Search Results

Search found 13300 results on 532 pages for 'exalytics performance tuning'.

Page 19/532 | < Previous Page | 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26  | Next Page >

• why is iometer performance slower after first run?

  - by Dan

  I'm doing some benchmarking with IOMeter, and I'm seeing a consistent and susbtantial drop-off in performance after running the first test. These drop-offs are about the same on the three systems I've tested on, which makes me think it's a configuration setting, or just a fact of life about using IOMeter. For example, one system (local RAID 10) went from 388 I/Os per second the first run, to about 211 I/Os per second on every run after that. Everything else about the test was identical, and I also bounced the machine in between runs. So, is this expected behavior, or am I missing something?

  Read the article

• Slow performance over network (Ubuntu)

  - by Filipe Santos

  i did setup this NodeJs TCP Server and tested it with a message flooder. Just to see how the performance of the server is. While the message throughput is great if i run the server and the message flooder on the same computer (ubuntu), the throughput dramaticaly decreases if i start the server on computer1(ubuntu1) and the message flooder on computer2(also ubuntu). Both PC are on the same network. In fact, they are directly connected to each other. I started searching the internet for reasons and i suppose i need to tune TCP on both Ubuntu-pcs but until now i haven't been successfull at all. Has anyone experienced such problems, or could someone help me out? Thanks Here the flooding code: var net=require('net') var client = net.createConnection(5000, "10.0.0.2") client.addListener("connect", function(){ for(var i = 0; i < 1000; i++) { client.write("message "); } })

  Read the article

• Can USB Hubs affect peripheral performance?

  - by Daniel Rasmussen

  Like many laptops, mine has 2 USB 2.0 ports. I'm looking to purchase a USB hub for my peripheral devices. I'm also planning on purchasing a laptop cooler with two USB powered fans, which connects to a USB port but can extend the plug, so it doesn't use one up. (Sorry for the poor description; see the link for a picture.) My questions are these: Can one plug 'too many' peripherals into a USB port? Can I plug my fans into a port, then the hub into the fans, then my keyboard and mouse, mic, and webcam into the extender..? Is it possible to draw too much power from a port? Secondly, will a USB hub affect the performance of any of my devices? I'm mostly worried about my mouse and keyboard. I like wired mice because I've noticed some lag in my Bluetooth mouse.

  Read the article

• PeopleSoft Applications Key Performance Improvements, Tuning Tips and Customer Benefits

  Ahmed Alomari, Senior Director, Oracle Applications Performance talks with Cliff about about improvements that have been made to PeopleTools 8.4.8 and in the HCM area for Enterprise 8.9 as well as key benefits of using the Oracle 10g database and Oracle 10g Application Server.

  Read the article

• Apache mpm-itk Performance

  - by Matt Beckman

  I manage a bunch of VPSs with memory ranging from 1GB to 8GB. Most of these websites are Joomla websites, and the servers must support multiple sites/users/S-FTP. I use mpm-itk almost exclusively (mostly due to it's convenience in these shared environments). However, I'm aware it isn't known for performance, so I need some advice on making it faster. Due to the lack of documentation when I first went the way of mpm-itk, I included only one setting in the config, and that was to limit each user to 50 clients (the rest I left up to defaults): <IfModule mpm_itk_module> MaxClientsVHost 50 </IfModule> Are there any better alternatives available? Are there any settings supported in mpm-prefork or mpm-worker that are also supported in mpm-itk? Thanks!

  Read the article

• Increase performance of Samsung 830 256GB SSD

  - by Robert Koritnik

  I have a Samsung 830 SSD in my notebook connected to a SATA interface. This is a rather old HP notebook nc8430 which means SATA is SATA I and not II or even III that disk supports. But SATA I still supports speeds up to 150MB/s so I expected at least double values as per image below. CrystalDiskMark shows rather slow performance: I've been using this SSD for over a year now and I would like to know what to do to make it blazingly fast as other reports say it should be? Edit As suggested I'm adding AS SSD screenshot of the test. And Samsung Magician's benchmark which is likely biased...

  Read the article

• How exactly is Google Webmaster Tools measuring "Site Performance"?

