Search Results

Search found 20904 results on 837 pages for 'disk performance'.

Page 121/837 | < Previous Page | 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128  | Next Page >

  • Ruby using the Gosu framework: why it runs slow first time?

    - by Omega
    I'm creating a Ruby game using the Gosu framework. All good. Sometimes, when I run the game, it has some kind of slow startup, and probably it will be rather slow during the whole game. So I close it and... open it again. It is very likely that it will startup quickly and the whole game will run smoothly and fast. Why is that? What is this phenomenon? Is it faster because of some cache stored or whatever since the first run? (But why would cache be stored? If the app dies, I would expect no references at all etc...) Ruby, Windows 7.

    Read the article

  • Updated sp_indexinfo

    - by TiborKaraszi
    It was time to give sp_indexinfo some love. The procedure is meant to be the "ultimate" index information procedure, providing lots of information about all indexes in a database or all indexes for a certain table. Here is what I did in this update: Changed the second query that retrieves missing index information so it generates the index name (based on schema name, table name and column named - limited to 128 characters). Re-arranged and shortened column names to make output more compact and more...(read more)

    Read the article

  • SQL Live Monitor

    - by TiborKaraszi
    I just found this one out there and wanted to share it. It connects to an instance and show you a bunch of figures. Nothing you can't extract yourself with SQL queries, but sometimes it is just nice to have one tool which is very easy to use. Here's what it looks like when connecting to an instance with no load on it: As you can see, there are some hyperlinked pages as well, and there are also some interesting options (like logging to CSV or for PAL analysis) under the "Option" button. One more thing...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Desktop runs very slick, animations are all fast and flawless. Moving windows around, however, is very laggy. Why?

    - by Muu
    This isn't a question about Ubuntu being laggy in general - not at all, in fact, it's very slick and fast for me. Clicking the "Workspace Switcher" in the dock performs the animation immediately and very smoothly. Switching between workspaces with the arrow keys - again, flawlessly. My computer has a resolution of 2560x1440 on a 27" display (no, not an Apple product - though my monitor has the same panel that Apple use in their cinema displays). It's powered by an Nvidia GeForce GTX 470 - easily enough to handle it - and an Intel i3. Hardware is not the issue. I am running Ubuntu 11.10 (upgraded from 11.04). I had the same issue in 11.04. I'm running the "NVIDIA accelerated graphics driver (post-release updates) (version current-updates)" from the additional drivers dialogue. Two drivers have been suggested to me via that dialogue and I've tried both - same effect with each. The driver is "activated and currently in use". Any other information required, let me know and I'll post it. I'm a programmer who works with Linux daily (both as a job and as an interest) so technical instructions are fine. I've noticed that Compiz uses a lot of CPU when moving windows around and it's memory usage is relatively high (though possibly expected for Compiz): 1671 user 20 0 478m 286m 33m S 1 7.3 12:44.05 compiz And one more thing - occasionally moving windows around is fast. But it only happens when all applications are closed, and even then it sometimes doesn't. Something must be interfering, but what? I'll try and find out but in the meantime, any suggestions are much appreciated :-)

    Read the article

  • Static vs. dynamic memory allocation - lots of constant objects, only small part of them used at runtime

    - by k29
    Here are two options: Option 1: enum QuizCategory { CATEGORY_1(new MyCollection<Question>() .add(Question.QUESTION_A) .add(Question.QUESTION_B) .add...), CATEGORY_2(new MyCollection<Question>() .add(Question.QUESTION_B) .add(Question.QUESTION_C) .add...), ... ; public MyCollection<Question> collection; private QuizCategory(MyCollection<Question> collection) { this.collection = collection; } public Question getRandom() { return collection.getRandomQuestion(); } } Option 2: enum QuizCategory2 { CATEGORY_1 { @Override protected MyCollection<Question> populateWithQuestions() { return new MyCollection<Question>() .add(Question.QUESTION_A) .add(Question.QUESTION_B) .add...; } }, CATEGORY_2 { @Override protected MyCollection<Question> populateWithQuestions() { return new MyCollection<Question>() .add(Question.QUESTION_B) .add(Question.QUESTION_C) .add...; } }; public Question getRandom() { MyCollection<Question> collection = populateWithQuestions(); return collection.getRandomQuestion(); } protected abstract MyCollection<Question> populateWithQuestions(); } There will be around 1000 categories, each containing 10 - 300 questions (100 on average). At runtime typically only 10 categories and 30 questions will be used. Each question is itself an enum constant (with its fields and methods). I'm trying to decide between those two options in the mobile application context. I haven't done any measurements since I have yet to write the questions and would like to gather more information before committing to one or another option. As far as I understand: (a) Option 1 will perform better since there will be no need to populate the collection and then garbage-collect the questions; (b) Option 1 will require extra memory: 1000 categories x 100 questions x 4 bytes for each reference = 400 Kb, which is not significant. So I'm leaning to Option 1, but just wondered if I'm correct in my assumptions and not missing something important? Perhaps someone has faced a similar dilemma? Or perhaps it doesn't actually matter that much?

