Search Results

Search found 40567 results on 1623 pages for 'database performance'.

Page 134/1623 | < Previous Page | 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141  | Next Page >

  • One on One table relation - is it harmful to keep relation in both tables?

    - by EBAGHAKI
    I have 2 tables that their rows have one on one relation.. For you to understand the situation, suppose there is one table with user informations and there is another table that contains a very specific informations and each user can only link to one these specific kind of informations ( suppose second table as characters ) And that character can only assign to the user who grabs it, Is it against the rules of designing clean databases to hold the relation key in both tables? User Table: user_id, name, age, character_id Character Table: character_id, shape, user_id I have to do it for performance, how do you think about it?

    Read the article

  • Is there a performance difference between Windows 7 on SSD installed from scratch versus it using a recent ghost/clone drive image from a harddisk?

    - by therobyouknow
    I'm planning to upgrade a notebook PC to a Solid-State Flash Drive (SSD) soon. I want to use the notebook before that and am considering installing Windows 7 on the hard disk (spinning variety, 5400rpm) before I get the SSD. To save time I am wondering if I can ghost/clone the installation of Windows 7 from the hard drive and put on the SSD. Would the performance of this clone from the harddisk onto the SSD be different from starting again and reinstalling Windows 7 from scratch on the SSD? (Windows 7 32bit professional)

    Read the article

  • Dual boot, win7 & ubuntu. Gparted, resize not move. Performance?

    - by data_jepp
    I installed dual boot on a computer that already had win7 installed. The question here is about gparted ability to move partitions. I made place for ubuntu in the computers "Data" partition, by resizing it. But I canceled the "move" action. Was that incredibly stupid, or is this care? Maybe performance is affected. Can this effect the hd's lifespan? The computer is UL30A.

    Read the article

  • How close can I get C# to the performance of C++ for small intensive tasks?

    - by SLC
    I was thinking about the speed difference of C++ to C# being mostly about C# compiling to byte-code that is taken in by the JIT compiler (is that correct?) and all the checks C# does. I notice that it is possible to turn a lot of these functions off, both in the compile options, and possibly through using the unsafe keyword as unsafe code is not verifiable by the common language runtime. Therefore if you were to write a simple console application in both languages, that flipped an imaginary coin an infinite number of times and displayed the results to the screen every 10,000 or so iterations, how much speed difference would there be? I chose this because it's a very simple program. I'd like to test this but I don't know C++ or have the tools to compile it. This is my C# version though: static void Main(string[] args) { unsafe { Random rnd = new Random(); int heads = 0, tails = 0; while (true) { if (rnd.NextDouble() > 0.5) heads++; else tails++; if ((heads + tails) % 1000000 == 0) Console.WriteLine("Heads: {0} Tails: {1}", heads, tails); } } } Is the difference enough to warrant deliberately compiling sections of code "unsafe" or into DLLs that do not have some of the compile options like overflow checking enabled? Or does it go the other way, where it would be beneficial to compile sections in C++? I'm sure interop speed comes into play too then. To avoid subjectivity, I reiterate the specific parts of this question as: Does C# have a performance boost from using unsafe code? Do the compile options such as disabling overflow checking boost performance, and do they affect unsafe code? Would the program above be faster in C++ or negligably different? Is it worth compiling long intensive number-crunching tasks in a language such as C++ or using /unsafe for a bonus? Less subjectively, could I complete an intensive operation faster by doing this?

    Read the article

  • How to increase the performance of a loop which runs for every 'n' minutes.