  - by Rémi

  I've been working for two months now on improving our response time (mainly server side) on a new forum (a brand new product on a technical point of view) we've launched in Germany a few month ago and I'm a lot surprised by the results I get. I monitor our response time using Apache logs and our own implementation of Boomerang beacon. Using my stats, I can see that our new product responds in about 680 ms where our old product was responding in about 1050 ms. On the other side, Google Webmaster Tool tells us that our pages have an average reponse time of about 1500 ms today where it was 700 three months ago with our old product. I've figured that GWT was taking client side metrics into account so I've added some measures on our Boomerang beacon and everything looks just fine. I've also ran some random pages on ySlow and Google's Page Speed and everything looks better than it was before. We event have a 82% on Google's Page Speed tool which is quite cool for a site with some ads in it :) Lately, we have signed a deal with Akamai to use two of their products : CDN for our static files (we were using another CDN before but it wasn't very effective) and RMA to improve Networks routes. We have also introduced a new agressive cache mecanism to ensure that most of the pages served to crawlers are cached by our memcache grid. After checking my metrics, it seems that this changes have improved from 650ms to about 500ms, which is good (still not great but it is definitly an improvement). But webmaster tools continues to report an increasing average response time where we see it decreasing in the same time. Have you ever had the same kind of wierd behavior on your sites while doing performance improvements ? Do you have any idea how to monitor the same thing Google does with Site Performance in Google Webmaster Tools so that we could improve our site and constantly check if it is what Google wants ? Edit 2011/07/26 : Thanks for your answers guys ! Nevertheless, I was not precise enough. The main issue we have is not with the Site Performance page but with the Crawl Stats one for now. We probably found an issue on our side with some very slow pages (around 3000 ms !!) and we are trying to fix them. I'll keep you posted as soon I'll have some infos. Thanks again !

  Read the article

• Webserver: Performance impact when storing session files on /dev/shm

  - by GetFree

  I have a website runing on a typical setup: Linux, Apache, PHP, MySQL. However, what's not typical about it, is that it's getting tons of traffic (400,000+ visits a day) and so, efficiency is becoming more and more important to me. I'm constantly looking for things I could optimize and, right now, my attention is focused on PHP's session files. There's a hell lot of session files constantly being read and created on the /tmp directory. So my question is: Is it a good idea to store the session files in /dev/shm (tmpfs) in order to speed things up a little bit??

  Read the article

• Firefox 3.6 performance increase tricks.......

  - by metal gear solid

  I use many Add-ons which helps me in Web development so i can't uninstall those addons. and usually I keep open lots of tabs in Firefox. And almost always keep Firefox on on my system. I use default profile only I always keep every addons and firefox itself updated. I found some addons to reduce memory use on Firefox addons site , but user reviews were not good for them still Is there any tested tricks to increase performance and reduce memory use of Firefox 3.6, which really works?

  Read the article

• What are performance limits of a database?

  - by Tommy

  What are some rough performance limits (read/s, write/s) for a single database server (no master-slave architecture), assuming storage on disk? How many read/s, write/s, depending on the kind of disk? (SSD vs non-SSD) , assuming simple operations (select one row by primary key, update one row, correctly indexed). I assume this limit is dependent on disk seek/write. EDIT: My question is more about getting rough metrics of the number of operations a database supports: to be able to know for example, if a new feature triggering 300 inserts/s can be supported without scaling out with additional servers.

  Read the article

• RHEL raw device (over VMware RDM) performance issues

  - by jifa

  I'm running RHEL 5.3 over vSphere 4.0U1. I configured multiple LUNs on my NetApp (Fibre) storage, and added the RDM on two (Linux) VMs, using the Paravirtual SCSI adapter. One LUN is 100GB in size, successfully mapped to /dev/sdb on both VMs, 5 more are 500MB in size (mapped to /dev/sd{c-g}. I also created one partition per device. I have encountered two issues: First, writing directly to /dev/sdb1 gives me ~50MB/s, while any of the /dev/sd{c-g}1 gives me ~9MB/s. There is no difference in configuration of the LUNs apart from their size. I am wondering what causes this but this is not my main problem, as I would settle for 9 MB/s. I created raw devices using udev pretty straightforwardly: ACTION=="add", KERNEL=="sdb1", RUN+="/bin/raw /dev/raw/raw1 %N" per device Writing to any of the new raw devices dramatically slows down performance to just over 900KB/s. Can anyone point me in a helpful direction? Thanks in advance, -- jifa

  Read the article

• Performance issues with new dedicated server [closed]

  - by Pierre Espenan

  I have just subscribed to a new dedicated server and am getting worst than expected PHP execution performance. Execution times are twice as high as on my old mutualized server! I'm definitely not an expert at server management, so I'm wondering what I missed. Here are some stuff that can help you understand what's wrong here : My server (in french but easy to understand) : http://www.online.net/fr/serveur-dedie/dedibox-sc phpinfo(); output : http://jsfiddle.net/E8b7W/embedded/result/ PHP bench script (dedicated server) : http://jsfiddle.net/EhXzK/embedded/result/ PHP bench script (old mutualized) : http://jsfiddle.net/ANbWt/embedded/result/ Is it normal to get such poor performances after a kernel update and basics "apt-get install" for apache2 and php ? Thanks !

