Search Results

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

Page 230/837 | < Previous Page | 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237  | Next Page >

  • Using FILE_FLAG_NO_BUFFERING will return noticeable speed gain?

    - by 9dan
    Recently noticed detail description of FILE_FLAG_NO_BUFFERING flag in MSDN, and read several Google search results about unbuffered I/O in Windows. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa363858(v=vs.85).aspx I wondering now, is it really important to consider unbuffered option in file I/O programming? Because many programs use plain old C stream I/O or C++ iostream, I didn't gave any attention to FILE_FLAG_NO_BUFFERING flag before. Let's say we are developing photo explorer program like Picasa. If we implement unbuffered I/O, could thumbnail display speed show noticeable difference in ordinary users?

    Read the article

  • How to explain to a developer that adding extra if - else if conditions is not a good way to "improv

    - by Lilit
    Recently I've bumped into the following C++ code: if (a) { f(); } else if (b) { f(); } else if (c) { f(); } Where a, b and c are all different conditions, and they are not very short. I tried to change the code to: if (a || b || c) { f(); } But the author opposed saying that my change will decrease readability of the code. I had two arguments: 1) You should not increase readability by replacing one branching statement with three (though I really doubt that it's possible to make code more readable by using else if instead of ||). 2) It's not the fastest code, and no compiler will optimize this. But my arguments did not convince him. What would you tell a programmer writing such a code? Do you think complex condition is an excuse for using else if instead of OR?

    Read the article

  • SQL Server 15MM rows, simple COUNT query. 15+ seconds?

    - by john
    We took over a website from another company after a client decided to switch. We have a table that grows by about 25k records a day, and is currently at 15MM records. The table looks something like: id (PK, int, not null) member_id (int, not null) another_id (int, not null) date (datetime, not null) SELECT COUNT(id) FROM tbl can take up to 15 seconds. A simple inner join on 'another_id' takes over 30 seconds. I can't imagine why this is taking so long. Any advice? SQL Server 2005 Express

    Read the article

  • SQL Server - Missing Indexes - What would use the index?

    - by BankZ
    I am using SQL Server 2008 and we are using the DMV's to find missing indexes. However, before I create the new index I am trying to figure out what proc/query is wanting that index. I want the most information I can get so I can make informed decision on my indexes. Sometimes the indexes SQL Server wants does not make sense to me. Does anyone know how I can figure out what wants it?

    Read the article

  • Nested loop traversing arrays

    - by alecco
    There are 2 very big series of elements, the second 100 times bigger than the first. For each element of the first series, there are 0 or more elements on the second series. This can be traversed and processed with 2 nested loops. But the unpredictability of the amount of matching elements for each member of the first array makes things very, very slow. The actual processing of the 2nd series of elements involves logical and (&) and a population count. I couldn't find good optimizations using C but I am considering doing inline asm, doing rep* mov* or similar for each element of the first series and then doing the batch processing of the matching bytes of the second series, perhaps in buffers of 1MB or something. But the code would be get quite messy. Does anybody know of a better way? C preferred but x86 ASM OK too. Many thanks! Sample/demo code with simplified problem, first series are "people" and second series are "events", for clarity's sake. (the original problem is actually 100m and 10,000m entries!) #include <stdio.h> #include <stdint.h> #define PEOPLE 1000000 // 1m struct Person { uint8_t age; // Filtering condition uint8_t cnt; // Number of events for this person in E } P[PEOPLE]; // Each has 0 or more bytes with bit flags #define EVENTS 100000000 // 100m uint8_t P1[EVENTS]; // Property 1 flags uint8_t P2[EVENTS]; // Property 2 flags void init_arrays() { for (int i = 0; i < PEOPLE; i++) { // just some stuff P[i].age = i & 0x07; P[i].cnt = i % 220; // assert( sum < EVENTS ); } for (int i = 0; i < EVENTS; i++) { P1[i] = i % 7; // just some stuff P2[i] = i % 9; // just some other stuff } } int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { uint64_t sum = 0, fcur = 0; int age_filter = 7; // just some init_arrays(); // Init P, P1, P2 for (int64_t p = 0; p < PEOPLE ; p++) if (P[p].age < age_filter) for (int64_t e = 0; e < P[p].cnt ; e++, fcur++) sum += __builtin_popcount( P1[fcur] & P2[fcur] ); else fcur += P[p].cnt; // skip this person's events printf("(dummy %ld %ld)\n", sum, fcur ); return 0; } gcc -O5 -march=native -std=c99 test.c -o test