    - by GustlyWind
    Hi Giving small background to my requirement and what i had accomplished so far: There are 18 Scheduler tasks run at regular intervals (least being 30 mins) takes input of nearly 5000 eligible employees run into a static method for iteration and generates a mail content for that employee and mails. An average task takes about 9 min multiplied by 18 will be roughly 162 mins meanwhile there would be next tasks which will be in queue (I assume). So my plan is something like the below loop try { // Handle Arraylist of alerts eligible employees Iterator employee = empIDs.iterator(); while (employee.hasNext()) { ScheduledImplementation.getInstance().sendAlertInfoToEmpForGivenAlertType((Long)employee.next(), configType,schedType); } } catch (Exception vEx) { _log.error("Exception Caught During sending " + configType + " messages:" + configType, vEx); } Since I know how many employees would come to my method I will divide the while loop into two and perform simultaneous operations on two or three employees at a time. Is this possible. Or is there any other ways I can improve the performance. Some of the things I had implemented so far 1.Wherever possible made methods static and variables too Didn't bother to catch exceptions and send back because these are background tasks. (And I assume this improves performance) Get the DB values in one query instead of multiple hits. If am successful in optimizing the while loop I think i can save couple of mins. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Is having a lot of DOM elements bad for performance?

    - by rFactor
    Hi, I am making a button that looks like this: <!-- Container --> <div> <!-- Top --> <div> <div></div> <div></div> <div></div> </div> <!-- Middle --> <div> <div></div> <div></div> <div></div> </div> <!-- Bottom --> <div> <div></div> <div></div> <div></div> </div> </div> It has many elements, because I want it to be skinnable without limiting the skinners abilities. However, I am concerned about performance. Does having a lot of DOM elements refrect bad performance? Obviously there will always be an impact, but how great is that?

    Read the article

  • How can I improve the performance of LinqToSql queries that use EntitySet properties?

    - by DanM
    I'm using LinqToSql to query a small, simple SQL Server CE database. I've noticed that any operations involving sub-properties are disappointingly slow. For example, if I have a Customer table that is referenced by an Order table, LinqToSql will automatically create an EntitySet<Order> property. This is a nice convenience, allowing me to do things like Customer.Order.Where(o => o.ProductName = "Stopwatch"), but for some reason, SQL Server CE hangs up pretty bad when I try to do stuff like this. One of my queries, which isn't really that complicated takes 3-4 seconds to complete. I can get the speed up to acceptable, even fast, if I just grab the two tables individually and convert them to List<Customer> and List<Order>, then join then manually with my own query, but this is throwing out a lot of what makes LinqToSql so appealing. So, I'm wondering if I can somehow get the whole database into RAM and just query that way, then occasionally save it. Is this possible? How? If not, is there anything else I can do to boost the performance besides resorting to doing all the joins manually? Note: My database in its initial state is about 250K and I don't expect it to grow to more than 1-2Mb. So, loading the data into RAM certainly wouldn't be a problem from a memory point of view. Update Here are the table definitions for the example I used in my question: create table Order ( Id int identity(1, 1) primary key, ProductName ntext null ) create table Customer ( Id int identity(1, 1) primary key, OrderId int null references Order (Id) )

    Read the article

  • Rewriting jQuery to plain old javascript - are the performance gains worth it?

    - by Swader
    Since jQuery is an incredibly easy and banal library, I've developed a rather complex project fairly quickly with it. The entire interface is jQuery based, and memory is cleaned regularly to maintain optimum performance. Everything works very well in Firefox, and exceptionally so in Chrome (other browsers are of no concern for me as this is not a commercial or publicly available product). What I'm wondering now is - since pure plain old javascript is really not a complicated language to master, would it be performance enhancing to rewrite the whole thing in plain old JS, and if so, how much of a boost would you expect to get from it? If the answers prove positive enough, I'll go ahead and do it, run a benchmark and report back with the precise findings. Cheers Edit: Thanks guys, valuable insight. The purpose was not to "re-invent the wheel" - it was just for experience and personal improvement. Just because something exists, doesn't mean you shouldn't explore it into greater detail, know how it works or try to recreate it. This is the same reason I seldom use frameworks, I would much rather use my own code and iron it out and gain massive experience doing it, than start off by using someone else's code, regardless of how ironed out it is. Anyway, won't be doing it, thanks for saving me the effort :)

    Read the article

  • Performance of a get unique elements/group by operation on an IEnumerable<T>.