  Read the article

• Performance improvements of VBulletin by integrating the plugins

  - by reggie

  I have amassed quite a lot of plugins and code that is being hooked into VBulletin's plugin system. There are good uses for this system. But since I am now locked in with the VB 3 branch and it is no longer updated, I wonder what kind of performance improvements I would see if I integrated all the plugins into the vbulletin files and turned the plugin system completely off. My site has about 1.5 mio posts, about 100,000 threads, 100,000 members (of which 10,000 are "active"). I estimate I have about 200 plugins from different products in the plugin manager. Has anybody ever tried this move and could share the experiences?

  Read the article

• graph performance monitor windows and linux

  - by Patrik

  We are using Munin to get graphs of our servers. (such as CPU load, I/O, available disk space, etc. ) Munin gives us last 24h, last 7 days, last month and last year. The good thing with Munin is that it supports all kinds of clients, such as Windows, Linux and switches because it can monitor over SNMP. However, we have a problem with the Munin client for Windows. Since we upgraded to Windows Server 2008 R2 it won't show graphs for some performance counters. What options are there out there? Both free and commercial.

  Read the article

• Tools for analyzing performance of SQL Server/Express?

  - by Adam Crossland

  The application that I have customized and continue to support for my client is seeing dramatic performance problems in the field. Simple queries on rather small datasets take over a minute when I would expect them to complete with sub-second times. My current theory is that SQL Server Express 2005 is too limited for the rather non-trivial demands being made of it, but I am not sure how to get about gathering data that I can use to either prove my point or allow me to move on to finding another cause. Can anyone point me toward some tools that would allow me to analyze the load on this database? Information such as simultaneous connections, execution times of individual queries, memory usage, heck just any profiling data at all would be a help. Many thanks.

  Read the article

• apache and ajp performance

  - by user12145

  I have an apache sitting in front of two tomcat app servers(one on the same physical server, the other on a different one) that does time consuming work(0.5 sec to 10sec per request). The apache http server is getting killed by an average of 1 to 2 concurrent requests per second. both Server spec is about 2GB of RAM. Is there a way to optimize apache to handle the load? any advise is welcome. BalancerMember ajp://localhost:8009/xxxxxx BalancerMember ajp://XXX.XX.XXX.XX:8009/xxxxxx I keep getting the following in apache2.2 log: [Mon Dec 28 00:31:02 2009] [error] ajp_read_header: ajp_ilink_receive failed [Mon Dec 28 00:31:02 2009] [error] (120006)APR does not understand this error code: proxy: read response failed from 127.0.0.1:8009 (localhost)

  Read the article

• SAS disk performance drops a while after reboot.

  - by Flamewires

  So we have some workstations with identical hardware. The Fedora14 box has a couple weeks uptime and still get good performance. hdparm -tT /dev/sda /dev/sda: Timing cached reads: 21766 MB in 2.00 seconds = 10902.12 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 586 MB in 3.00 seconds = 195.20 MB/sec The Cent 5.5 boxes however seem to be okay after a reboot, /dev/sda: Timing cached reads: 34636 MB in 2.00 seconds = 17354.64 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 498 MB in 3.01 seconds = 165.62 MB/sec but some time later( unsure exactly, tested at approx 1 day uptime) /dev/sda: Timing cached reads: 2132 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1064.96 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 160 MB in 3.01 seconds = 53.16 MB/sec drop to this. This is with very low load. I believe they all have the same bios settings. Any ideas what could cause this on Cent? Ask for more info. It might also be worth noting, that passing the --direct flag causes the slow boxes to perform similarly to the non-slow ones for buffered disk reads.

  Read the article

• Performance Tune IBM DB2 z/OS Applications using Resource Constraint Analysis

  For the DB2 for z/OS professional the two most common systems tuning scenarios are tuning a DB2 data sharing group or tuning a series of application SQL statements. The data sharing group environment can involve multiple hardware installations and many other cross-system features and functions such as coupling facilities and management policies. Resource constraint analysis is a useful tool in both situations.