    Read the article

  • Ubuntu 12.10 is slow and some programs gose to non-respond state

    - by user99631
    Ubuntu 12.10 is so slow and a lot of not responding applications I was using Skype whenever i open it it will go to non-responding state thin back to normal after a while even the software centre the system process is eating the CPU I don’t know if the compiz is the problem but issuing the command compiz --replace restore the applications from non-responding state CPU : Intel Celeron D 3.4 RAM : 1 GB VGA : Intel G45 Plz help

    Read the article

  • Why using Fragments?

    - by ahmed_khan_89
    I have read the documentation and some other questions' threads about this topic and I don't really feel convinced; I don't see clearly the limits of use of this technique. Fragments are now seen as a Best Practice; every Activity should be basically a support for one or more Fragments and not call a layout directly. Fragments are created in order to: allow the Activity to use many fragments, to change between them, to reuse these units... == the Fragment is totally dependent to the Context of an activity , so if I need something generic that I can reuse and handle in many Activities, I can create my own custom layouts or Views ... I will not care about this additional Complexity Developing Layer that fragments would add. a better handling to different resolution == OK for tablets/phones in case of long process that we can show two (or more) fragments in the same Activity in Tablets, and one by one in phones. But why would I use fragments always ? handling callbacks to navigate between Fragments (i.e: if the user is Logged-in I show a fragment else I show another fragment). === Just try to see how many bugs facebook SDK Log-in have because of this, to understand that it is really (?) ... considering that an Android Application is based on Activities... Adding another life cycles in the Activity would be better to design an Application... I mean the modules, the scenarios, the data management and the connectivity would be better designed, in that way. === This is an answer of someone who's used to see the Android SDK and Android Framework with a Fragments vision. I don't think it's wrong, but I am not sure it will give good results... And it is really abstract... ==== Why would I complicate my life, coding more, in using them always? else, why is it a best practice if it's just a tool for some cases? what are these cases?

    Read the article

  • Does low latency code sometimes have to be "ugly"?

    - by user997112
    (This is mainly aimed at those who have specific knowledge of low latency systems, to avoid people just answering with unsubstantiated opinions). Do you feel there is a trade-off between writing "nice" object orientated code and writing very fast low latency code? For instance, avoiding virtual functions in C++/the overhead of polymorphism etc- re-writing code which looks nasty, but is very fast etc? It stands to reason- who cares if it looks ugly (so long as its maintainable)- if you need speed, you need speed? I would be interested to hear from people who have worked in such areas.

    Read the article

  • Huge performance difference between two web servers, odd behavior seen using process monitor

