosted in IIS. While performing load testing of the API we discovered that the response times are good but that they deteriorate rapidly as soon as we hit about 3,500 concurrent users per server. We have two servers and when hitting them with 7,000 users the average response times sit below 500ms for all endpoints. The boxes are behind a load balancer so we get 3,500 concurrents per server. However as soon as we increase the number of total concurrent users we see a significant increase in response times. Increasing the concurrent users to 5,000 per server gives us an average response time per endpoint of around 7 seconds. The memory and CPU on the servers are quite low, both while the response times are good and when after they deteriorate. At peak with 10,000 concurrent users the CPU averages just below 50% and the RAM sits around 3-4 GB out of 16. This leaves us thinking that we are hitting some kind of limit somewhere. The below screenshot shows some key counters in perfmon during a load test with a total of 10,000 concurrent users. The highlighted counter is requests/second. To the right of the screenshot you can see the requests per second graph becoming really erratic. This is the main indicator for slow response times. As soon as we see this pattern we notice slow response times in the load test. How do we go about troubleshooting this performance issue? We are trying to identify if this is a coding issue or a configuration issue. Are there any settings in web.config or IIS that could explain this behaviour? The application pool is running .NET v4.0 and the IIS version is 7.5. The only change we have made from the default settings is to update the application pool Queue Length value from 1,000 to 5,000. We have also added the following config settings to the Aspnet.config file: <system.web> <applicationPool maxConcurrentRequestsPerCPU="5000" maxConcurrentThreadsPerCPU="0" requestQueueLimit="5000" /> </system.web> More details: The purpose of the API is to combine data from various external sources and return as JSON. It is currently using an InMemory cache implementation to cache individual external calls at the data layer. The first request to a resource will fetch all data required and any subsequent requests for the same resource will get results from the cache. We have a 'cache runner' that is implemented as a background process that updates the information in the cache at certain set intervals. We have added locking around the code that fetches data from the external resources. We have also implemented the services to fetch the data from the external sources in an asynchronous fashion so that the endpoint should only be as slow as the slowest external call (unless we have data in the cache of course). This is done using the System.Threading.Tasks.Task class. Could we be hitting a limitation in terms of number of threads available to the process?

    Read the article

  • Determining cause of high NFS/IO utilization without iotop

    - by Matt
    I have a server that is doing an NFSv4 export for user's home directories. There are roughly 25 users (mostly developers/analysts) and about 40 servers mounting the home directory export. Performance is miserable, with users often seeing multi-second lags for simple commands (like ls, or writing a small text file). Sometimes the home directory mount completely hangs for minutes, with users getting "permission denied" errors. The hardware is a Dell R510 with dual E5620 CPUs and 8 GB RAM. There are eight 15k 2.5” 600 GB drives (Seagate ST3600057SS) configured in hardware RAID-6 with a single hot spare. RAID controller is a Dell PERC H700 w/512MB cache (Linux sees this as a LSI MegaSAS 9260). OS is CentOS 5.6, home directory partition is ext3, with options “rw,data=journal,usrquota”. I have the HW RAID configured to present two virtual disks to the OS: /dev/sda for the OS (boot, root and swap partitions), and /dev/sdb for the home directories. What I find curious, and suspicious, is that the sda device often has very high utilization, even though it only contains the OS. I would expect this virtual drive to be idle almost all the time. The system is not swapping, according to "free" and "vmstat". Why would there be major load on this device? Here is a 30-second snapshot from iostat: Time: 09:37:28 AM Device: rrqm/s wrqm/s r/s w/s rkB/s wkB/s avgrq-sz avgqu-sz await svctm %util sda 0.00 44.09 0.03 107.76 0.13 607.40 11.27 0.89 8.27 7.27 78.35 sda1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sda2 0.00 44.09 0.03 107.76 0.13 607.40 11.27 0.89 8.27 7.27 78.35 sdb 0.00 2616.53 0.67 157.88 2.80 11098.83 140.04 8.57 54.08 4.21 66.68 sdb1 0.00 2616.53 0.67 157.88 2.80 11098.83 140.04 8.57 54.08 4.21 66.68 dm-0 0.00 0.00 0.03 151.82 0.13 607.26 8.00 1.25 8.23 5.16 78.35 dm-1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 dm-2 0.00 0.00 0.67 2774.84 2.80 11099.37 8.00 474.30 170.89 0.24 66.84 dm-3 0.00 0.00 0.67 2774.84 2.80 11099.37 8.00 474.30 170.89 0.24 66.84 Looks like iotop is the ideal tool to use to sniff out these kinds of issues. But I'm on CentOS 5.6, which doesn't have a new enough kernel to support that program. I looked at Determining which process is causing heavy disk I/O?, and besides iotop, one of the suggestions said to do a "echo 1 /proc/sys/vm/block_dump". I did that (after directing kernel messages to tempfs). In about 13 minutes I had about 700k reads or writes, roughly half from kjournald and the other half from nfsd: # egrep " kernel: .*(READ|WRITE)" messages | wc -l 768439 # egrep " kernel: kjournald.*(READ|WRITE)" messages | wc -l 403615 # egrep " kernel: nfsd.*(READ|WRITE)" messages | wc -l 314028 For what it's worth, for the last hour, utilization has constantly been over 90% for the home directory drive. My 30-second iostat keeps showing output like this: Time: 09:36:30 PM Device: rrqm/s wrqm/s r/s w/s rkB/s wkB/s avgrq-sz avgqu-sz await svctm %util sda 0.00 6.46 0.20 11.33 0.80 71.71 12.58 0.24 20.53 14.37 16.56 sda1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sda2 0.00 6.46 0.20 11.33 0.80 71.71 12.58 0.24 20.53 14.37 16.56 sdb 137.29 7.00 549.92 3.80 22817.19 43.19 82.57 3.02 5.45 1.74 96.32 sdb1 137.29 7.00 549.92 3.80 22817.19 43.19 82.57 3.02 5.45 1.74 96.32 dm-0 0.00 0.00 0.20 17.76 0.80 71.04 8.00 0.38 21.21 9.22 16.57 dm-1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 dm-2 0.00 0.00 687.47 10.80 22817.19 43.19 65.48 4.62 6.61 1.43 99.81 dm-3 0.00 0.00 687.47 10.80 22817.19 43.19 65.48 4.62 6.61 1.43 99.82

