Search Results

Search found 1283 results on 52 pages for 'micro benchmark'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 17/52 | < Previous Page | 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  | Next Page >

  • Amazon EC2 prices for Windows Instance?

    - by Abhishek Gupta
    Hello Guys , I want to ask from some Amazon cloud technology Experts , that is it profitable to deploy our web application on amazon cloud as compared to normal server? Currently there are micro,small, large and other types of instances available , if we start from micro instance then we realize that our app needs some more CPU cycle and Ram then how can we dynamically move to next more powerful instance automatically at runtime. What is the approx minimum yearly cost for a single EC2 windows small instance? I wnat to deploy a simple Online quiz application (ASP.net based) on Amazon Cloud which at a time can have maximum of 500 users only. Please suggest me as I m very new to Cloud .Should I go for Azure or Amazon?

    Read the article

  • Mathematica & J/Link: Memory Constraints?

    - by D-Bug
    I am doing a computing-intensive benchmark using Mathematica and its J/Link Java interface. The benchmark grinds to a halt if a memory footprint of about 320 MB is reached, since this seems to be the limit and the garbage collector needs more and more time and will eventually fail. The Mathematica function ReinstallJava takes the argument command line. I tried to do ReinstallJava[CommandLine -> "java -Xmx2000m ..."] but Mathematica seems to ignore the -Xmx option completely. How can I set the -Xmx memory option for my java program? Where does the limit of 320 MB come from? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Why PHP (script) serves more requests than CGI (compiled)?

    - by Lucas Batistussi
    I developed the following CGI script and run on Apache 2 (http://localhost/test.chtml). I did same script in PHP (http://localhost/verifica.php). Later I performed Apache benchmark using Apache Benchmark tool. The results are showed in images. include #include <stdlib.h> int main(void) { printf("%s%c%c\n", "Content-Type:text/html;charset=iso-8859-1",13,10); printf("<TITLE>Multiplication results</TITLE>\n"); printf("<H3>Multiplication results</H3>\n"); return 0; } Someone can explain me why PHP serves more requests than CGI script?

    Read the article

  • Performance issues when using SSD for a developer notebook (WAMP/LAMP stack)?

    - by András Szepesházi
    I'm a web application developer using my notebook as a standalone development environment (WAMP stack). I just switched from a Core2-duo Vista 32 bit notebook with 2Gb RAM and SATA HDD, to an i5-2520M Win7 64 bit with 4Gb RAM and 128 GB SDD (Corsair P3 128). My initial experience was what I expected, fast boot, quick load of all the applications (Eclipse takes now 5 seconds as opposed to 30s on my old notebook), overall great experience. Then I started to build up my development stack, both as LAMP (using VirtualBox with a debian guest) and WAMP (windows native apache + mysql + php). I wanted to compare those two. This still all worked great out, then I started to pull in my projects to these stacks. And here came the nasty surprise, one of those projects produced a lot worse response times than on my old notebook (that was true for both the VirtualBox and WAMP stack). Apache, php and mysql configurations were practically identical in all environments. I started to do a lot of benchmarking and profiling, and here is what I've found: All general benchmarks (Performance Test 7.0, HDTune Pro, wPrime2 and some more) gave a big advantage to the new notebook. Nothing surprising here. Disc specific tests showed that read/write operations peaked around 380M/160M for the SSD, and all the different sized block operations also performed very well. Started apache performance benchmarking with Apache Benchmark for a small static html file (10 concurrent threads, 500 iterations). Old notebook: min 47ms, median 111ms, max 156ms New WAMP stack: min 71ms, median 135ms, max 296ms New LAMP stack (in VirtualBox): min 6ms, median 46ms, max 175ms Right here I don't get why the native WAMP stack performed so bad, but at least the LAMP environment brought the expected speed. Apache performance measurement for non-cached php content. The php runs a loop of 1000 and generates sha1(uniqid()) inisde. Again, 10 concurrent threads, 500 iterations were used for the benchmark. Old notebook: min 0ms, median 39ms, max 218ms New WAMP stack: min 20ms, median 61ms, max 186ms New LAMP stack (in VirtualBox): min 124ms, median 704ms, max 2463ms What the hell? The new LAMP performed miserably, and even the new native WAMP was outperformed by the old notebook. php + mysql test. The test consists of connecting to a database and reading a single record form a table using INNER JOIN on 3 more (indexed) tables, repeated 100 times within a loop. Databases were identical. 10 concurrent threads, 100 iterations were used for the benchmark. Old notebook: min 1201ms, median 1734ms, max 3728ms New WAMP stack: min 367ms, median 675ms, max 1893ms New LAMP stack (in VirtualBox): min 1410ms, median 3659ms, max 5045ms And the same test with concurrency set to 1 (instead of 10): Old notebook: min 1201ms, median 1261ms, max 1357ms New WAMP stack: min 399ms, median 483ms, max 539ms New LAMP stack (in VirtualBox): min 285ms, median 348ms, max 444ms Strictly for my purposes, as I'm using a self contained development environment (= low concurrency) I could be satisfied with the second test's result. Though I have no idea why the VirtualBox environment performed so bad with higher concurrency. Finally I performed a test of including many php files. The application that I mentioned at the beginning, the one that was performing so bad, has a heavy bootstrap, loads hundreds of small library and configuration files while initializing. So this test does nothing else just includes about 100 files. Concurrency set to 1, 100 iterations: Old notebook: min 140ms, median 168ms, max 406ms New WAMP stack: min 434ms, median 488ms, max 604ms New LAMP stack (in VirtualBox): min 413ms, median 1040ms, max 1921ms Even if I consider that VirtualBox reached those files via shared folders, and that slows things down a bit, I still don't see how could the old notebook outperform so heavily both new configurations. And I think this is the real root of the slow performance, as the application uses even more includes, and the whole bootstrap will occur several times within a page request (for each ajax call, for example). To sum it up, here I am with a brand new high-performance notebook that loads the same page in 20 seconds, that my old notebook can do in 5-7 seconds. Needless to say, I'm not a very happy person right now. Why do you think I experience these poor performance values? What are my options to remedy this situation?