    - by Francis Gagnon
    We have two Coldfusion servers that have a huge performance difference running the exact same code on the exact same input data. The code in questions instantiates a large amount of CFCs (Coldfusion Components, which are similar to objects in OOP languages). I compared the two servers by running Process Monitor and then calling the problematic code on both machines. I learned two things. First, Coldfusion opens CFC files every time it instantiates an object. Both servers do this, so it cannot be the cause of the performance difference. Second, the fast server opens the CFC files directly while the server with the performance problem seems to navigate its way through the path until it reaches the desired CFC file. It does this for every file, even the ones it has previously loaded, and because the code instantiates so many CFCs it becomes very slow. See below the partial Promon traces that show this behavior. It can take over 60 seconds for the slow server to do what the fast one does in 2 seconds. Can anyone tell me what causes this behavior? Is it a Coldfusion setting? Since Coldfusion runs on top of Java, is it a Java setting? Is it an OS option? The fast server is running Windows XP and I think the slow server is a Windows Server 2003. Bonus question: Coldfusion doesn't seem to perform any READ FILE operations on any of the CFC or CFM files. How can this be? Sample of the fast server opening CFC files: 11:25:14.5588975 jrun.exe QueryOpen C:\CF\wwwroot\APP\com\HtmlUtils.cfc 11:25:14.5592758 jrun.exe CreateFile C:\CF\wwwroot\APP\com\HtmlUtils.cfc 11:25:14.5595024 jrun.exe QueryBasicInformationFile C:\CF\wwwroot\APP\com\HtmlUtils.cfc 11:25:14.5595940 jrun.exe CloseFile C:\CF\wwwroot\APP\com\HtmlUtils.cfc 11:25:14.5599628 jrun.exe CreateFile C:\CF\wwwroot\APP\com\HtmlUtils.cfc 11:25:14.5601600 jrun.exe QueryBasicInformationFile C:\CF\wwwroot\APP\com\HtmlUtils.cfc 11:25:14.5602463 jrun.exe CloseFile C:\CF\wwwroot\APP\com\HtmlUtils.cfc Equivalent sample of the slow server opening CFC files: 11:15:08.1249230 jrun.exe CreateFile D:\ 11:15:08.1250100 jrun.exe QueryDirectory D:\org 11:15:08.1252852 jrun.exe CloseFile D:\ 11:15:08.1259670 jrun.exe CreateFile D:\org 11:15:08.1260319 jrun.exe QueryDirectory D:\org\cli 11:15:08.1260769 jrun.exe CloseFile D:\org 11:15:08.1269451 jrun.exe CreateFile D:\org\cli 11:15:08.1270613 jrun.exe QueryDirectory D:\org\cli\cpn 11:15:08.1271140 jrun.exe CloseFile D:\org\cli 11:15:08.1279312 jrun.exe CreateFile D:\org\cli\cpn 11:15:08.1280086 jrun.exe QueryDirectory D:\org\cli\cpn\APP 11:15:08.1280789 jrun.exe CloseFile D:\org\cli\cpn 11:15:08.1291034 jrun.exe CreateFile D:\org\cli\cpn\APP 11:15:08.1291709 jrun.exe QueryDirectory D:\org\cli\cpn\APP\com 11:15:08.1292224 jrun.exe CloseFile D:\org\cli\cpn\APP 11:15:08.1300568 jrun.exe CreateFile D:\org\cli\cpn\APP\com 11:15:08.1301321 jrun.exe QueryDirectory D:\org\cli\cpn\APP\com\HtmlUtils.cfc 11:15:08.1301843 jrun.exe CloseFile D:\org\cli\cpn\APP\com 11:15:08.1312049 jrun.exe CreateFile D:\org\cli\cpn\APP\com\HtmlUtils.cfc 11:15:08.1314409 jrun.exe QueryBasicInformationFile D:\org\cli\cpn\APP\com\HtmlUtils.cfc 11:15:08.1314633 jrun.exe CloseFile D:\org\cli\cpn\APP\com\HtmlUtils.cfc 11:15:08.1315881 jrun.exe CreateFile D:\ 11:15:08.1316379 jrun.exe QueryDirectory D:\org 11:15:08.1316926 jrun.exe CloseFile D:\ 11:15:08.1330951 jrun.exe CreateFile D:\org 11:15:08.1338656 jrun.exe QueryDirectory D:\org\cli 11:15:08.1339118 jrun.exe CloseFile D:\org 11:15:08.1526468 jrun.exe CreateFile D:\org\cli 11:15:08.1527295 jrun.exe QueryDirectory D:\org\cli\cpn 11:15:08.1527989 jrun.exe CloseFile D:\org\cli 11:15:08.1531977 jrun.exe CreateFile D:\org\cli\cpn 11:15:08.1532589 jrun.exe QueryDirectory D:\org\cli\cpn\APP 11:15:08.1533575 jrun.exe CloseFile D:\org\cli\cpn 11:15:08.1538457 jrun.exe CreateFile D:\org\cli\cpn\APP 11:15:08.1539083 jrun.exe QueryDirectory D:\org\cli\cpn\APP\com 11:15:08.1539553 jrun.exe CloseFile D:\org\cli\cpn\APP 11:15:08.1544126 jrun.exe CreateFile D:\org\cli\cpn\APP\com 11:15:08.1544980 jrun.exe QueryDirectory D:\org\cli\cpn\APP\com\HtmlUtils.cfc 11:15:08.1545482 jrun.exe CloseFile D:\org\cli\cpn\APP\com 11:15:08.1551034 jrun.exe CreateFile D:\org\cli\cpn\APP\com\HtmlUtils.cfc 11:15:08.1552878 jrun.exe QueryBasicInformationFile D:\org\cli\cpn\APP\com\HtmlUtils.cfc 11:15:08.1553044 jrun.exe CloseFile D:\org\cli\cpn\APP\com\HtmlUtils.cfc Thanks

    Read the article

  • Expected IOPS for log writing on PS6000X SAN?