    Read the article

  • Scalable stl set like container for C++

    - by Pqr
    Hi, I need to store large number of integers. There can be duplicates in the input stream of integers, I just need to store distinct amongst them. I was using stl set initially but It went OutOfMem when input number of integers went too high. I am looking for some C++ container library which would allow me to store numbers with the said requirement possibly backed by file i.e container should not try to keep all numbers in-mem. I don't need to store this data persistently, I just need to find unique values amongst it.

    Read the article

  • Start all tab's activities for pre-cache

    - by Pentium10
    I have a TabActivity with three tabs defined. The first tab is light-weight and renders in acceptable time. But the 2nd and 3rd tab, does need a couple of seconds to get visually rendered, after I click them. I would like to launch them, after I've loaded my first tab, in background for pre-cache. Once they are loaded, I can switch quickly between them. So I am wondering how can I launch the 2nd and 3rd tab. They are intents loaded in the view area.

    Read the article

  • fast load big object graph from DB

    - by Famos
    Hi I have my own data structure written in C# like: public class ElectricScheme { public List<Element> Elements { get; set; } public List<Net> Nets { get; set; } } public class Element { public string IdName { get; set; } public string Func { get; set; } public string Name { get; set; } public BaseElementType Type { get; set; } public List<Pin> Pins { get; set; } } public class Pin { public string IdName { get; set; } public string Name { get; set; } public BasePinType PinType { get; set; } public BasePinDirection PinDirection { get; set; } } public class Net { public string IdName { get; set; } public string Name { get; set; } public List<Tuple<Element,Pin>> ConnectionPoints { get; set; } } Where Elements count ~19000, each element contain =3 Pin, Nets count ~20000, each net contain =3 pair (Element, Pin) Parse txt (file size ~17mb) file takes 5 minutes. Serilization / Deserialization by default serializer ~3 minutes. Load from DB 20 minutes and not loaded... I use Entity Framework like public ElectricScheme LoadScheme(int schemeId) { var eScheme = (from s in container.ElectricSchemesSet where s.IdElectricScheme.Equals(schemeId) select s).FirstOrDefault(); if (eScheme == null) return null; container.LoadProperty(eScheme, "Elements"); container.LoadProperty(eScheme, "Nets"); container.LoadProperty(eScheme, "Elements.Pins"); return eScheme; } The problem is dependencies between Element and Pin... (for ~19000 elements ~95000 pins) Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • SQL Server - how to determine if indexes aren't being used?

    - by rwmnau
    I have a high-demand transactional database that I think is over-indexed. Originally, it didn't have any indexes at all, so adding some for common processes made a huge difference. However, over time, we've created indexes to speed up individual queries, and some of the most popular tables have 10-15 different indexes on them, and in some cases, the indexes are only slightly different from each other, or are the same columns in a different order. Is there a straightforward way to watch database activity and tell if any indexes are not hit anymore, or what their usage percentage is? I'm concerned that indexes were created to speed up either a single daily/weekly query, or even a query that's not being run anymore, but the index still has to be kept up to date every time the data changes. In the case of the high-traffic tables, that's a dozen times/second, and I want to eliminate indexes that are weighing down data updates while providing only marginal improvement.