    Read the article

  • HTC to launch Windows 7 phone in India

    - by samsudeen
    It is a good news for the Indian smart phone users as the wait is finally over for Windows 7 mobile.The Taiwanese  mobile giant HTC is all set to release its Windows 7 based Smartphone series in India from January. HTC HD7 & HTC Mozart , the two smart phones running on Windows 7 OS started appearing on the HTC Indian website (HTC India) from last week.Though Flip kart (Indian online e-commerce website)  has started getting pre -orders for HTC HD7 a month ago , the buzz has started from last week after the introduction of “HTC Mozart”. The complete feature comparison between both the smart phones is given below. Feature Comparison HTC Mozart HTC HD 7 Microsoft Windows 7 Microsoft Windows 7 Qualcomm Snapdragon Processor QSD 8250 1 GHz CPU Qualcomm Snapdragon Processor QSD 8250 1 GHz CPU 8MegaPixel camera with Xenon Flash 5 MP, 2592?1944 pixels, autofocus, dual-LED flash, 480 x 800 pixels, 3.7 inches 480 x 800 pixels, 4.3 inches 11.9mm thick and Weighs 130g 11.2 mm thick and Weighs 162 g Bluetooth 2.1 Bluetooth 2.1 8 GB of internal storage memory 8 GB of internal storage memory 512MB of ROM and 576 of RAM 512MB of ROM and 576 of RAM 3G HSDPA 7.2 Mbps and HSUPA 2 Mbps 3G HSDPA 7.2 Mbps; HSUPA 2 Mbps Wi-Fi 802.11 b/g/n Wi-Fi 802.11 b/g/n Micro-USB interconnector Micro-USB interconnector 3.5mm audio jack 3.5mm audio jack GPS antenna GPS antenna Standard battery Li-Po 1300 MA Standard battery, Li-Ion 1230 MA Standby 360 h (2G) up to 435 h (3G) Up to 310 h (2G) / Up to 320 h (3G) Talk time Up to 6 h 40 min (2G) and 5 h 30 min (3G) Up to 6 h 20 min (2G) / Up to 5 h 20 min (3G) Estimated Price “HTC HD 7″ is priced between  INR 27855 to 32000. though the price of “HDT Mozart” is officially not announced it is estimated to be around INR 30000. Where to Buy The Windows 7 phone is not yet available in stores directly, but most of the leading mobile stores are getting pre -orders. I have given some of the online store links below. Flip kart UniverCell This article titled,HTC to launch Windows 7 phone in India, was originally published at Tech Dreams. Grab our rss feed or fan us on Facebook to get updates from us.

    Read the article

  • Database Trends & Applications column: Database Benchmarking from A to Z

    - by KKline
    Have you heard of the monthly print and web magazine Database Trends & Applications (DBTA)? Did you know I'm the regular columnist covering SQL Server ? For the past six months, I've been writing a series of articles about database benchmarking culminating in the latest article discussing my three favorite database benchmarking tools: the free, open-source HammerDB, the native SQL Server Distributed Replay Utility, and the commercial Benchmark Factory from Dell / Quest Software. Wondering what...(read more)

    Read the article

  • code metrics for .net code

    - by user20358
    While the code metrics tool gives a pretty good analysis of the code being analyzed, I was wondering if there was any such benchmark on acceptable standards for the following as well: Maximum number of types per assembly Maximum number of such types that can be accessible Maximum number of parameters per method Acceptable RFC count Acceptable Afferent coupling count Acceptable Efferent coupling count Any other metrics to judge the quality of .Net code by? Thanks for your time.

    Read the article

  • Agile isn’t always Agile

    - by BuckWoody
    I want to make a disclaimer before I dive into this topic – At Microsoft we use all kinds of development methodologies, and I’ve worked in lots of other shops using lots of methodologies. This is one of those “religious” topics like which programming language or database is best, and is bound to generate some heat. But this isn’t pointed towards one particular event or company. But I really don’t like Agile. In particular, I really don’t like Scrum. Let me explain. Agile is a methodology for developing software that emphasizes adapting to change more so than the traditional “waterfall” method of developing software. Within Agile is a process called a “scrum” meeting. The pitch goes that in this quick, stand-up meeting the people involved in the development project (which should include the DBA, but very often doesn’t) go around the room stating what they are working on, when that will be finished and what is keeping them from getting finished (“blockers”, these are called). Sounds all very non-threatening – we’re just “enabling” the developers to work more efficiently. And that’s what we all want, isn’t it? Except it doesn’t work. In my experience (and yours might be VERY different) this just turns into a micro-management environment, where devs have to defend their daily work. Of all the work environments I hate the most, micro-management environments are THE worst. I don’t like workign in them, and I don’t like creating them. The other issue I have with Scrum is that it makes your whole team task-focused. Everyone wants to make sure that they are not the “long pole” in the meeting (meaning that they aren’t the one that gets all the attention) so they only focus on safe, quick tasks. And although you have all of the boxes checked, the project does not go well at all – even when it does finish. Before you comment (and please do comment) I fully realize that Agile <> Scrum. But in my experience, it sometimes turns into that. Share this post: email it! | bookmark it! | digg it! | reddit! | kick it! | live it!