    - by dssz
    Customer is experiencing poor Sybase ASE 15 performance on a PS6000X SAN with 16 X 450GB 10K in RAID-50. The server is a Dell R710 running 2003 server R2 64bit in ESX 4.0.0,256968 I've used sqlio to benchmark the sequential write performance of 4KB blocks on the drive. sqlio -kW -t1 -s600 -dE -o1 -fsequential -b4 -BH -LS sqliotestfile.dat Result is 1900 IOPS. However, when Sybase is running a sustained workload of small inserts SAN HQ shows a consistent 590 IOPS (and 100% 4K write activity). It also shows that the write latency increases to 1.2ms from <1ms. Monitoring and tests in Sybase demonstrate the performance problem is IO related and in particular there is a lot of wait time writing to the log. The SAN indicates that write caching is enabled. What IOPS should the SAN be capable of for 4k sequential write activity? Also, with write caching enabled, shouldn't the controller be batching up the 4K writes into something more efficient? Also, any tips on Sybase on ESX would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • What causes "A disk read error occurred, Press Ctrl + Alt + Del to restart"?

    - by Mehrdad
    I have a virtual machine containing Windows XP SP3. When I resized the VHD file (and the embedded partition), and tried booting, I got: A disk read error occurred Press Ctrl + Alt + Del to restart Some notes: FixBoot and FixMBR don't help. ChkDsk doesn't help. The partition is indeed active. The partition starts at sector 63 (it also did so before the problem) of cylinder 1, head 1, and is marked as type 0x07 (NTFS) My host OS reads the VHD and the partition completely fine I'm interested in knowing the cause rather than the fix. So "re-format the disk", "reinstall Windows", etc. aren't valid solutions. It's a virtual machine after all... I have nothing to lose, so I don't care about fixing it. I just want to know what's causing this problem, in case I run into it again on a physical machine (which I have done before). More info: The layout of the original, dynamic VHD (which works correctly): +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦ Disk: 3 MBR/GPT: MBR ¦ ¦ Size: 127.00GB CHS: 16578 255 63 ¦ ¦ Sectors: 266338304 Disk Signature: 0xEE3EEE3E ¦ ¦ Partitions: 1 Partition Order: 1 ¦ ¦ Media Type: Fixed Interface: SCSI ¦ ¦ Description: Msft Virtual Disk ¦ +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------¦ ¦Pos Idx Type/Name Size Boot Hide Start Sector Total Sectors DL Vol Label ¦ +--- --- --------- ---- ---- ---- -------------- -------------- -- -----------¦ ¦ 1 1 07-NTFS 1.5G Yes No 63 3,148,677 F: <None> ¦ +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ The layout of the resized, fixed-size VHD (which doesn't work): +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ¦ Disk: 3 MBR/GPT: MBR ¦ ¦ Size: 1.50GB CHS: 196 255 63 ¦ ¦ Sectors: 3149824 Disk Signature: 0xEE3EEE3E ¦ ¦ Partitions: 1 Partition Order: 1 ¦ ¦ Media Type: Fixed Interface: SCSI ¦ ¦ Description: Msft Virtual Disk ¦ +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------¦ ¦Pos Idx Type/Name Size Boot Hide Start Sector Total Sectors DL Vol Label ¦ +--- --- --------- ---- ---- ---- -------------- -------------- -- -----------¦ ¦ 1 1 07-NTFS 1.5G Yes No 63 3,148,677 F: <None> ¦ +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

    Read the article

  • ESX 4.0 space: DASD, NAS, or ?

    - by thormj
    I put together an ESX box for better management, but its performance is a WTF item; I'm a noob at dealing with ESX, so I'm looking for a laundry-list of reading material to help me straighten this out so I can go back to .NET programming. Current storage system: We're running Raid5+Hotspare (8x500 GB spindles) on a PERC6i on a Dell 2910. Due to ESX limitatios, the PERC is showing the storage as 1x2TB + 1x800GB "partitions." I'm not sure of the setup's configuration (stride / stripe / ???) at all. Our Applications We have a SBS server as well as a minor (2x50 GB, but growing at 10GB/month) database server... Our application that lives on the database VM is CPU and I/O insense; it's a database churning excercise mixed in with a lot of computation on the data (fixing that performance is what I'm supposed to be working on)... Perfomance Issue When I do a backup, restore, or worse (copy a backup from 1 vm to another to move it to the QA VM), the entire system slows to a crawl (even "unrelated" VMs). I originally thought a DASD situation would be quite good since you had PCI-x bandwidth, but the systemwide slowdown is killing productivity. Questions What should I do to make an intelligent decision about NAS vs RAID vs SAN vs DASD? Are there sweet spots/ugly spots in the storage setup? Can you use a SSD PCI-X card in ESX for the tempdb? Good/Bad idea? Is there any way to "share" some image in a copy-on-write fashion? Most of the "Backup-Copy-Restore" is to "put a clean image on the dev boxes"; if I could have them "share" the master image, the "big copy" (2x50 GB) would only need to be done once per week instead of once per dev per week...[runtime performance isn't a concern with the dev boxes, but the backup/copy/restore kills production, SBS, and everything else on the box]

