Search Results

Search found 4580 results on 184 pages for 'faster'.

Page 30/184 | < Previous Page | 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37  | Next Page >

  • Effectiveness and Efficiency

    - by Daniel Moth
    In the professional environment, i.e. at work, I am always seeking personal growth and to be challenged. The result is that my assignments, my work list, my tasks, my goals, my commitments, my [insert whatever word resonates with you] keep growing (in scope and desired impact). Which in turn means I have to keep finding new ways to deliver more value, while not falling into the trap of working more hours. To do that I continuously evaluate both my effectiveness and my efficiency. EFFECTIVENESS The first thing I check is my effectiveness: Am I doing the right things? Am I focusing too much on unimportant things? Am I spending more time doing stuff that is important to my team/org/division/business/company, or am I spending it on stuff that is important to me and that I enjoy doing? Am I valuing activities that maybe I have outgrown and should be delegated to others who are at a stage I have surpassed (in Microsoft speak: is the work I am doing level appropriate or am I still operating at the previous level)? Notice how the answers to those questions change over time and due to certain events, so I have to remind myself to revisit them frequently. Events that force me to re-examine them are: change of role, change of team/org/etc, change of direction of team/org/etc, re-org, new hires on the team that take on some of the work I did, personal promotion, change of manager... and if none of those events has occurred since the last annual review, I ask myself those at each annual review anyway. If you think you are not being effective at work, make a list of the stuff that you do and start tracking where your time goes. In parallel, have a discussion with your manager about where they think your time should go. Ultimately your time is finite and hence it is your most precious investment, don't waste it. If your management doesn't value as highly what you spend your time on, then either convince your management, or stop spending your time on it, or find different management: Lead, Follow, or get out of the way! That's my view on effectiveness. You have to fix that before moving to being efficient, or you may end up being very efficient at stuff that nobody wants you to be doing in the first place. For example, you may be spending your time writing blog posts and becoming better and faster at it all the time. If your manager thinks that is not even part of your job description, you are wasting your time to satisfy your inner desires. Nobody can help you with your effectiveness other than your management chain and your management peers - they are the judges of it. EFFICIENCY The second thing I check is my efficiency: Am I doing things right? For me, doing things right means that I deliver the same quality of work faster [than what I used to, and than my peers, and than expected of me]. The result is that I can achieve more [than what I used to, and than my peers, and than expected of me]. Notice how the efficiency goal is a more portable one. If, by whatever criteria, you think you are the best at [insert your own skill here], this can change at two events: because you have new colleagues (who are potentially better than your older ones), and it can change with a change of manager (who has potentially higher expectations). That's about it. Once you are efficient at something, you carry that with you... All you need to really be doing here is, when taking on new kinds of work that you haven't done before, try a few approaches and devise a system so that you can become efficient at this new activity too... Just keep "collecting" stuff that you are efficient at. If you think you are not being efficient at something, break it down: What are the steps you take to complete that task? How long do you spend on each step? Talk to others about what steps they take, to see if you can optimize some steps away or trade them for better steps, or just learn how to complete a step faster. Have a system for every task you take so that you can have repeatable success. That's my view on efficiency. You have to fix it so that you can free up time to do more. When you plan a route from A to B - all else being equal - you try to get there as fast as possible so why would you not want to do that with your everyday work? For example, imagine you are inefficient at processing email: You spend more time than necessary dealing with email, and you still end up with dropped email threads and with slower response times than others. How can you improve? Talk to someone that you think is good at this, understand their system (e.g. here is my email processing system) and come up with one that works for you. Parting Thoughts Are you considered, by your colleagues and manager, an effective and efficient person at your workplace? If you are, what would you change if you were asked by your management to do the job of two people? Seriously, think about that! Your immediate reaction may be "that is not possible", but it actually is. You just have to re-assess what things that were previously important will now stop being important, by discussing them with your management and reaching agreement on relative priorities. For example, stuff that was previously on your plate may now have to be delegated or dropped. Where you thought you were efficient, maybe now you have to find an even faster path to completion, perhaps keeping in mind that Perfect is the Enemy of “Good Enough”. My personal experience (from both observing others and from my own reflection) is that when folks are struggling to keep up at work it is because of two reasons: They are investing energy in stuff that they enjoy doing which the business regards as having a lower priority than a lot of other things on their plate. They are completing tasks to a level of higher quality than what is required (due to personal pride) missing the big picture which almost always mandates completing three tasks at good enough quality than knocking only one of them out of the park while the other two come in late or not at all. There is a lot of content on the web, so I strongly encourage you to use your favorite search engine to read other views on effectiveness and efficiency (Bing, Google). Comments about this post by Daniel Moth welcome at the original blog.