    Read the article

  • Robotic Arm &ndash; Hardware

    - by Szymon Kobalczyk
    This is first in series of articles about project I've been building  in my spare time since last Summer. Actually it all began when I was researching a topic of modeling human motion kinematics in order to create gesture recognition library for Kinect. This ties heavily into motion theory of robotic manipulators so I also glanced at some designs of robotic arms. Somehow I stumbled upon this cool looking open source robotic arm: It was featured on Thingiverse and published by user jjshortcut (Jan-Jaap). Since for some time I got hooked on toying with microcontrollers, robots and other electronics, I decided to give it a try and build it myself. In this post I will describe the hardware build of the arm and in later posts I will be writing about the software to control it. Another reason to build the arm myself was the cost factor. Even small commercial robotic arms are quite expensive – products from Lynxmotion and Dagu look great but both cost around USD $300 (actually there is one cheap arm available but it looks more like a toy to me). In comparison this design is quite cheap. It uses seven hobby grade servos and even the cheapest ones should work fine. The structure is build from a set of laser cut parts connected with few metal spacers (15mm and 47mm) and lots of M3 screws. Other than that you’d only need a microcontroller board to drive the servos. So in total it comes a lot cheaper to build it yourself than buy an of the shelf robotic arm. Oh, and if you don’t like this one there are few more robotic arm projects at Thingiverse (including one by oomlout). Laser cut parts Some time ago I’ve build another robot using laser cut parts so I knew the process already. You can grab the design files in both DXF and EPS format from Thingiverse, and there are also 3D models of each part in STL. Actually the design is split into a second project for the mini servo gripper (there is also a standard servo version available but it won’t fit this arm).  I wanted to make some small adjustments, layout, and add measurements to the parts before sending it for cutting. I’ve looked at some free 2D CAD programs, and finally did all this work using QCad 3 Beta with worked great for me (I also tried LibreCAD but it didn’t work that well). All parts are cut from 4 mm thick material. Because I was worried that acrylic is too fragile and might break, I also ordered another set cut from plywood. In the end I build it from plywood because it was easier to glue (I was told acrylic requires a special glue). Btw. I found a great laser cutter service in Kraków and highly recommend it (www.ebbox.com.pl). It cost me only USD $26 for both sets ($16 acrylic + $10 plywood). Metal parts I bought all the M3 screws and nuts at local hardware store. Make sure to look for nylon lock (nyloc) nuts for the gripper because otherwise it unscrews and comes apart quickly. I couldn’t find local store with metal spacers and had to order them online (you’d need 11 x 47mm and 3 x 15mm). I think I paid less than USD $10 for all metal parts. Servos This arm uses five standards size servos to drive the arm itself, and two micro servos are used on the gripper. Author of the project used Modelcraft RS-2 Servo and Modelcraft ES-05 HT Servo. I had two Futaba S3001 servos laying around, and ordered additional TowerPro SG-5010 standard size servos and TowerPro SG90 micro servos. However it turned out that the SG90 won’t fit in the gripper so I had to replace it with a slightly smaller E-Sky EK2-0508 micro servo. Later it also turned out that Futaba servos make some strange noise while working so I swapped one with TowerPro SG-5010 which has higher torque (8kg / cm). I’ve also bought three servo extension cables. All servos cost me USD $45. Assembly The build process is not difficult but you need to think carefully about order of assembling it. You can do the base and upper arm first. Because two servos in the base are close together you need to put first with one piece of lower arm already connected before you put the second servo. Then you connect the upper arm and finally put the second piece of lower arm to hold it together. Gripper and base require some gluing so think it through too. Make sure to look closely at all the photos on Thingiverse (also other people copies) and read additional posts on jjshortcust’s blog: My mini servo grippers and completed robotic arm  Multiply the robotic arm and electronics Here is also Rob’s copy cut from aluminum My assembled arm looks like this – I think it turned out really nice: Servo controller board The last piece of hardware I needed was an electronic board that would take command from PC and drive all seven servos. I could probably use Arduino for this task, and in fact there are several Arduino servo shields available (for example from Adafruit or Renbotics).  However one problem is that most support only up to six servos, and second that their accuracy is limited by Arduino’s timer frequency. So instead I looked for dedicated servo controller and found a series of Maestro boards from Pololu. I picked the Pololu Mini Maestro 12-Channel USB Servo Controller. It has many nice features including native USB connection, high resolution pulses (0.25µs) with no jitter, built-in speed and acceleration control, and even scripting capability. Another cool feature is that besides servo control, each channel can be configured as either general input or output. So far I’m using seven channels so I still have five available to connect some sensors (for example distance sensor mounted on gripper might be useful). And last but important factor was that they have SDK in .NET – what more I could wish for! The board itself is very small – half of the size of Tic-Tac box. I picked one for about USD $35 in this store. Perhaps another good alternative would be the Phidgets Advanced Servo 8-Motor – but it is significantly more expensive at USD $87.30. The Maestro Controller Driver and Software package includes Maestro Control Center program with lets you immediately configure the board. For each servo I first figured out their move range and set the min/max limits. I played with setting the speed an acceleration values as well. Big issue for me was that there are two servos that control position of lower arm (shoulder joint), and both have to be moved at the same time. This is where the scripting feature of Pololu board turned out very helpful. I wrote a script that synchronizes position of second servo with first one – so now I only need to move one servo and other will follow automatically. This turned out tricky because I couldn’t find simple offset mapping of the move range for each servo – I had to divide it into several sub-ranges and map each individually. The scripting language is bit assembler-like but gets the job done. And there is even a runtime debugging and stack view available. Altogether I’m very happy with the Pololu Mini Maestro Servo Controller, and with this final piece I completed the build and was able to move my arm from the Meastro Control program.   The total cost of my robotic arm was: $10 laser cut parts $10 metal parts $45 servos $35 servo controller ----------------------- $100 total So here you have all the information about the hardware. In next post I’ll start talking about the software that I wrote in Microsoft Robotics Developer Studio 4. Stay tuned!