    Read the article

  • Disk operations freeze Debian

    - by Grzenio
    Hi, I have just installed Debian testing on my new desktop and I am not very happy with performance - when I perform a disk intensive operation, e.g. upgrade packages in the system, everything seems to freeze, e.g. changing tabs in Iceweasel takes 3 seconds. I run the Debian on my 3 year old Thinkpad X60 ultra-portable, and I don't have these issues. (every single parameter of the laptop is much worse than the desktop). I am using the default packaged kernel and scripts. I run hdparm -t /dev/sda1 And I got around 96GB/s, which is expected. What else can I try to make it work better? EDIT: grzes:/home/ga# hdparm -i /dev/sda /dev/sda: Model=WDC WD15EARS-00Z5B1, FwRev=80.00A80, SerialNo=WD-WMAVU1362357 Config={ HardSect NotMFM HdSw>15uSec SpinMotCtl Fixed DTR>5Mbs FmtGapReq } RawCHS=16383/16/63, TrkSize=0, SectSize=0, ECCbytes=50 BuffType=unknown, BuffSize=unknown, MaxMultSect=16, MultSect=16 CurCHS=16383/16/63, CurSects=16514064, LBA=yes, LBAsects=2930277168 IORDY=on/off, tPIO={min:120,w/IORDY:120}, tDMA={min:120,rec:120} PIO modes: pio0 pio3 pio4 DMA modes: mdma0 mdma1 mdma2 UDMA modes: udma0 udma1 udma2 udma3 udma4 udma5 *udma6 AdvancedPM=no WriteCache=enabled Drive conforms to: Unspecified: ATA/ATAPI-1,2,3,4,5,6,7 * signifies the current active mode EDIT2: Even my wife said "on this new computer I can't do anything when I copy the photos from the camera and its much worse than on the old one". So it must be serious. EDIT3: Updated to 2.6.32, but still no improvement EDIT4: I forgot to mention that the new disk is ext4, the old was ext3. EDIT5: Still not solved. I have a P43 ASUS P5QL-E board. Lines from dmesg that seem relevant: [ 0.370850] Block layer SCSI generic (bsg) driver version 0.4 loaded (major 253) [ 0.370852] io scheduler noop registered [ 0.370853] io scheduler anticipatory registered [ 0.370854] io scheduler deadline registered [ 0.370876] io scheduler cfq registered (default) ... [ 0.908233] ata_piix 0000:00:1f.2: version 2.13 [ 0.908243] ata_piix 0000:00:1f.2: PCI INT B -> GSI 19 (level, low) -> IRQ 19 [ 0.908246] ata_piix 0000:00:1f.2: MAP [ P0 P2 P1 P3 ] [ 0.908275] ata_piix 0000:00:1f.2: setting latency timer to 64 [ 0.908316] scsi0 : ata_piix [ 0.908374] scsi1 : ata_piix [ 0.909180] ata1: SATA max UDMA/133 cmd 0xa000 ctl 0x9c00 bmdma 0x9480 irq 19 [ 0.909183] ata2: SATA max UDMA/133 cmd 0x9880 ctl 0x9800 bmdma 0x9488 irq 19 [ 0.909199] ata_piix 0000:00:1f.5: PCI INT B -> GSI 19 (level, low) -> IRQ 19 [ 0.909202] ata_piix 0000:00:1f.5: MAP [ P0 -- P1 -- ] [ 0.909228] ata_piix 0000:00:1f.5: setting latency timer to 64 [ 0.909279] scsi2 : ata_piix [ 0.909326] scsi3 : ata_piix [ 0.910021] ata3: SATA max UDMA/133 cmd 0xb000 ctl 0xac00 bmdma 0xa480 irq 19 [ 0.910024] ata4: SATA max UDMA/133 cmd 0xa880 ctl 0xa800 bmdma 0xa488 irq 19 [ 0.915575] FDC 0 is a post-1991 82077 ... [ 1.716062] ata1.00: SATA link up 3.0 Gbps (SStatus 123 SControl 300) [ 1.716074] ata1.01: SATA link down (SStatus 0 SControl 300) [ 