    Read the article

  • Romanian parter Omnilogic Delivers “No Limits” Scalability, Performance, Security, and Affordability through Next-Generation, Enterprise-Grade Engineered Systems

    - by swalker
    Omnilogic SRL is a leading technology and information systems provider in Romania and central and Eastern Europe. An Oracle Value-Added Distributor Partner, Omnilogic resells Oracle software, hardware, and engineered systems to Oracle Partner Network members and provides specialized training, support, and testing facilities. Independent software vendors (ISVs) also use Omnilogic’s demonstration and testing facilities to upgrade the performance and efficiency of their solutions and those of their customers by migrating them from competitor technologies to Oracle platforms. Omnilogic also has a dedicated offering for ISV solutions, based on Oracle technology in a hosting service provider model. Omnilogic wanted to help Oracle Partners and ISVs migrate solutions to Oracle Exadata and sell Oracle Exadata to end-customers. It installed Oracle Exadata Database Machine X2-2 Quarter Rack at its data center to create a demonstration and testing environment. Demonstrations proved that Oracle Exadata achieved processing speeds up to 100 times faster than competitor systems, cut typical back-up times from 6 hours to 20 minutes, and stored 10 times more data. Oracle Partners and ISVs learned that migrating solutions to Oracle Exadata’s preconfigured, pre-integrated hardware and software can be completed rapidly, at low cost, without business disruption, and with reduced ongoing operating costs. Challenges A word from Omnilogic “Oracle Exadata is the new killer application—the smartest solution on the market. There is no competition.” – Sorin Dragomir, Chief Operating Officer, Omnilogic SRL Enable Oracle Partners in Romania and central and eastern Europe to achieve Oracle Exadata Ready status by providing facilities to test and optimize existing applications and build real-life proofs of concept (POCs) for new solutions on Oracle Exadata Database Machine Provide technical support and demonstration facilities for ISVs migrating their customers’ solutions from competitor technologies to Oracle Exadata to maximize performance, scalability, and security; optimize hardware and datacenter space; cut maintenance costs; and improve return on investment Demonstrate power of Oracle Exadata’s high-performance, high-capacity engineered systems for customer-facing businesses, such as government organizations, telecommunications, banking and insurance, and utility companies, which typically require continuous availability to support very large data volumes Showcase Oracle Exadata’s unchallenged online transaction processing (OLTP) capabilities that cut application run times to provide unrivalled query turnaround and user response speeds while significantly reducing back-up times and eliminating risk of unplanned outages Capitalize on providing a world-class training and demonstration environment for Oracle Exadata to accelerate sales with Oracle Partners Solutions Created a testing environment to enable Oracle Partners and ISVs to test their own solutions and those of their customers on Oracle Exadata running on Oracle Enterprise Linux or Oracle Solaris Express to benchmark performance prior to migration Leveraged expertise on Oracle Exadata to offer Oracle Exadata training, migration, support seminars and to showcase live demonstrations for Oracle Partners Proved how Oracle Exadata’s pre-engineered systems, that come assembled, configured, and ready to run, reduce deployment time and cost, minimize risk, and help customers achieve the full performance potential immediately after go live Increased processing speeds 10-fold and with zero data loss for a telecommunications provider’s client-facing customer relationship management solution Achieved performance improvements of between 6 and 100 times faster for financial and utility company applications currently running on IBM, Microsoft, or SAP HANA platforms Showed how daily closure procedures carried out overnight by banks, insurance companies, and other financial institutions to analyze each day’s business, can typically be cut from around six hours to 20 minutes, some 18 times faster, when running on Oracle Exadata Simulated concurrent back-ups while running applications under normal working conditions to prove that Oracle Exadata-based solutions can be backed up during business hours without causing bottlenecks or impacting the end-user experience Demonstrated that Oracle Exadata’s built-in analytics, data mining and OLTP capabilities make it the highest-performance, lowest-cost choice for large data warehousing operations Showed how Oracle Exadata’s columnar compression and intelligent storage architecture allows 10 times more data to be stored than on competitor platforms Demonstrated how Oracle Exadata cuts hardware requirements significantly by consolidating workloads on to fewer servers which delivers greater power efficiency and lower operating costs that competing systems from IBM and other manufacturers Proved to ISVs that migrating solutions to Oracle Exadata’s preconfigured, pre-integrated hardware and software can be completed rapidly, at low cost, and with minimal business disruption Demonstrated how storage servers, database servers, and network switches can be added incrementally and inexpensively to the Oracle Exadata platform to support business expansion On track to grow revenues by 10% in year one and by 15% annually thereafter through increased business generated from Oracle Partners and ISVs