    Read the article

  • Robocopy silently missing files

    - by John Hunt
    I'm using Robocopy to sync data from our server's hard disk to an external disk as a backup. It's a pretty simple solution but pretty much the best/easiest one we could come up with - we use two external disks and rotate them offsite. Anyway, here's the script (with the comments taken out) that I'm using to do it. It works very well, it's quick and almost 100% complete - however it's acting pretty strange with a few files (note company name has been changed in paths to protect the innocent): @ECHO OFF set DATESTAMP=%DATE:~10,4%/%DATE:~4,2%/%DATE:~7,2% %TIME:~0,2%:%TIME:~3,2%:%TIME:~6,2% SET prefix="E:\backup_log-" SET source_dir="M:\Company Names Data\Working Folder\_ADMIN_BACKUP_FILES\COMPA AANY Business Folder_Backup_040407\COMPANY_sales order register\BACKUP CLIENT FOLDERS & CURRENT JOBS pre 270404\CLIENT SALES ORDER REGISTER" SET dest_dir="E:\dest" SET log_fname=%prefix%%date:~-4,4%%date:~-10,2%%date:~-7,2%.log SET what_to_copy=/COPY:DAT /MIR SET options=/R:0 /W:0 /LOG+:%log_fname% /NFL /NDL ROBOCOPY %source_dir% %dest_dir% %what_to_copy% %options% set DATESTAMP=%DATE:~10,4%/%DATE:~4,2%/%DATE:~7,2% %TIME:~0,2%:%TIME:~3,2%:%TIME:~6,2% cscript msg.vbs "Backup completed at %DATESTAMP% - Logs can be found on the E: drive." :END Normally the source would just be M:\Comapany name data\ but I altered the script a bit to test the problem. The following files in the source are not copied to the dest: Someclient\SONICP~1.DOC Someclient\SONICP~2.DOC Someclient\SONICP~3.DOC However, files in the same directory named: TIMESH~1.XLS TIMESH~2.XLS are copied. I'm able to open the files that aren't copied with no trouble at all, and they certainly weren't opened when I ran robocopy so it's not a locking issue. Robocopy is running as administrator so it's not a permissions issue. There's no trace these files were even attempted to be copied as there are no errors being output in the log or in my command prompt. Does anyone have any suggestions as to what this might be? Busted hard disk? Cheers, John.

    Read the article

  • Building a PC, advice on SSD/Hybrid Hard Drives

    - by Jamie Hartnoll
    I am looking at building a new PC, it's mainly for office (graphics heavy) use and programming. Looking for good performance with opening and closing programs and files as well as a fast boot. I plan to have 3 primary hard drives Windows 7 Programs (photoshop etc) Current Files (There'll also be a large storage capacity back up drive, but this will be the Seagate drive I already have.) So, my question is, looking at standard "old fashioned" hard drives and SSD drives, obviously there's a massive price difference. I have been looking at drives like this: http://www.ebuyer.com/268693-corsair-120gb-force-3-ssd-cssd-f120gb3-bk-cssd-f120gb3-bk and this: http://www.ebuyer.com/321969-momentus-xt-750gb-sata-2-5in-7200rpm-hybrid-8gb-ssd-in-st750lx003 Having no experience of using either I don't know what's the most efficient thing to go for. Clearly the SSD will have better performance, but: If, for example, I had an SSD for Windows (say about 100gB), that would clearly give me the boot speed I want, then I guess my real questions are: If I were to buy one more SSD, would it give the greatest improvement on standard performance if used to store programs, or currently used files? Given that the OS is on an SSD, should I not bother with the 3 drives and instead, partition that Hybrid drive to store programs and currently used files on it? Obviously, option two is cheaper and option one could cause me storage issues, but that's when I can dump files I am not currently using onto another drive. Any, I am open to suggestions... so what do you suggest?!

    Read the article

  • How can I mount dd image of a partition?