    - by tolism7
    I was wondering how could I improve the performance of the following code: public class MyObject { public int Year { get; set; } } //In my case I have 30000 IEnumerable<MyObject> data = MethodThatReturnsManyMyObjects(); var groupedByYear = data.GroupBy(x => x.Year); //Here is the where it takes around 5 seconds foreach (var group in groupedByYear) //do something here. The idea is to get a set of objects with unique year values. In my scenario there are only 6 years included in the 30000 items in the list so the foreach loop will be executed 6 times only. So we have many items needing to be grouped in a few groups. Using the .Distinct() with an explicit IEqualityComparer would be an alternative but somehow I feel that it wont make any difference. I can understand if 30000 items is too much and that i should be happy with the 5 seconds I get, but I was wondering if the above can be imporved performance wise. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • MySQL - What is wrong with this query or my database? Terrible performance.

    - by Moss
    SELECT * from `employees` a LEFT JOIN (SELECT phone1 p1, count(*) c, FROM `employees` GROUP BY phone1) b ON a.phone1 = b.p1; I'm not sure if it is this query in particular that has the problem. I have been getting terrible performance in general with this database. The table in question has 120,000 rows. I have tried this particular query remotely and locally with the MyISAM and InnoDB engines, with different types of joins, and with and without an index on phone1. I can get this to complete in about 4 minutes on a 10,000 row table successfully but performance drops exponentially with larger tables. Remotely it will lose connection to the server and locally it brings my system to its knees and seems to go on forever. This query is only a smaller step I was trying to do when a larger query couldn't complete. Maybe I should explain the whole scenario. I have one big flat ugly table that lists a bunch of people and their contact info and the info of the companies they work for. I'm trying to normalize the database and intelligently determine which phone numbers apply to individual people and which apply to an office location. My reasoning is that if a phone number occurs multiple times and the number of occurrence equals the number of times that the street address it is attached to occurs then it must be an office number. So the first step is to count each phone number grouping by phone number. Normally if you just use COUNT()...GROUP BY it will only list the first record it finds in that group so I figured I have to join the full table to the count table where the phone number matches. This does work but as I said I can't successfully complete it on any table much larger than 10,000 rows. This seems pathetic and this doesn't seem like a crazy query to do. Is there a better way to achieve what I want or do I have to break my large table into 12 pieces or is there something wrong with the table or db?

    Read the article

  • HD video editing system with Truecrypt

    - by Rob
    I'm looking to do hi-def video editing and transcoding on an unencrypted standard partition, with Truecrypt on the system partition for sensitive data. I'm aiming to keep certain data private but still have performance where needed. Goals: Maximum, unimpacted, performance possible for hi-def video editing, encryption of video not required Encrypt system partition, using Truecrypt, for web/email privacy, etc. in the event of loss In other words I want to selectively encrypt the hard drive - i.e. make the system partition encrypted but not impact the original maximum performance that would be available to me for hi-def/HD video editing. The thinking is to use an unencrypted partition for the video and set up video applications to point at that. Assuming that they would use that partition only for their workspace and not the encrypted system partition, then I should expect to not get any performance hit. Would I be correct? I guess it might depend on the application, if that app is hard-wired to use the system partition always for temporary storage during editing and transcoding, or if it has to be installed on the C: system partition always. So some real data on how various apps behave in the respect would be useful, e.g. Adobe, Cyberlink, Nero etc. etc. I have a Intel i7 Quad-core (8 threads) 1.6Ghz (up to 2.8Ghz turbo-boost) 4Gb, 7200rpm SATA, nvidia HP laptop. I've read the excellent posting about the general performance impact of truecrypt but the benchmarks weren't specific enough for my needs where I'm dealing with HD-video and using a non-encrypted partition to maintain max performance.

    Read the article

  • Why is my rsync so slow?