    Read the article

  • Why Is Hibernation Still Used?

    - by Jason Fitzpatrick
    With the increased prevalence of fast solid-state hard drives, why do we still have system hibernation? Today’s Question & Answer session comes to us courtesy of SuperUser—a subdivision of Stack Exchange, a community-driven grouping of Q&A web sites. The Question SuperUser reader Moses wants to know why he should use hibernate on a desktop machine: I’ve never quite understood the original purpose of the Hibernation power state in Windows. I understand how it works, what processes take place, and what happens when you boot back up from Hibernate, but I’ve never truly understood why it’s used. With today’s technology, most notably with SSDs, RAM and CPUs becoming faster and faster, a cold boot on a clean/efficient Windows installation can be pretty fast (for some people, mere seconds from pushing the power button). Standby is even faster, sometimes instantaneous. Even SATA drives from 5-6 years ago can accomplish these fast boot times. Hibernation seems pointless to me [on desktop computers] when modern technology is considered, but perhaps there are applications that I’m not considering. What was the original purpose behind hibernation, and why do people still use it? Quite a few people use hibernate, so what is Moses missing in the big picture? The Answer SuperUser contributor Vignesh4304 writes: Normally hibernate mode saves your computer’s memory, this includes for example open documents and running applications, to your hard disk and shuts down the computer, it uses zero power. Once the computer is powered back on, it will resume everything where you left off. You can use this mode if you won’t be using the laptop/desktop for an extended period of time, and you don’t want to close your documents. Simple Usage And Purpose: Save electric power and resuming of documents. In simple terms this comment serves nice e.g (i.e. you will sleep but your memories are still present). Why it’s used: Let me describe one sample scenario. Imagine your battery is low on power in your laptop, and you are working on important projects on your machine. You can switch to hibernate mode – it will result your documents being saved, and when you power on, the actual state of application gets restored. Its main usage is like an emergency shutdown with an auto-resume of your documents. MagicAndre1981 highlights the reason we use hibernate everyday: Because it saves the status of all running programs. I leave all my programs open and can resume working the next day very easily. Doing a real boot would require to start all programs again, load all the same files into those programs, get to the same place that I was at before, and put all my windows in exactly the same place. Hibernating saves a lot of work pulling these things back up again. It’s not unusual to find computers around the office here that have been hibernated day in and day out for months without an actual full system shutdown and restart. It’s enormously convenient to freeze your work space at the exact moment you stopped working and to turn right around and resume there the next morning. Have something to add to the explanation? Sound off in the the comments. Want to read more answers from other tech-savvy Stack Exchange users? Check out the full discussion thread here.     

    Read the article

  • SQL Server Optimizer Malfunction?