    - by Puneet Arora
    I created a dd image of a partition (containing an HFS+ FS) of one of my disks (and not the entire disk) a few days ago using the following command - dd conv=sync,noerror bs=8k if=/dev/sdc2 of=/path/to/img How can I mount it? I tried the following but it doesn't work - mount -o loop,ro -t hfsplus /path/to/img /path/to/mntDir It gives me mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/loop1, missing codepage or helper program, or other error In some cases useful info is found in syslog - try dmesg | tail or so and dmesg | tail gives me - [5248455.568479] hfs: invalid secondary volume header [5248455.568494] hfs: unable to find HFS+ superblock [5248462.674836] hfs: invalid secondary volume header [5248462.674843] hfs: unable to find HFS+ superblock [5248550.672105] hfs: invalid secondary volume header [5248550.672115] hfs: unable to find HFS+ superblock [5248993.612026] hfs: unable to find HFS+ superblock [5248998.103385] hfs: unable to find HFS+ superblock [5249031.441359] hfs: unable to find HFS+ superblock [5249036.274864] hfs: unable to find HFS+ superblock Is there something wrong that I am doing? I tried searching on how to do this but all the results I get only talk about mounting a partition from within a full disk image, using the offset option with mount - none talk about the case where the image itself is that of a partition. Thanks. PS: I'm running 64bit Arch Linux, and the partition from the original disk /dev/sdc2 mounts fine.

    Read the article

  • Why is MySQL table_cache full but never used

    - by Jeremy Clarke
    I have been using the tuning-primer.sh script to tune my my.cnf settings. I have most things working well but the part about TABLE CACHE makes no sense: TABLE CACHE Current table_cache value = 900 tables. You have a total of 0 tables You have 900 open tables. Current table_cache hit rate is 1% , while 100% of your table cache is in use. You should probably increase your table_cache When I do SHOW STATUS; I get the following table-related numbers: Open_tables = 900 Opened_tables = 0 It seems like something is going wrong. I have some extra memory I could use on increasing the table_cache size, but my sense is that the 900 tables already available aren't doing anything, and increasing it will just waste more energy. Why might this be happening? Are there other settings that could cause all my table_cache slots to be used even though there are no hits to them? I have 150 max connections and probably no more than 4 tables per join, FWIW. Here is the tuner script output for temp tables, which I've also been tuning: TEMP TABLES Current max_heap_table_size = 90 M Current tmp_table_size = 90 M Of 11032358 temp tables, 40% were created on disk Perhaps you should increase your tmp_table_size and/or max_heap_table_size to reduce the number of disk-based temporary tables. Note! BLOB and TEXT columns are not allow in memory tables. If you are using these columns raising these values might not impact your ratio of on disk temp tables.

    Read the article

  • Access denied to external USB disk; update access rights fails in Windows 8

    - by gerard
    I use to work with 2 laptops (Windows vista and Windows 7), my work files being on an external usb disk. My oldest laptop broke down, so I bought a new one. I had no option other than take Windows 8. I suspect something changed with access rights, as my external disk suffered some "access denied" problem on Windows. I was prompted (by Windows 8) somehow to fix the access rights, which I tried to do, getting to the properties - security. This process was very slow and ended up saying disk is not ready Additionally, my external usb disk somehow was not recognized anymore. Back to Windows 7, I was warned that my disk needed to be verified, which I did. In this process, some files were lost (most of them I could recover from the folder found00x, but I have some backup anyway). Also, I don't know why, but under Windows 7, all the folder showed with a lock. Then back again to Windows 8. Same problem : access denied to my disk + no way to change access rights as it gets stuck disk is not ready". Now I am pretty sure there is some kind of bug or inconsistency in Windows 8 / Windows 7. I did 2. and 3. a few times. At some point, I also got an access denied in Windows 7. I could restore access rights to the disk to "System" (properties - security - EDIT for full control to group "system". ). But then I still get the same access right pb on Windows 8, and getting stuck in the process to restore full control to "system" -- and "admin" groups. I upgraded Windows8 with the Windows8 updates available. Does not help.

    Read the article

  • Aging SBS needs updates / Thoughts for one-off, off-line complete backup?