    Read the article

  • Intel Xeon 5600 (Westmere-EP) and 7500 (Nehalem-EX)

    - by jchang
    Intel Xeon 5600 (Westmere-EP) and 7500 (Nehalem-EX) Performance Intel launched the Xeon 5600 series (Westmere-EP, 32nm) six-core processors on 16 March 2010 without any TPC benchmark results. In the performance world, no results almost always mean bad or not good results. Yet there is every reason to believe that the Xeon 5600 series with six-cores (X models only) will performance exactly as expected for a 50% increase in the number of cores at the same frequency (as the 5500) with no system level...(read more)

    Read the article

  • How to setup Dual Head with "radeon" driver for R770?

    - by user1709408
    I want to make dual head setup without xrandr but with Xinerama. I put "Screen 1" line into xorg.conf, but card still show identical output on DVI-2 and DVI-3 It is important to use xinerama for me (to glue three monitors), that's why i decide not to use ranrd (randr is incompatible with xinerama as i read somewhere) Here is my videocard (HD 4850 X2): lspci | grep R700 03:00.0 VGA compatible controller: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] nee ATI R700 [Radeon HD 4850] 04:00.0 Display controller: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] nee ATI R700 [Radeon HD 4850] Here is how monitors are connected: grep "DVI" /var/log/Xorg.0.log [ 1210.002] (II) RADEON(0): Output DVI-0 using monitor section Monitor0 [ 1210.048] (II) RADEON(0): Output DVI-1 has no monitor section [ 1210.079] (II) RADEON(0): EDID for output DVI-0 [ 1210.080] (II) RADEON(0): Printing probed modes for output DVI-0 [ 1210.128] (II) RADEON(0): EDID for output DVI-1 [ 1210.128] (II) RADEON(0): Output DVI-0 connected [ 1210.128] (II) RADEON(0): Output DVI-1 disconnected [ 1210.128] (II) RADEON(0): Output DVI-0 using initial mode 1920x1200 [ 1210.160] (II) RADEON(1): Output DVI-2 using monitor section Monitor2 [ 1210.215] (II) RADEON(1): Output DVI-3 has no monitor section [ 1210.246] (II) RADEON(1): EDID for output DVI-2 [ 1210.247] (II) RADEON(1): Printing probed modes for output DVI-2 [ 1210.299] (II) RADEON(1): EDID for output DVI-3 [ 1210.300] (II) RADEON(1): Printing probed modes for output DVI-3 [ 1210.300] (II) RADEON(1): Output DVI-2 connected [ 1210.300] (II) RADEON(1): Output DVI-3 connected [ 1210.300] (II) RADEON(1): Output DVI-2 using initial mode 1920x1200 [ 1210.300] (II) RADEON(1): Output DVI-3 using initial mode 1920x1200 Here is my /etc/X11/xorg.conf Section "ServerFlags" Option "RandR" "0" Option "Xinerama" "1" EndSection Section "ServerLayout" Identifier "Three Head Layout" Screen "MyPrecious0" Screen "MyPrecious2" RightOf "MyPrecious0" Screen "MyPrecious3" LeftOf "MyPrecious0" EndSection Section "Screen" Identifier "MyPrecious0" Monitor "Monitor0" Device "Device300" EndSection Section "Screen" Identifier "MyPrecious2" Monitor "Monitor2" Device "Device400" EndSection Section "Screen" Identifier "MyPrecious3" Monitor "Monitor3" Device "Device401" EndSection Section "Device" Identifier "Device300" BusID "PCI:3:0:0" Screen 0 Driver "radeon" EndSection Section "Device" Identifier "Device400" BusID "PCI:4:0:0" Screen 0 Driver "radeon" EndSection Section "Device" Identifier "Device401" BusID "PCI:4:0:0" Screen 1 Driver "radeon" EndSection Section "Monitor" Identifier "Monitor0" EndSection Section "Monitor" Identifier "Monitor2" EndSection Section "Monitor" Identifier "Monitor3" EndSection I tried to switch to vesa driver (didn't work for me) I tried to add options like Option "ZaphodHeads" "DVI-2" and Option "ZaphodHeads" "DVI-3" into sections "Device 400" and "Device 401" (this didn't help because "ZaphodHeads" option is for ranrd, and randr is disabled by decision) I tried to merge sections "Device 400" and "Device 401" into one section and add Option "ZaphodHeads" "DVI-2,DVI-3" (see comment about randr above) single section setup helps to change log line RADEON(1): Output DVI-3 has no monitor section into RADEON(1): Output DVI-3 using monitor section Monitor3 but nothing was enough to switch from screen cloning to separate screens. This problem (lack of documentation on radeon driver) is similar to these: Radeon display driver clones monitors while using Xinerama (moderators decision to close that problem was wrong) Ubuntu 12.10 multi-monitor setup isn't working The problem is solvable, because this hardware worked as three headed for me earlier with gentoo/xorg-server-1.3 Xorg -configure creates setup for the first monitor on the first GPU Please don't advise to use fglrx/aticonfig/amdcccle (this goes against my religion beliefs)