    Read the article

  • Fastest way to read/store lots of multidimensional data? (Java)

    - by RemiX
    I have three questions about three nested loops: for (int x=0; x<400; x++) { for (int y=0; y<300; y++) { for (int z=0; z<400; z++) { // compute and store value } } } And I need to store all computed values. My standard approach would be to use a 3D-array: values[x][y][z] = 1; // test value but this turns out to be slow: it takes 192 ms to complete this loop, where a single int-assignment int value = 1; // test value takes only 66 ms. 1) Why is an array so relatively slow? 2) And why does it get even slower when I put this in the inner loop: values[z][y][x] = 1; // (notice x and z switched) This takes more than 4 seconds! 3) Most importantly: Can I use a data structure that is as quick as the assignment of a single integer, but can store as much data as the 3D-array?

    Read the article

  • Why is Python so slow?

    - by Riemannliness
    Why is Python such a slow language, on average, compared to C/C++? I learned Python as my first programming language, but I've only just started with C and already I can feel and see the difference.

    Read the article

  • What is the time complexity of LinkedList.getLast() in Java?

    - by i.
    I have a private LinkedList in a Java class & will frequently need to retrieve the last element in the list. The lists need to scale, so I'm trying to decide whether I need to keep a reference to the last element when I make changes (to achieve O(1)) or if the LinkedList class does that already with the getLast() call. What is the big-O cost of LinkedList.getLast() and is it documented? (i.e. can I rely on this answer or should I make no assumptions & cache it even if it's O(1)?)

    Read the article

  • How much faster is C++ than C#?

    - by Trap
    Or is it now the other way around? From what I've heard there are some areas in which C# proves to be faster than C++, but I've never had the guts to test it by myself. Thought any of you could explain these differences in detail or point me to the right place for information on this.

    Read the article

  • how does array_diff work?

    - by SpawnCxy
    I just wonder how array_diff() works.And obviously it couldn't work as follows function array_diff($arraya, $arrayb) { $diffs = array(); foreach ($arraya as $keya => $valuea) { foreach ($arrayb as $valueb) { if ($valuea == $valueb) { break; } $diffs[$keya]=$valuea; } } return $diffs; } //couldn't be worse than this Hope someone can show me some better solution. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • F# why my recursion is faster than Seq.exists?

    - by user38397
    I am pretty new to F#. I'm trying to understand how I can get a fast code in F#. For this, I tried to write two methods (IsPrime1 and IsPrime2) for benchmarking. My code is: // Learn more about F# at http://fsharp.net open System open System.Diagnostics #light let isDivisible n d = n % d = 0 let IsPrime1 n = Array.init (n-2) ((+) 2) |> Array.exists (isDivisible n) |> not let rec hasDivisor n d = match d with | x when x < n -> (n % x = 0) || (hasDivisor n (d+1)) | _ -> false let IsPrime2 n = hasDivisor n 2 |> not let SumOfPrimes max = [|2..max|] |> Array.filter IsPrime1 |> Array.sum let maxVal = 20000 let s = new Stopwatch() s.Start() let valOfSum = SumOfPrimes maxVal s.Stop() Console.WriteLine valOfSum Console.WriteLine("IsPrime1: {0}", s.ElapsedMilliseconds) ////////////////////////////////// s.Reset() s.Start() let SumOfPrimes2 max = [|2..max|] |> Array.filter IsPrime2 |> Array.sum let valOfSum2 = SumOfPrimes2 maxVal s.Stop() Console.WriteLine valOfSum2 Console.WriteLine("IsPrime2: {0}", s.ElapsedMilliseconds) Console.ReadKey() IsPrime1 takes 760 ms while IsPrime2 takes 260ms for the same result. What's going on here and how I can make my code even faster?

    Read the article

  • Why is casting and comparing in PHP faster than is_*?