    - by tcv
    Hey guys, So, we checked out the status of an SBS 2003 at one of our more recent, spend-averse clients and found it to be woefully out-of-date. Scary out of date. I think it's running IE2. Ok, maybe not that far back. Anyway, I was thinking that I could use some kind of disk-imaging software to image the four IDE drives within and, in the event the server gets some kind of Update Induced Indigestion, I could completely restore. Usually my go-to software for this is Acronis, but my client will likely balk at a $500 price tag for a one-off backup with their server product. I had thought we could use the boot media from, say, Backup & Recovery 10 to take an off-line image of all the drives. According to their CHAT tech support, however, it will not work. I pressed for the technical reasons and they said they'd email me. They haven't emailed me. They still might. This server is running SBS 2003, pre sp2. It's got four IDE disks. One is a Basic disk, which contains the O/S. The others are bound as a dynamic disk. You might ask: "Don't they already have backup software?" They do! Backup Exec, a very low-end version that won't even do VSS. I don't know much about BE, but it seems to me that if the worst were to happen, it would mean building a new server O/S, installing BE (if the media is available), then restoring. Would it even work? I can take the system down for hours to do a backup and my goal here is a pretty dead-simple restore if the worst happens. Any and all suggestions are exciting. m

    Read the article

  • Where do vendors publish internal transfer rates of HDDs?

    - by red888
    So I've started to dig into storage fundamentals and found that in order to calculate the IOPS of a HDD you need to know the internal transfer rate of the drive (time it takes data to move from the platters to internal disk's cache). I went on newegg and even a few vendor sites and could not find this info published for any HDDs. Is it sometimes called something else? Take this link to a seagate HDD for instance. Nowhere do I see "internal transfer rate", but I do see something called "Sustained Data Rate OD"- is that the same thing? Just so you know where I'm getting this info (Book: "Information Storage and Management Storing, Managing..."): Consider an example with the following specifications provided for a disk: The average seek time is 5 ms in a random I/O environment; therefore, T = 5 ms. Disk rotation speed of 15,000 revolutions per minute or 250 revolutions per second — from which rotational latency (L) can be determined, which is one-half of the time taken for a full rotation or L = (0.5/250 rps expressed in ms). 40 MB/s internal data transfer rate, from which the internal transfer time (X) is derived based on the block size of the I/O — for example, an I/O with a block size of 32 KB; therefore X = 32 KB/40 MB. Consequently, the time taken by the I/O controller to serve an I/O of block size 32 KB is (TS) = 5 ms + (0.5/250) + 32 KB/40 MB = 7.8 ms. Therefore, the maximum number of I/Os serviced per second or IOPS is (1/TS) = 1/(7.8 × 10^-3) = 128 IOPS.

    Read the article

  • SSD suddenly full

    - by Daniel
    Today the hard drive of our server was suddenly full. The disk usage always stayed around 50 % in the weeks and months before (old data is regularly expunged from the server). I deleted 10 GB of files in /tmp, which strangely freed 51 GB. Here is what I did: root@***:~# df -h Dateisystem Size Used Avail Use% Eingehängt auf /dev/sda3 139G 137G 0 100% / tmpfs 3,9G 0 3,9G 0% /lib/init/rw udev 3,9G 116K 3,9G 1% /dev tmpfs 3,9G 0 3,9G 0% /dev/shm /dev/sda1 985M 25M 910M 3% /boot root@***:/var# du -hs * 3,3M backups 438M cache 9,4G lib 4,0K local 12K lock 76M log 24K mail 4,0K opt 88K run 184K spool 10G tmp 12K www root@***:/var/tmp# find -type f -print0 | xargs -0 rm root@***:/var/tmp# df -h Dateisystem Size Used Avail Use% Eingehängt auf /dev/sda3 139G 81G 51G 62% / tmpfs 3,9G 0 3,9G 0% /lib/init/rw udev 3,9G 116K 3,9G 1% /dev tmpfs 3,9G 0 3,9G 0% /dev/shm /dev/sda1 985M 25M 910M 3% /boot Any explanation as to why deleting 10 GB in /tmp gave me back 51 GB on the disk? Could this point to an SSD failure? Are there any tools for Debian to test SSD health? I already have checked syslog. The first entry relating to this incidient is a mysql message: 1:22:02 [ERROR] /usr/sbin/mysqld: Disk is full writing... So I have absolutely no idea what caused this.

    Read the article

  • Would an array of SSD drives be able to succesfully substitute the system memory?

    - by Florin Mircea
    I watched a few videos trying to answer this. This video (youtube.com/watch?v=eULFf6F5Ri8) shows a bunch of guys stacking 24 SSD's reaching a peak of around 2GBps r/w. That's under the limit of the worst DDR3 in this list (memorybenchmark.net/write_ddr3_amd.html) - that shows DDR3 memory performance varying from 2.78 to 6.55 Gb per second, but that video is over 3 years old. This video (youtube.com/watch?v=27GmBzQWwP0) shows a more optimistic situation, but for PCI-E SSD drives: 5 drives peaking at around 4Gb. And this other video shows that stacking up more than 3 SSD's doesn't realistically offer a substantial added performance. This and the fact that in all benchmarks the drives act quite poorly when dealing with small files (5k file read/write averaging from 10MB to around 30-40MBps) as opposed to how native memory handles such files, seems to indicate a definite NO to this question. Also, the write life cycle is indeed limited and the drives might wear out quickly, as kindly pointed out by paddy. However, I wanted to get more opinions on this. Would it be possible to at least obtain current memory performance with SSD's in RAID 0? And if so, in what circumstances? I am assuming using this configuration with a Windows OS that has a memory pagefile resident to that stack of SSD's, thus making it very fast to work with.