    - by Tony Davis
    There was a sharp intake of breath from the audience when Adam Machanic declared the SQL Server optimizer to be essentially "stuck in 1997". It was during his fascinating "Query Tuning Mastery: Manhandling Parallelism" session at the recent PASS SQL Summit. Paraphrasing somewhat, Adam (blog | @AdamMachanic) offered a convincing argument that the optimizer often delivers flawed plans based on assumptions that are no longer valid with today’s hardware. In 1997, when Microsoft engineers re-designed the database engine for SQL Server 7.0, SQL Server got its initial implementation of a cost-based optimizer. Up to SQL Server 2000, the developer often had to deploy a steady stream of hints in SQL statements to combat the occasionally wilful plan choices made by the optimizer. However, with each successive release, the optimizer has evolved and improved in its decision-making. It is still prone to the occasional stumble when we tackle difficult problems, join large numbers of tables, perform complex aggregations, and so on, but for most of us, most of the time, the optimizer purrs along efficiently in the background. Adam, however, challenged further any assumption that the current optimizer is competent at providing the most efficient plans for our more complex analytical queries, and in particular of offering up correctly parallelized plans. He painted a picture of a present where complex analytical queries have become ever more prevalent; where disk IO is ever faster so that reads from disk come into buffer cache faster than ever; where the improving RAM-to-data ratio means that we have a better chance of finding our data in cache. Most importantly, we have more CPUs at our disposal than ever before. To get these queries to perform, we not only need to have the right indexes, but also to be able to split the data up into subsets and spread its processing evenly across all these available CPUs. Improvements such as support for ColumnStore indexes are taking things in the right direction, but, unfortunately, deficiencies in the current Optimizer mean that SQL Server is yet to be able to exploit properly all those extra CPUs. Adam’s contention was that the current optimizer uses essentially the same costing model for many of its core operations as it did back in the days of SQL Server 7, based on assumptions that are no longer valid. One example he gave was a "slow disk" bias that may have been valid back in 1997 but certainly is not on modern disk systems. Essentially, the optimizer assesses the relative cost of serial versus parallel plans based on the assumption that there is no IO cost benefit from parallelization, only CPU. It assumes that a single request will saturate the IO channel, and so a query would not run any faster if we parallelized IO because the disk system simply wouldn’t be able to handle the extra pressure. As such, the optimizer often decides that a serial plan is lower cost, often in cases where a parallel plan would improve performance dramatically. It was challenging and thought provoking stuff, as were his techniques for driving parallelism through query logic based on subsets of rows that define the "grain" of the query. I highly recommend you catch the session if you missed it. I’m interested to hear though, when and how often people feel the force of the optimizer’s shortcomings. Barring mistakes, such as stale statistics, how often do you feel the Optimizer fails to find the plan you think it should, and what are the most common causes? Is it fighting to induce it toward parallelism? Combating unexpected plans, arising from table partitioning? Something altogether more prosaic? Cheers, Tony.

    Read the article

  • An observation on .NET loops – foreach, for, while, do-while

    It’s very common that .NET programmers use “foreach” loop for iterating through collections. Following is my observation whilst I was testing simple scenario on loops. “for” loop is 30% faster than “foreach” and “while” loop is 50% faster than “foreach”. “do-while” is bit faster than “while”. Someone may feel that how does it make difference if I’m iterating only 1000 times in a loop. This test case is only for simple iteration. According to the "Data structure" concepts, best and worst cases are completely based on the data we provide to the algorithm. so we can not conclude that a "foreach" algorithm is not good. All I want to tell that we need to be little cautious even choosing the loops. Example:- You might want to chose quick sort when you want to sort more numbers. At the same time bubble sort may be effective than quick sort when you want to sort less numbers. Take a simple scenario, a request of a simple web application fetches the data of 10000 (10K) rows and iterating them for some business logic. Think, this application is being accessed by 1000 (1K) people simultaneously. In this simple scenario you are ending up with 10000000 (10Million or 1 Crore) iterations. below is the test scenario with simple console application to test 100 Million records. using System;using System.Collections.Generic;using System.Diagnostics;namespace ConsoleApplication1{ class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { var sw = new Stopwatch(); var numbers = GetSomeNumbers(); sw.Start(); foreach (var item in numbers) { } sw.Stop(); Console.WriteLine( String.Format("\"foreach\" took {0} milliseconds", sw.ElapsedMilliseconds)); sw.Reset(); sw.Start(); for (int i = 0; i < numbers.Count; i++) { } sw.Stop(); Console.WriteLine( String.Format("\"for\" loop took {0} milliseconds", sw.ElapsedMilliseconds)); sw.Reset(); sw.Start(); var it = 0; while (it++ < numbers.Count) { } sw.Stop(); Console.WriteLine( String.Format("\"while\" loop took {0} milliseconds", sw.ElapsedMilliseconds)); sw.Reset(); sw.Start(); var it2 = 0; do { } while (it2++ < numbers.Count); sw.Stop(); Console.WriteLine( String.Format("\"do-while\" loop took {0} milliseconds", sw.ElapsedMilliseconds)); } #region Get me 10Crore (100 Million) numbers private static List<int> GetSomeNumbers() { var lstNumbers = new List<int>(); var count = 100000000; for (var i = 1; i <= count; i++) { lstNumbers.Add(i); } return lstNumbers; } #endregion Get me some numbers }} In above example, I was just iterating through 100 Million numbers. You can see the time to execute various  loops provided in .NET Output "foreach" took 1108 milliseconds "for" loop took 727 milliseconds "while" loop took 596 milliseconds "do-while" loop took 594 milliseconds   Press any key to continue . . . So I feel we need to be careful while choosing the looping strategy. Please comment your thoughts. span.fullpost {display:none;}