1.724318] ata1.00: ATA-8: WDC WD15EARS-00Z5B1, 80.00A80, max UDMA/133 [ 1.724322] ata1.00: 2930277168 sectors, multi 16: LBA48 NCQ (depth 0/32) [ 1.740339] ata1.00: configured for UDMA/133 [ 1.740428] scsi 0:0:0:0: Direct-Access ATA WDC WD15EARS-00Z 80.0 PQ: 0 ANSI: 5 [ 1.746788] scsi 6:0:0:0: CD-ROM ASUS DRW-1608P 1.17 PQ: 0 ANSI: 5 ... [ 1.925981] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] 2930277168 512-byte logical blocks: (1.50 TB/1.36 TiB) [ 1.926005] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Write Protect is off [ 1.926007] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Mode Sense: 00 3a 00 00 [ 1.926020] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Write cache: enabled, read cache: enabled, doesn't support DPO or FUA [ 1.926092] sda:sr0: scsi3-mmc drive: 40x/40x writer cd/rw xa/form2 cdda tray [ 1.931106] Uniform CD-ROM driver Revision: 3.20 [ 1.931191] sr 6:0:0:0: Attached scsi CD-ROM sr0 ... [ 1.941936] sda1 sda2 sda3 sda4 < sda5 sda6 > [ 1.967691] sd 0:0:0:0: [sda] Attached SCSI disk [ 1.970938] sd 0:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg0 type 0 [ 1.970959] sr 6:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg1 type 5 ... [ 2.500086] EXT4-fs (sda3): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode ... [ 7.150468] EXT4-fs (sda6): mounted filesystem with ordered data mode

    Read the article

  • WPF performance : Converters vs. Triggers

    - by Joachim Kerschbaumer
    hi there, i´m currently facing a problem where i have to set properties on a bunch of framework elements depending on some other properties. i wonder how triggers and converters compare when it comes to performance. Especially MultiTriggers and IMultiValueConverters. Is there any difference? google wasn't helpful so i thought maybe some of the guys over here at SO could bring in some light. thanks, j.

    Read the article

  • Enhance Localization performances? (ComponentResourceManager.ApplyResources)

    - by Srodriguez
    Dear all, After experiencing some performances issues on my client side, we decided to give a try to some of the performance profilers to try to find the bottleneck or identify the guilty parts of the code. Of course, as many performance investigations, the problems comes from various things, but something I find out is that the ComponentResourceManager.ApplyResources of my user controls takes way too much time in the construction of my forms: more than 24% of the construction time is spent in the ApplyResources inside the InitializeComponent(). This seems rather a lot for only "finding a resource string and putting it in it's container". What is exactly done in the ComponentResourceManager.ApplyResources ? I guess more than searching the string, if not it wouldn't take that long. Is there a way to enhance the performances of the localization? Our software is localized in several languages, so we do need to keep this multi-lingual feature. Any recommendations regarding this issue? Thanks! PS: We are coding in C#, .NET 3.5 SP1.