    - by iblue
    My Laptop and my workstation are both connected to a Gigabit Switch. Both are running Linux. But when I copy files with rsync, it performs badly. I get about 22 MB/s. Shouldn't I theoretically get about 125 MB/s? What is the limiting factor here? EDIT: I conducted some experiments. Write performance on the laptop The laptop has a xfs filesystem with full disk encryption. It uses aes-cbc-essiv:sha256 cipher mode with 256 bits key length. Disk write performance is 58.8 MB/s. iblue@nerdpol:~$ LANG=C dd if=/dev/zero of=test.img bs=1M count=1024 1073741824 Bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 18.2735 s, 58.8 MB/s Read performance on the workstation The files I copied are on a software RAID-5 over 5 HDDs. On top of the raid is a lvm. The volume itself is encrypted with the same cipher. The workstation has a FX-8150 cpu that has a native AES-NI instruction set which speeds up encryption. Disk read performance is 256 MB/s (cache was cold). iblue@raven:/mnt/bytemachine/imgs$ dd if=backup-1333796266.tar.bz2 of=/dev/null bs=1M 10213172008 bytes (10 GB) copied, 39.8882 s, 256 MB/s Network performance I ran iperf between the two clients. Network performance is 939 Mbit/s iblue@raven $ iperf -c 94.135.XXX ------------------------------------------------------------ Client connecting to 94.135.XXX, TCP port 5001 TCP window size: 23.2 KByte (default) ------------------------------------------------------------ [ 3] local 94.135.XXX port 59385 connected with 94.135.YYY port 5001 [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 1.09 GBytes 939 Mbits/sec

    Read the article

  • google reader like architecture

    - by islam
    dear i want to make architect for application like google reader that save users feeds(rss,atoms) in database what is the best architecture i can do to make something like this ineed to know a good db desgin if i have to save something on files (xml or something) need to archive .etc hope to find some hints

    Read the article

  • Are soft deletes a good idea?

    - by Khou
    Are soft deletes a good idea or a bad idea? Instead of actually deleting a record in your database, you would just flag it as "IsDeleted" = true, and upon recovery of the record you could just flag it as "False". Is this a good idea?

    Read the article

  • Working with foreigh keys - cannot insert

    - by Industrial
    Hi everyone! Doing my first tryouts with foreign keys in a mySQL database and are trying to do a insert, that fails for this reason: Integrity constraint violation: 1452 Cannot add or update a child row: a foreign key constraint fails Does this mean that foreign keys restrict INSERTS as well as DELETES and/or UPDATES on each table that is enforced with foreign keys relations? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • relational databases and multicast messages

    - by xRobot
    I have read that relational databases are a terrible way to do multicast messages like twitter. So twitter saves every tweet only one times and then retrieve its in every stream ? or saves every tweet in every users's stream ? I want to know why relational database ( like mysql or postgresql ) doesn't good for twitter-like application.

    Read the article

  • django forms- register user script

    - by itsandy
    Hi all, I want to make something like http://www.djangosnippets.org/accounts/register/ using django..the register form. I am new to django. i have made a simple view form using django forms but unable o understand how to connect my form to a database. Im using postgresql. is there an easy way to use some snippet or script to achieve this. Please Help

    Read the article

  • index 'enabled' fields good idea?

    - by sibidiba
    Content of a website is stored in a MySQL database. 99% of the content will be enabled, but some (users, posts etc.) will be disabled. Most of the queries end as WHERE (...) AND enabled Is it a good idea to create an index on the field 'enabled'?

    Read the article

  • Meaning of Primary Key to Microsoft SQL Server 2008

    - by usr
    What meaning does the concept of a primary key have to the database engine of SQL Server? I don't mean the clustered/nonclustered index created on the "ID" column, i mean the constraint object "primary key". Does it matter if it exists or not? Alternatives: alter table add primary key clustered alter table create clustered index Does it make a difference?

    Read the article

  • The Next-gen Databases

    - by Randin
    I'm learning traditional Relational Databases (with PostgreSQL) and doing some research I've come across some new types of databases. CouchDB, Drizzle, and Scalaris to name a few, what is going to be the next database technologies to deal with?

    Read the article

  • What's wrong with foreign keys?

    - by kronoz
    I remember hearing Joel mention in the podcast that he'd barely ever used a foreign key (if I remember correctly). However, to me they seem pretty vital to avoid duplication and subsequent data integrity problems throughout your database. Do people have some solid reasons as to why (to avoid a discussion in lines with SO principals)? Edit: "I've yet to have a reason to create a foreign key, so this might be my first reason to actually set up one."

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141  | Next Page >