    Read the article

  • MySQL Cluster 7.2: Over 8x Higher Performance than Cluster 7.1

    - by Mat Keep
    0 0 1 893 5092 Homework 42 11 5974 14.0 Normal 0 false false false EN-US JA X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;} Summary The scalability enhancements delivered by extensions to multi-threaded data nodes enables MySQL Cluster 7.2 to deliver over 8x higher performance than the previous MySQL Cluster 7.1 release on a recent benchmark What’s New in MySQL Cluster 7.2 MySQL Cluster 7.2 was released as GA (Generally Available) in February 2012, delivering many enhancements to performance on complex queries, new NoSQL Key / Value API, cross-data center replication and ease-of-use. These enhancements are summarized in the Figure below, and detailed in the MySQL Cluster New Features whitepaper Figure 1: Next Generation Web Services, Cross Data Center Replication and Ease-of-Use Once of the key enhancements delivered in MySQL Cluster 7.2 is extensions made to the multi-threading processes of the data nodes. Multi-Threaded Data Node Extensions The MySQL Cluster 7.2 data node is now functionally divided into seven thread types: 1) Local Data Manager threads (ldm). Note – these are sometimes also called LQH threads. 2) Transaction Coordinator threads (tc) 3) Asynchronous Replication threads (rep) 4) Schema Management threads (main) 5) Network receiver threads (recv) 6) Network send threads (send) 7) IO threads Each of these thread types are discussed in more detail below. MySQL Cluster 7.2 increases the maximum number of LDM threads from 4 to 16. The LDM contains the actual data, which means that when using 16 threads the data is more heavily partitioned (this is automatic in MySQL Cluster). Each LDM thread maintains its own set of data partitions, index partitions and REDO log. The number of LDM partitions per data node is not dynamically configurable, but it is possible, however, to map more than one partition onto each LDM thread, providing flexibility in modifying the number of LDM threads. The TC domain stores the state of in-flight transactions. This means that every new transaction can easily be assigned to a new TC thread. Testing has shown that in most cases 1 TC thread per 2 LDM threads is sufficient, and in many cases even 1 TC thread per 4 LDM threads is also acceptable. Testing also demonstrated that in some instances where the workload needed to sustain very high update loads it is necessary to configure 3 to 4 TC threads per 4 LDM threads. In the previous MySQL Cluster 7.1 release, only one TC thread was available. This limit has been increased to 16 TC threads in MySQL Cluster 7.2. The TC domain also manages the Adaptive Query Localization functionality introduced in MySQL Cluster 7.2 that significantly enhanced complex query performance by pushing JOIN operations down to the data nodes. Asynchronous Replication was separated into its own thread with the release of MySQL Cluster 7.1, and has not been modified in the latest 7.2 release. To scale the number of TC threads, it was necessary to separate the Schema Management domain from the TC domain. The schema management thread has little load, so is implemented with a single thread. The Network receiver domain was bound to 1 thread in MySQL Cluster 7.1. With the increase of threads in MySQL Cluster 7.2 it is also necessary to increase the number of recv threads to 8. This enables each receive thread to service one or more sockets used to communicate with other nodes the Cluster. The Network send thread is a new thread type introduced in MySQL Cluster 7.2. Previously other threads handled the sending operations themselves, which can provide for lower latency. To achieve highest throughput however, it has been necessary to create dedicated send threads, of which 8 can be configured. It is still possible to configure MySQL Cluster 7.2 to a legacy mode that does not use any of the send threads – useful for those workloads that are most sensitive to latency. The IO Thread is the final thread type and there have been no changes to this domain in MySQL Cluster 7.2. Multiple IO threads were already available, which could be configured to either one thread per open file, or to a fixed number of IO threads that handle the IO traffic. Except when using compression on disk, the IO threads typically have a very light load. Benchmarking the Scalability Enhancements The scalability enhancements discussed above have made it possible to scale CPU usage of each data node to more than 5x of that possible in MySQL Cluster 7.1. In addition, a number of bottlenecks have been removed, making it possible to scale data node performance by even more than 5x. Figure 2: MySQL Cluster 7.2 Delivers 8.4x Higher Performance than 7.1 The flexAsynch benchmark was used to compare MySQL Cluster 7.2 performance to 7.1 across an 8-node Intel Xeon x5670-based cluster of dual socket commodity servers (6 cores each). As the results demonstrate, MySQL Cluster 7.2 delivers over 8x higher performance per data nodes than MySQL Cluster 7.1. More details of this and other benchmarks will be published in a new whitepaper – coming soon, so stay tuned! In a following blog post, I’ll provide recommendations on optimum thread configurations for different types of server processor. You can also learn more from the Best Practices Guide to Optimizing Performance of MySQL Cluster Conclusion MySQL Cluster has achieved a range of impressive benchmark results, and set in context with the previous 7.1 release, is able to deliver over 8x higher performance per node. As a result, the multi-threaded data node extensions not only serve to increase performance of MySQL Cluster, they also enable users to achieve significantly improved levels of utilization from current and future generations of massively multi-core, multi-thread processor designs.

    Read the article

  • Should you buy an ATI Radeon x1200 driver?

    If you are looking for a good graphics driver, the choices available to you will boggle your mind. Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) has joined up with ATI Technologies to make the most cutting edge graph... [Author: Sunny Makkar - Computers and Internet - March 20, 2010]

    Read the article

  • Fastest Functional Language

    - by Farouk
    I've recently been delving into functional programming especially Haskell and F#, the prior more so. After some googling around I could not find a benchmark comparison of the more prominent functional languages (Scala,F# etc). I know it's not necessarily fair to some of the languages (Scala comes to mind) given that they are hybrids, but I just wanna know which outperforms which on what operations and overall.

    Read the article

  • Fusion Applications Enablement Toolkit: the Partner's single place of information for all OPN Fusion Apps resources

    - by Richard Lefebvre
    Take a look and then come back regularly at https://blogs.oracle.com/opnenablement/resource/fusion_applications.html ... a micro site designed to give our EMEA Fusion Partners all the Fusion enablement critical information (Key links, event, materials, etc.) that they need to achieve specialization. This site will be updated on a regular basis, especially for OPN events and training sessions.