  Read the article

• Sun Directory Server 5.2 performance

  - by tmow

  Hi all, I'm using logconv.pl (provided by Sun), to measure performance on my server. These two metrics results, are worrying me a bit: Binds: 192164 Unbinds: 111569 In fact the difference between the two it's quite big, how can I determine which are the unbound requests? As stated by Lodovic: Many applications just close the connections without sending an Unbind request. This simply can explain the difference. But the logconv.pl doesn't show details about the unbound requests, do you know any other tools or can you suggest some queries or whatever that can help me find out the root cause? Do you think anyway that the performances may improve fixing the issue?

  Read the article

• Performance Tuning Re-indexing and Update Statistics – A Case Study

  Recently we started experiencing a very strange issue in our production reporting environment where the Re-indexing and Update Statistics operation suddenly began taking more than 2 days to complete and was thus causing blockage in the database which in turn caused impairment in application performance. NEW! Take the stress out of .NET deploymentEliminate the risk in deploying manually to live systems using Deployment Manager, the new tool from Red Gate. Try it now.

  Read the article

• Network Performance issue

  - by qubemarker

  We have three Ubuntu 10.04 servers. One server is a storage server and the other two servers are configured as clients. The storage server has a good amount of capacity and it is integrated with windows Active directory server for Authentication. I am uploading some video files from both clients to the server and when I am uploading data from any one client alone I get about 26 MB/s data transfer rate. When I upload data from both the clients simultaneously I am only getting about 8 MB/s from each client. I have gigabit ethernet cards in all of the servers and a L2 Managed gigabit switch for connectivity. I don’t know why the data transfer rate is decreasing so much in simultaneous read and write. I have tried all of the TCP stack related settings suggested here. Can any assist with getting better read/write performance out of this setup? Any help is appreciated.

  Read the article

• Poor disk performance with high disk capacity usage

  - by GoldenNewby

  I've heard numerous times in the web hosting industry that using "too much" disk space on a drive is bad for performance. Is this just a myth? Can someone explain why this is an issue, even in a situation where the amount of IO done to the drive would be the same at 10% as it would be at 90%? I'm especially curious in the case of virtual servers. If I set up 10 Logical volumes as the virtual disks for some VMs, is it going to run better if I "waste" 20% of the disk space?

  Read the article

• WCF NetTcpBinding Buffered vs Streamed performance problems

  - by DxCK

  I wrote a WCF service that should transform any size of files, using the Streamed TransferMode in NetTcpBinding, and System.IO.Stream object. When running performance test, i found significant performance problem. Then I decided to test it with Buffered TransferMode and saw that performance is two times faster! Because my service should transfer big files, i just can't stay in Buffered TransferMode because of memory management overhead on big files at the server and client side together. Why is Streamed TransferMode slower than the Buffered TransferMode? What can i do to make Stremed performance better?

  Read the article

• Terrible DotNetNuke performance

  - by Peter Bridger

  I'm involved with a project using DotNetNuke version 05.01.04 Community Edition. We are building our new Intranet using it, but performance is terrible. We have five people adding pages and content to it and every 15-30 seconds they experience a pause of 10 seconds or longer before the system continues and the next screens loads. The server is Windows 2003, 3.8GHz with 1GB of RAM. I'm told by our server admin that the CPU and memory performance don't appear to be the bottleneck. We currently have 350 pages in the system, we a plan to add 1000. So we need to resolve this performance problem so that we can enter content and so we can go live. I just can't see where the bottleneck is. Is there a good why to determine the bottleneck when using DotNetNuke? Modules installed Publish:Engage (Not currently in use) Page Blaster (Doesn't appear to providing caching when users logged in using Integrated Authentication) SimpleGallery XMod Content Manager IIS Setup Application recycling completely disabled (Apart from a 2am recycle) New findings: 18th March 2010 The main bottleneck was due to version 5.1.4 having a bug which caused 1300 database roundtrips on an average page, due to broken database in-memory caching. We've upgraded to 5.2.4 which has resolved this bottleneck. Now the next biggest bottleneck is the navigation. We've used both DDR:Menu and DDN:Nav, but both have a major impact on performance. Is there a navigation interface out there that doesn't drain performance so badly?

  Read the article

• Database performance benchmark

  - by pablo

  Any good articles out there comparing Oracle vs SQL Server vs MySql in terms of performance? I'd like to know things like: INSERT performance SELECT performance Scalability under heavy load Based on some real examples in order to gain a better understanding about the different RDBMS.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26  | Next Page >