    Read the article

  • Choosing random numbers efficiently

    - by Frederik Wordenskjold
    I have a method, which uses random samples to approximate a calculation. This method is called millions of times, so its very important that the process of choosing the random numbers is efficient. I'm not sure how fast javas Random().nextInt really are, but my program does not seem to benefit as much as I would like it too. When choosing the random numbers, I do the following (in semi pseudo-code): // Repeat this 300000 times Set set = new Set(); while(set.length != 5) set.add(randomNumber(MIN,MAX)); Now, this obviously has a bad worst-case running time, as the random-function in theory can add duplicated numbers for an eternity, thus staying in the while-loop forever. However, the numbers are chosen from {0..45}, so a duplicated value is for the most part unlikely. When I use the above method, its only 40% faster than my other method, which does not approximate, but yields the correct result. This is ran ~ 1 million times, so I was expecting this new method to be at least 50% faster. Do you have any suggestions for a faster method? Or maybe you know of a more efficient way of generation a set of random numbers.

    Read the article

  • Is SQLDataReader slower than using the command line utility sqlcmd?

    - by Andrew
    I was recently advocating to a colleague that we replace some C# code that uses the sqlcmd command line utility with a SqlDataReader. The old code uses: System.Diagnostics.ProcessStartInfo procStartInfo = new System.Diagnostics.ProcessStartInfo("cmd", "/c " + sqlCmd); wher sqlCmd is something like "sqlcmd -S " + serverName + " -y 0 -h-1 -Q " + "\"" + "USE [" + database + "]" + ";+ txtQuery.Text +"\"";\ The results are then parsed using regular expressions. I argued that using a SQLDataReader woud be more in line with industry practices, easier to debug and maintain and probably faster. However, the SQLDataReader approach is at least the same speed and quite possibly slower. I believe I'm doing everything correctly with SQLDataReader. The code is: using (SqlConnection connection = new SqlConnection()) { try { SqlConnectionStringBuilder builder = new SqlConnectionStringBuilder(connectionString); connection.ConnectionString = builder.ToString(); ; SqlCommand command = new SqlCommand(queryString, connection); connection.Open(); SqlDataReader reader = command.ExecuteReader(); // do stuff w/ reader reader.Close(); } catch (Exception ex) { outputMessage += (ex.Message); } } I've used System.Diagnostics.Stopwatch to time both approaches and the command line utility (called from C# code) does seem faster (20-40%?). The SqlDataReader has the neat feature that when the same code is called again, it's lightening fast, but for this application we don't anticipate that. I have already done some research on this problem. I note that the command line utility sqlcmd uses OLE DB technology to hit the database. Is that faster than ADO.NET? I'm really suprised, especially since the command line utility approach involves starting up a process. I really thought it would be slower. Any thoughts? Thanks, Dave

    Read the article

  • How to use SQLAlchemy to dump an SQL file from query expressions to bulk-insert into a DBMS?