    Read the article

  • Which design pattern to use when using ORM?

    - by RPK
    I am writing a small ASP.NET Web Forms application. In my solution explorer, I added various class library projects to define layers, viz: Model Repository Presentation WebUI Someone suggested me that this layered approach is not of much sense if I am using ORM tool like PetaPoco, which itself takes care of separation of data access layer. I want to use PetaPoco micro-ORM and want to know which design pattern is suitable with ORM tools. Do I still need several class library projects to separate the concerns?

    Read the article

  • Excellent Windows Azure benchmarks

    - by Sarang
    The Extreme computing group has released a fairly comprehensive set of benchmarks  for almost all aspects of WA. They have also provided the source code to alleviate all doubts that may surface with the MSFT logo lurking around the top right of their homepage :) (Which also resides at a cloudapp.net url). The code is simple and the tests comprehensive enough to hold as data points for customer interactions. Add to it the clean no nonsense Silverlight charts to render the benchmarks and you are set to sell. Technorati Tags: Azure,Benchmark,Extreme Computing Group

    Read the article

  • New videos: Getting started with embedded Java and more

    - by terrencebarr
    OTN just published a set of six videos related to embedded Java: Java at ARM TechCon Java SE Embedded Development Made Easy, Part 1 Java SE Embedded Development Made Easy, Part 2 Mobile Database Synchronization – Healthcare Demonstration Tomcat Micro Cluster Java Embedded Partnerships Good stuff. Enjoy! Cheers, – Terrence Filed under: Mobile & Embedded Tagged: embedded, Java Embedded, Java SE Embedded, video

    Read the article

  • Intel Xeon E5 (Sandy Bridge-EP) and SQL Server 2012 Benchmarks

    - by jchang
    Intel officially announced the Xeon E5 2600 series processor based on Sandy Bridge-EP variant with upto 8 cores and 20MB LLC per socket. Only one TPC benchmark accompanied product launch, summary below. Processors Cores per Frequency Memory SQL Vendor TPC-E 2 x Xeon E5-2690 8 2.9GHz 512GB (16x32GB) 2012 IBM 1,863.23 2 x Xeon E7-2870 10 2.4GHz 512GB (32x16GB) 2008R2 IBM 1,560.70 2 x Xeon X5690 6 3.46GHz 192GB (12x16GB) 2008R2 HP 1,284.14 Note: the HP report lists SQL Server 2008 R2 Enterprise Edition...(read more)

    Read the article

  • How do I make code bound to an ORM testable?

    - by RPK
    In Test Driven Development, how do I make code bound to an ORM testable? I am using a Micro-ORM (PetaPoco) and I have several methods that interact with the database like: AddCustomer UpdateRecord etc. I want to know how to write a test for these methods. I searched YouTube for videos on writing a test for DAL, but I didn't find any. I want to know which method or class is testable and how to write a test before writing the code itself.

    Read the article

  • Find a Faster DNS Server with Namebench

    - by Mysticgeek
    One way to speed up your Internet browsing experience is using a faster DNS server. Today we take a look at Namebench, which will compare your current DNS server against others out there, and help you find a faster one. Namebench Download the file and run the executable (link below). Namebench starts up and will include the current DNS server you have configured on your system. In this example we’re behind a router and using the DNS server from the ISP. Include the global DNS providers and the best available regional DNS server, then start the Benchmark. The test starts to run and you’ll see the queries it’s running through. The benchmark takes about 5-10 minutes to complete. After it’s complete you’ll get a report of the results. Based on its findings, it will show you what DNS server is fastest for your system. It also displays different types of graphs so you can get a better feel for the different results. You can export the results to a .csv file as well so you can present the results in Excel. Conclusion This is a free project that is in continuing development, so results might not be perfect, and there may be more features added in the future. If you’re looking for a method to help find a faster DNS server for your system, Namebench is a cool free utility to help you out. If you’re looking for a public DNS server that is customizable and includes filters, you might want to check out our article on helping to protect your kids from questionable content using OpenDNS. You can also check out how to speed up your web browsing with Google Public DNS. Links Download NameBench for Windows, Mac, and Linux from Google Code Learn More About the Project on the Namebench Wiki Page Similar Articles Productive Geek Tips Open a Second Console Session on Ubuntu ServerShare Ubuntu Home Directories using SambaSetup OpenSSH Server on Ubuntu LinuxDisable the Annoying “This device can perform faster” Balloon Message in Windows 7Search For Rows With Special Characters in SQL Server TouchFreeze Alternative in AutoHotkey The Icy Undertow Desktop Windows Home Server – Backup to LAN The Clear & Clean Desktop Use This Bookmarklet to Easily Get Albums Use AutoHotkey to Assign a Hotkey to a Specific Window Latest Software Reviews Tinyhacker Random Tips DVDFab 6 Revo Uninstaller Pro Registry Mechanic 9 for Windows PC Tools Internet Security Suite 2010 How to Add Exceptions to the Windows Firewall Office 2010 reviewed in depth by Ed Bott FoxClocks adds World Times in your Statusbar (Firefox) Have Fun Editing Photo Editing with Citrify Outlook Connector Upgrade Error Gadfly is a cool Twitter/Silverlight app

    Read the article

  • 'Installing breakpad exception handler for appid(steam)' while trying to run Steam

    - by Star Diamond
    I installed steam for ubuntu , so I tried to launch it and i get this : ~$ steam Installing breakpad exception handler for appid(steam)/version(1352224866_client) ~$ lsb_release -a No LSB modules are available. Distributor ID: Ubuntu Description: Ubuntu 12.10 Release: 12.10 Codename: quantal ~$ lspci | grep VGA 00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation 2nd Generation Core Processor Family Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 09) 01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] nee ATI Whistler XT [AMD Radeon HD 6700M Series] (rev ff) What is the problem and how to fix it?