    Read the article

  • performance comparision between Zend Lucene and Java Lucene

    - by Carson
    Zend Lucene and Java Lucene are built in PHP and java repectively, and PHP language has a higher level than java. Just wondering How big the performance difference among these two, regarding to index building and data searching? Is it much more effective to let java create and rebuild index, and let php use the index?

    Read the article

  • Performance of if statement versus switch statement

    - by behrk2
    Hi Everyone, I have an if statement with 16 cases (I am checking the state of four boolean variables). Would there be any value in trying to implement this differently, with nested switch statements perhaps? What is the actual performance gain of a switch statement over an if statement? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Difference in String concatenation performance

    - by Homer
    I know you should use a StringBuilder when concatenating strings but I was just wondering if there is a difference in concatenating string variables and string literals. So, is there a difference in performance in building s1, s2, and s3? string foo = "foo"; string bar = "bar"; string s1 = "foo" + "bar"; string s2 = foo + "bar"; string s3 = foo + bar;

    Read the article

  • What might cause the big overhead of making a HttpWebRequest call?

    - by Dimitri C.
    When I send/receive data using HttpWebRequest (on Silverlight, using the HTTP POST method) in small blocks, I measure the very small throughput of 500 bytes/s over a "localhost" connection. When sending the data in large blocks, I get 2 MB/s, which is some 5000 times faster. Does anyone know what could cause this incredibly big overhead? Update: I did the performance measurement on both Firefox 3.6 and Internet Explorer 7. Both showed similar results. Update: The Silverlight client-side code I use is essentially my own implementation of the WebClient class. The reason I wrote it is because I noticed the same performance problem with WebClient, and I thought that the HttpWebRequest would allow to tweak the performance issue. Regrettably, this did not work. The implementation is as follows: public class HttpCommChannel { public delegate void ResponseArrivedCallback(object requestContext, BinaryDataBuffer response); public HttpCommChannel(ResponseArrivedCallback responseArrivedCallback) { this.responseArrivedCallback = responseArrivedCallback; this.requestSentEvent = new ManualResetEvent(false); this.responseArrivedEvent = new ManualResetEvent(true); } public void MakeRequest(object requestContext, string url, BinaryDataBuffer requestPacket) { responseArrivedEvent.WaitOne(); responseArrivedEvent.Reset(); this.requestMsg = requestPacket; this.requestContext = requestContext; this.webRequest = WebRequest.Create(url) as HttpWebRequest; this.webRequest.AllowReadStreamBuffering = true; this.webRequest.ContentType = "text/plain"; this.webRequest.Method = "POST"; this.webRequest.BeginGetRequestStream(new AsyncCallback(this.GetRequestStreamCallback), null); this.requestSentEvent.WaitOne(); } void GetRequestStreamCallback(IAsyncResult asynchronousResult) { System.IO.Stream postStream = webRequest.EndGetRequestStream(asynchronousResult); postStream.Write(requestMsg.Data, 0, (int)requestMsg.Size); postStream.Close(); requestSentEvent.Set(); webRequest.BeginGetResponse(new AsyncCallback(this.GetResponseCallback), null); } void GetResponseCallback(IAsyncResult asynchronousResult) { HttpWebResponse response = (HttpWebResponse)webRequest.EndGetResponse(asynchronousResult); Stream streamResponse = response.GetResponseStream(); Dim.Ensure(streamResponse.CanRead); byte[] readData = new byte[streamResponse.Length]; Dim.Ensure(streamResponse.Read(readData, 0, (int)streamResponse.Length) == streamResponse.Length); streamResponse.Close(); response.Close(); webRequest = null; responseArrivedEvent.Set(); responseArrivedCallback(requestContext, new BinaryDataBuffer(readData)); } HttpWebRequest webRequest; ManualResetEvent requestSentEvent; BinaryDataBuffer requestMsg; object requestContext; ManualResetEvent responseArrivedEvent; ResponseArrivedCallback responseArrivedCallback; } I use this code to send data back and forth to an HTTP server.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115  | Next Page >