    - by Mahmoud Abdelkader
    Please bear with me as I explain the problem, how I tried to solve it, and my question on how to improve it is at the end. I have a 100,000 line csv file from an offline batch job and I needed to insert it into the database as its proper models. Ordinarily, if this is a fairly straight-forward load, this can be trivially loaded by just munging the CSV file to fit a schema, but I had to do some external processing that requires querying and it's just much more convenient to use SQLAlchemy to generate the data I want. The data I want here is 3 models that represent 3 pre-exiting tables in the database and each subsequent model depends on the previous model. For example: Model C --> Foreign Key --> Model B --> Foreign Key --> Model A So, the models must be inserted in the order A, B, and C. I came up with a producer/consumer approach: - instantiate a multiprocessing.Process which contains a threadpool of 50 persister threads that have a threadlocal connection to a database - read a line from the file using the csv DictReader - enqueue the dictionary to the process, where each thread creates the appropriate models by querying the right values and each thread persists the models in the appropriate order This was faster than a non-threaded read/persist but it is way slower than bulk-loading a file into the database. The job finished persisting after about 45 minutes. For fun, I decided to write it in SQL statements, it took 5 minutes. Writing the SQL statements took me a couple of hours, though. So my question is, could I have used a faster method to insert rows using SQLAlchemy? As I understand it, SQLAlchemy is not designed for bulk insert operations, so this is less than ideal. This follows to my question, is there a way to generate the SQL statements using SQLAlchemy, throw them in a file, and then just use a bulk-load into the database? I know about str(model_object) but it does not show the interpolated values. I would appreciate any guidance for how to do this faster. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Reduce function calls

    - by Curious2learn
    Hello, I profiled my python program and found that the following function was taking too long to run. Perhaps, I can use a different algorithm and make it run faster. However, I have read that I can also possibly increase the speed by reducing function calls, especially when it gets called repeatedly within a loop. I am a python newbie and would like to learn how to do this and see how much faster it can get. Currently, the function is: def potentialActualBuyers(setOfPeople,theCar,price): count=0 for person in setOfPeople: if person.getUtility(theCar) >= price and person.periodCarPurchased==None: count += 1 return count where setOfPeople is a list of person objects. I tried the following: def potentialActualBuyers(setOfPeople,theCar,price): count=0 Utility=person.getUtility for person in setOfPeople: if Utility(theCar) >= price and person.periodCarPurchased==None: count += 1 return count This, however, gives me an error saying local variable 'person' referenced before assignment Any suggestions, how I can reduce function calls or any other changes that can make the code faster. Again, I am a python newbie and even though I may possibly be able to use a better algorithm, it is still worthwhile learning the answer to the above question. Thanks very much.

    Read the article

  • Optimization of a c++ matrix/bitmap class

    - by Andrew
    I am searching a 2D matrix (or bitmap) class which is flexible but also fast element access. The contents A flexible class should allow you to choose dimensions during runtime, and would look something like this (simplified): class Matrix { public: Matrix(int w, int h) : data(new int[x*y]), width(w) {} void SetElement(int x, int y, int val) { data[x+y*width] = val; } // ... private: // symbols int width; int* data; }; A faster often proposed solution using templates is (simplified): template <int W, int H> class TMatrix { TMatrix() data(new int[W*H]) {} void SetElement(int x, int y, int val) { data[x+y*W] = val; } private: int* data; }; This is faster as the width can be "inlined" in the code. The first solution does not do this. However this is not very flexible anymore, as you can't change the size anymore at runtime. So my question is: Is there a possibility to tell the compiler to generate faster code (like when using the template solution), when the size in the code is fixed and generate flexible code when its runtime dependend? I tried to achieve this by writing "const" where ever possible. I tried it with gcc and VS2005, but no success. This kind of optimization would be useful for many other similar cases.

    Read the article

  • C++ Function pointers vs Switch

    - by Perfix
    What is faster: Function pointers or switch? The switch statement would have around 30 cases, consisting of enumarated unsigned ints from 0 to 30. I could do the following: class myType { FunctionEnum func; string argv[123]; int someOtherValue; }; // In another file: myType current; // Iterate through a vector containing lots of myTypes // ... for ( i=0; i < myVecSize; i ++ ) switch ( current.func ) { case 1: //... break; // ........ case 30: // blah break; } And go trough the switch with func every time. The good thing about switch would also be that my code is more organized than with 30 functions. Or I could do that (not so sure with that): class myType { myReturnType (*func); string argv[123]; int someOtherValue; }; I'd have 30 different functions then, at the beginning a pointer to one of them is assigned to myType. What is probably faster: Switch statement or function pointer? Calls per second: Around 10 million. I can't just test it out - that would require me to rewrite the whole thing. Currently using switch. I'm building an interpreter which I want to be faster than Python & Ruby - every clock cycle matters!