    Read the article

  • Das T5-4 TPC-H Ergebnis naeher betrachtet

    - by Stefan Hinker
    Inzwischen haben vermutlich viele das neue TPC-H Ergebnis der SPARC T5-4 gesehen, das am 7. Juni bei der TPC eingereicht wurde.  Die wesentlichen Punkte dieses Benchmarks wurden wie gewohnt bereits von unserer Benchmark-Truppe auf  "BestPerf" zusammengefasst.  Es gibt aber noch einiges mehr, das eine naehere Betrachtung lohnt. Skalierbarkeit Das TPC raet von einem Vergleich von TPC-H Ergebnissen in unterschiedlichen Groessenklassen ab.  Aber auch innerhalb der 3000GB-Klasse ist es interessant: SPARC T4-4 mit 4 CPUs (32 Cores mit 3.0 GHz) liefert 205,792 QphH. SPARC T5-4 mit 4 CPUs (64 Cores mit 3.6 GHz) liefert 409,721 QphH. Das heisst, es fehlen lediglich 1863 QphH oder 0.45% zu 100% Skalierbarkeit, wenn man davon ausgeht, dass die doppelte Anzahl Kerne das doppelte Ergebnis liefern sollte.  Etwas anspruchsvoller, koennte man natuerlich auch einen Faktor von 2.4 erwarten, wenn man die hoehere Taktrate mit beruecksichtigt.  Das wuerde die Latte auf 493901 QphH legen.  Dann waere die SPARC T5-4 bei 83%.  Damit stellt sich die Frage: Was hat hier nicht skaliert?  Vermutlich der Plattenspeicher!  Auch hier lohnt sich eine naehere Betrachtung: Plattenspeicher Im Bericht auf BestPerf und auch im Full Disclosure Report der TPC stehen einige interessante Details zum Plattenspeicher und der Konfiguration.   In der Konfiguration der SPARC T4-4 wurden 12 2540-M2 Arrays verwendet, die jeweils ca. 1.5 GB/s Durchsatz liefert, insgesamt also eta 18 GB/s.  Dabei waren die Arrays offensichtlich mit jeweils 2 Kabeln pro Array direkt an die 24 8GBit FC-Ports des Servers angeschlossen.  Mit den 2x 8GBit Ports pro Array koennte man so ein theoretisches Maximum von 2GB/s erreichen.  Tatsaechlich wurden 1.5GB/s geliefert, was so ziemlich dem realistischen Maximum entsprechen duerfte. Fuer den Lauf mit der SPARC T5-4 wurden doppelt so viele Platten verwendet.  Dafuer wurden die 2540-M2 Arrays mit je einem zusaetzlichen Plattentray erweitert.  Mit dieser Konfiguration wurde dann (laut BestPerf) ein Maximaldurchsatz von 33 GB/s erreicht - nicht ganz das doppelte des SPARC T4-4 Laufs.  Um tatsaechlich den doppelten Durchsatz (36 GB/s) zu liefern, haette jedes der 12 Arrays 3 GB/s ueber seine 4 8GBit Ports liefern muessen.  Im FDR stehen nur 12 dual-port FC HBAs, was die Verwendung der Brocade FC Switches erklaert: Es wurden alle 4 8GBit ports jedes Arrays an die Switches angeschlossen, die die Datenstroeme dann in die 24 16GBit HBA ports des Servers buendelten.  Das theoretische Maximum jedes Storage-Arrays waere nun 4 GB/s.  Wenn man jedoch den Protokoll- und "Realitaets"-Overhead mit einrechnet, sind die tatsaechlich gelieferten 2.75 GB/s gar nicht schlecht.  Mit diesen Zahlen im Hinterkopf ist die Verdopplung des SPARC T4-4 Ergebnisses eine gute Leistung - und gleichzeitig eine gute Erklaerung, warum nicht bis zum 2.4-fachen skaliert wurde. Nebenbei bemerkt: Weder die SPARC T4-4 noch die SPARC T5-4 hatten in der gemessenen Konfiguration irgendwelche Flash-Devices. Mitbewerb Seit die T4 Systeme auf dem Markt sind, bemuehen sich unsere Mitbewerber redlich darum, ueberall den Eindruck zu hinterlassen, die Leistung des SPARC CPU-Kerns waere weiterhin mangelhaft.  Auch scheinen sie ueberzeugt zu sein, dass (ueber)grosse Caches und hohe Taktraten die einzigen Schluessel zu echter Server Performance seien.  Wenn ich mir nun jedoch die oeffentlichen TPC-H Ergebnisse ansehe, sehe ich dies: TPC-H @3000GB, Non-Clustered Systems System QphH SPARC T5-4 3.6 GHz SPARC T5 4/64 – 2048 GB 409,721.8 SPARC T4-4 3.0 GHz SPARC T4 4/32 – 1024 GB 205,792.0 IBM Power 780 4.1 GHz POWER7 8/32 – 1024 GB 192,001.1 HP ProLiant DL980 G7 2.27 GHz Intel Xeon X7560 8/64 – 512 GB 162,601.7 Kurz zusammengefasst: Mit 32 Kernen (mit 3 GHz und 4MB L3 Cache), liefert die SPARC T4-4 mehr QphH@3000GB ab als IBM mit ihrer 32 Kern Power7 (bei 4.1 GHz und 32MB L3 Cache) und auch mehr als HP mit einem 64 Kern Intel Xeon System (2.27 GHz und 24MB L3 Cache).  Ich frage mich, wo genau SPARC hier mangelhaft ist? Nun koennte man natuerlich argumentieren, dass beide Ergebnisse nicht gerade neu sind.  Nun, in Ermangelung neuerer Ergebnisse kann man ja mal ein wenig spekulieren: IBMs aktueller Performance Report listet die o.g. IBM Power 780 mit einem rPerf Wert von 425.5.  Ein passendes Nachfolgesystem mit Power7+ CPUs waere die Power 780+ mit 64 Kernen, verfuegbar mit 3.72 GHz.  