    Read the article

  • WAMP running extremely slow on WIndows 7

    - by JavaCake
    After 2 days of tough fight trying to figure out what the problem is with my Windows 7 32-bit machine at work i have nearly given up. The issue is that the pages are loaded extremely slow, the performance is both when accessed locally (127.0.0.1) or from another computer in the intranet. First to explain the system: WAMP version: Apache 2.2.22 – Mysql 5.5.24 – PHP 5.4.3 XDebug 2.1.2 XDC 1.5 PhpMyadmin 3.4.10.1 SQLBuddy 1.3.3 webGrind 1.0 DocumentRoot: Located on network drive MySQL: InnoDB Pages: PHP, MySQL, AJAX etc. So basically the changes i have made in order to get a greater performance: Changed C:\windows\system32\drivers\etc\hosts: 127.0.0.1 localhost 127.0.0.1 127.0.0.1 Modified my.ini: innodb_flush_log_at_trx_commit = 2 Modified httpd.ini: EnableMMAP on EnableSendfile on Modified php.ini: realpath_cache_size= 4m How i measure the performance is the overall loadtime of the page. I run it locally on my Mac OS X machine aswell (MAMP), and typically the frontpage loadtime is 0.06seconds but on the Windows 7 machine it is 6-10seconds. I have verified the loadtime with developertools in Chrome aswell. Furthermore the result is identical in XAMPP.

    Read the article

  • Is there an objective way to measure slowness of PC/WINDOWS?

    - by ekms
    We've a lot of users that usually complain about that his PC is "slow". (we use win XP). We usually check startup programs, virus, fragmentation, disk health and common problems that causes slowness (Symantec AV drops disk to 1mb/s , or a seagate HD firmware error in certain models), but in those cases the slowness is pretty evident. In other hand, the most common is the user complaining about his pc but for us looks OK, even in 6 years old desktops. People sometimes even complains about his new quad core desktops speed!!! So, we are asking if there's a way to OBJECTIVELY check that a computer didn't dropped its performance, compared with similar ones o previous measures, specially for work use (I don't think that 3dmark benchmark o similar may help). The only thing that I found that was useful is HDTune, but it only check hard disk performance. Basically, what we want is something that enable us to say to our users "see? your PC is as slow as was three years ago! stop complaining! Is all in your head!"

    Read the article

  • Ubuntu's garbage collection cron job for PHP sessions takes 25 minutes to run, why?

    - by Lamah
    Ubuntu has a cron job set up which looks for and deletes old PHP sessions: # Look for and purge old sessions every 30 minutes 09,39 * * * * root [ -x /usr/lib/php5/maxlifetime ] \ && [ -d /var/lib/php5 ] && find /var/lib/php5/ -depth -mindepth 1 \ -maxdepth 1 -type f -cmin +$(/usr/lib/php5/maxlifetime) ! -execdir \ fuser -s {} 2> /dev/null \; -delete My problem is that this process is taking a very long time to run, with lots of disk IO. Here's my CPU usage graph: The cleanup running is represented by the teal spikes. At the beginning of the period, PHP's cleanup jobs were scheduled at the default 09 and 39 minutes times. At 15:00 I removed the 39 minute time from cron, so a cleanup job twice the size runs half as often (you can see the peaks get twice as wide and half as frequent). Here are the corresponding graphs for IO time: And disk operations: At the peak where there were about 14,000 sessions active, the cleanup can be seen to run for a full 25 minutes, apparently using 100% of one core of the CPU and what seems to be 100% of the disk IO for the entire period. Why is it so resource intensive? An ls of the session directory /var/lib/php5 takes just a fraction of a second. So why does it take a full 25 minutes to trim old sessions? Is there anything I can do to speed this up? The filesystem for this device is currently ext4, running on Ubuntu Precise 12.04 64-bit. EDIT: I suspect that the load is due to the unusual process "fuser" (since I expect a simple rm to be a damn sight faster than the performance I'm seeing). I'm going to remove the use of fuser and see what happens.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128  | Next Page >