    - by tstenner
    While optimizing a function in PHP, I changed if(is_array($obj)) foreach($obj as $key=$value { [snip] } else if(is_object($obj)) foreach($obj as $key=$value { [snip] } to if($obj == (array) $obj) foreach($obj as $key=$value { [snip] } else if($obj == (obj) $obj) foreach($obj as $key=$value { [snip] } After learning about ===, I changed that to if($obj === (array) $obj) foreach($obj as $key=$value { [snip] } else if($obj === (obj) $obj) foreach($obj as $key=$value { [snip] } Changing each test from is_* to casting resulted in a major speedup (30%). I understand that === is faster than == as no coercion has to be done, but why is casting the variable so much faster than calling any of the is_*-functions?

    Read the article

  • Detecting when Javascript is performing poorly

    - by what-the-crap
    I'm working on a webapp in jquery that, on older machines or machines without much resources, may perform poorly. To get around this I'd like to make a degraded version that disables some of the features, particularly those that rely on large images. How can I tell if my app is running poorly on the user's computer in jquery or javascript in general? I just need a way to call a function that will degrade the app. (especially when the user may run low on system memory) The only way I can think of is for manual user intervention, but the option would add clutter for users that don't need it and users that do need it may not notice it. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Why is i-- faster than i++ in loops? [closed]

    - by Afshin Mehrabani
    Possible Duplicate: JavaScript - Are loops really faster in reverse…? I don't know if this question is valid in other languages or not, but I'm asking this specifically for JavaScript. I see in some articles and questions that the fastest loop in JavaScript is something like: for(var i = array.length; i--; ) Also in Sublime Text 2, when you try to write a loop, it suggests: for (var i = Things.length - 1; i >= 0; i--) { Things[i] }; I want to know, why is i-- faster than i++ in loops?

    Read the article

  • MySql: make this query faster… is there a way ? PART TWO

    - by robert
    This is part two of the question: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2913639/mysql-make-this-query-faster-theres-a-way this query still run slowly: SELECT b.id, b.name, c.name FROM bookcorr as a JOIN books as b on b.id = a.books_id = JOIN Library as c on c.id = a.library_id WHERE a.category_id = '2521' AND a.library_id = '4983' ORDER BY b.name ASC LIMIT 0,15 Any suggest ?

    Read the article

  • PHP Try and Catch for SQL Insert

    - by meme
    I have a page on my website (high traffic) that does an insert on every page load. I am curious of the fastest and safest way to (catch an error) and continue if the system is not able to do the insert into MySQL. Should I use try/catch or die or something else. I want to make sure the insert happens but if for some reason it can't I want the page to continue to load anyway. ... $db = mysql_select_db('mobile', $conn); mysql_query("INSERT INTO redirects SET ua_string = '$ua_string'") or die('Error #10'); mysql_close($conn); ...

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to put a form control on its own thread?

    - by BVernon
    I'm using a DataGridView and some operations that I do cause it to become unresponsive for periods of time. Normally I would put data processing in its own thread to make the form more responsive, but in this case it's the DataGridView itself that's taking so long. This leads me to wonder whether it's possible to have the main form on one thread and the DataGridView on another thread so it doesn't prevent the main form from responding. I completely understand that doing so is probably not 'safe' and likely opens up a can of worms that makes it hardly worth trying and I fully expect this post will be getting down votes for merely suggesting such a ridiculous idea. Is this possible? And if so how would you go about it?

    Read the article

  • .net File.Copy very slow when copying many small files (not over network)

    - by Guavaman
    I'm making a simple folder sync backup tool for myself and ran into quite a roadblock using File.Copy. Doing tests copying a folder of ~44,000 small files (Windows mail folders) to another drive in my system, I found that using File.Copy was over 3x slower than using a command line and running xcopy to copy the same files/folders. My C# version takes over 16+ minutes to copy the files, whereas xcopy takes only 5 minutes. I've tried searching for help on this topic, but all I find is people complaining about slow file copying of large files over a network. This is neither a large file problem nor a network copying problem. I found an interesting article about a better File.Copy replacement, but the code as posted has some errors which causes problems with the stack and I am nowhere near knowledgeable enough to fix the problems in his code. Are there any common or easy ways to replace File.Copy with something more speedy?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237  | Next Page >