Sie wird mit einem rPerf Wert von  690.1 angegeben, also 1.62x mehr.  Wenn man also annimmt, dass Plattenspeicher nicht der limitierende Faktor ist (IBM hat mit 177 SSDs getestet, sie duerfen das gerne auf 400 erhoehen) und IBMs eigene Leistungsabschaetzung zugrunde legt, darf man ein theoretisches Ergebnis von 311398 QphH@3000GB erwarten.  Das waere dann allerdings immer noch weit von dem Ergebnis der SPARC T5-4 entfernt, und gerade in der von IBM so geschaetzen "per core" Metric noch weniger vorteilhaft. In der x86-Welt sieht es nicht besser aus.  Leider gibt es von Intel keine so praktischen rPerf-Tabellen.  Daher muss ich hier fuer eine Schaetzung auf SPECint_rate2006 zurueckgreifen.  (Ich bin kein grosser Fan von solchen Kreuz- und Querschaetzungen.  Insb. SPECcpu ist nicht besonders geeignet, um Datenbank-Leistung abzuschaetzen, da fast kein IO im Spiel ist.)  Das o.g. HP System wird bei SPEC mit 1580 CINT2006_rate gelistet.  Das bis einschl. 2013-06-14 beste Resultat fuer den neuen Intel Xeon E7-4870 mit 8 CPUs ist 2180 CINT2006_rate.  Das ist immerhin 1.38x besser.  (Wenn man nur die Taktrate beruecksichtigen wuerde, waere man bei 1.32x.)  Hier weiter zu rechnen, ist muessig, aber fuer die ungeduldigen Leser hier eine kleine tabellarische Zusammenfassung: TPC-H @3000GB Performance Spekulationen System QphH* Verbesserung gegenueber der frueheren Generation SPARC T4-4 32 cores SPARC T4 205,792 2x SPARC T5-464 cores SPARC T5 409,721 IBM Power 780 32 cores Power7 192,001 1.62x IBM Power 780+ 64 cores Power7+  311,398* HP ProLiant DL980 G764 cores Intel Xeon X7560 162,601 1.38x HP ProLiant DL980 G780 cores Intel Xeon E7-4870    224,348* * Keine echten Resultate  - spekulative Werte auf der Grundlage von rPerf (Power7+) oder SPECint_rate2006 (HP) Natuerlich sind IBM oder HP herzlich eingeladen, diese Werte zu widerlegen.  Aber stand heute warte ich noch auf aktuelle Benchmark Veroffentlichungen in diesem Datensegment. Was koennen wir also zusammenfassen? Es gibt einige Hinweise, dass der Plattenspeicher der begrenzende Faktor war, der die SPARC T5-4 daran hinderte, auf jenseits von 2x zu skalieren Der Mythos, dass SPARC Kerne keine Leistung bringen, ist genau das - ein Mythos.  Wie sieht es umgekehrt eigentlich mit einem TPC-H Ergebnis fuer die Power7+ aus? Cache ist nicht der magische Performance-Schalter, fuer den ihn manche Leute offenbar halten. Ein System, eine CPU-Architektur und ein Betriebsystem jenseits einer gewissen Grenze zu skalieren ist schwer.  In der x86-Welt scheint es noch ein wenig schwerer zu sein. Was fehlt?  Nun, das Thema Preis/Leistung ueberlasse ich gerne den Verkaeufern ;-) Und zu guter Letzt: Nein, ich habe mich nicht ins Marketing versetzen lassen.  Aber manchmal kann ich mich einfach nicht zurueckhalten... Disclosure Statements The views expressed on this blog are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Oracle. TPC-H, QphH, $/QphH are trademarks of Transaction Processing Performance Council (TPC). For more information, see www.tpc.org, results as of 6/7/13. Prices are in USD. SPARC T5-4 409,721.8 QphH@3000GB, $3.94/QphH@3000GB, available 9/24/13, 4 processors, 64 cores, 512 threads; SPARC T4-4 205,792.0 QphH@3000GB, $4.10/QphH@3000GB, available 5/31/12, 4 processors, 32 cores, 256 threads; IBM Power 780 QphH@3000GB, 192,001.1 QphH@3000GB, $6.37/QphH@3000GB, available 11/30/11, 8 processors, 32 cores, 128 threads; HP ProLiant DL980 G7 162,601.7 QphH@3000GB, $2.68/QphH@3000GB available 10/13/10, 8 processors, 64 cores, 128 threads. SPEC and the benchmark names SPECfp and SPECint are registered trademarks of the Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation. Results as of June 18, 2013 from www.spec.org. HP ProLiant DL980 G7 (2.27 GHz, Intel Xeon X7560): 1580 SPECint_rate2006; HP ProLiant DL980 G7 (2.4 GHz, Intel Xeon E7-4870): 2180 SPECint_rate2006,

    Read the article

  • What type of code is suitable for unit testing?

    - by RPK
    In Test Driven Development, what type of code is testable? I am using a Micro-ORM (PetaPoco) and I have several methods that interact with the database like: AddCustomer UpdateRecord etc. I want to know how to write a test for these methods. I searched YouTube for videos on writing a test for DAL, but I didn't find any. I want to know which method or class is testable and how to write a test before writing the code itself.

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24  | Next Page >