    Read the article

  • What is the fastest MD5 sum calculator?

    - by netvope
    I tested the speed of md5sum on a few Ubuntu 8.04 servers Pentium III 700 MHz: 52 MB/s Atom 1.6 GHz, 32-bit: 119 MB/s Core 2 (Yorkfield) 2.5GHz, 32-bit: 194 MB/s Core 2 (Yorkfield) 2.5GHz, 64-bit: 222 MB/s Then I downloaded a tool (by apt-get install) called md5deep and found that it's roughly 20% faster (as tested on the 32-bit Core 2 server). This makes me feel that the "vanilla" md5sum included in Ubuntu isn't the fastest one. Questions: Other than md5deep, are you aware of any MD5 calculators that are potentially faster than md5sum? (Answers for software from other OS are also welcomed.) If I want to compile md5sum myself, where can I download the source? What compiler options would you suggest for the Core 2 server? (note: gcc 4.2.4 in Ubuntu 8.04 does not seem to support -march=core2)

    Read the article

  • Issues with Rsync on a NAS

    - by Daniel Fischer
    I'm trying to rsync a few external hard drives over to my new Nas DS412+ but I'm noticing it's stupid slow. I'm trying it via mounting the backup folder via afb on a Mac. I was told this may be the wrong way to do it. I recently just turned on "network backup" on the Synology and am now running rsync over ssh like: rsync -ar --progress . admin@localip:/backup/path Is this the right way to do it now? Will it be faster? Is there something else I can do to make it faster? Edit: I'm getting a ton of: "failed to set permissions" "failed to set times" now that I run it. What do I do?

    Read the article

  • How well will ntpd work when the latency is highly variable?

    - by JP Anderson
    I have an application where we are using some non-standard networking equipment (cannot be changed) that goes into a dormant state between traffic bursts. The network latency is very high for the first packet since it's essentially waking the system, waiting for it to reconnect, and then making the first round-trip. Subsequent messages (provided they are within the next minute or so) are much faster, but still highly-latent. A typical set of pings will look like 2500ms, 900ms, 880ms, 885ms, 900ms, 890ms, etc. Given that NTP uses several round trips before computing the offset, how well can I expect ntpd to work over this kind of link? Will the initially slow first round trip be ignored based on the much different (and faster) following messages to/from the ntp server? Thanks and Regards.

    Read the article

  • Can I put a laptop Core i7 CPU in a desktop?

    - by Weezy
    One of the most important thing to me for a CPU is a good mix between speed and heat. For example five years ago I bought a Core 2 Duo 6300 (max TDP 65W): I put a big heatsink on the CPU, no fans (I do hate moving parts and noise) and it worked like a charm and very silently for five years (and it still work but five years later I wouldn't mind a faster CPU and a faster memory controller and more memory). I consider a max TDP of 130W unacceptable (like some high-end Core i7 have), for several reasons. So I was wondering: can I build a desktop and put a Core i7 CPU meant to be used in laptop in it? For example I was thinking about the Core i7 740QM (max TDP 45W [!]). Are these compatible with desktop Core i7 motherboards? (for example on NewEgg it says that the "CPU socket type" for the Core i7 740QM is PGA988, I've not too sure about what this is)

    Read the article

  • Partial-stroking / Short-stroking / Half-stroking Hard Drives?

    - by Daniel Magliola
    Could anyone here explain to me what is implied by this term? (I've seen the same thing mentioned with the 3 terms). At first when I read about it, for some reason I understood that it was some way of splitting the bytes across the platters of the disk, which sounded like a good idea and obviously doesn't make sense, because that wouldn't cut disk size in half (and disk are probably already splitting bytes across platters)... The best I've come to understand is that basically instead of creating one partition for the whole size of the disk, you create 2 partitions, and use only one of them, either the one in the "center" or the one in the "rim" of the platters, and since one of the two is faster (people didn't seem to agree on which one was faster), that makes everything better. Am I understanding this correctly? Has anyone tried this with their drives and had a good outcome? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Sizing a Virtual Server

    - by vdubs
    I would like to replace four aging physical servers with one virtual server. What is the best way to insure the VM server is sized correctly? The requirements of the apps that will be running on the four servers are APPLICATION SERVERS - QTY 3 - These will run the application layer for the web server, Business Objects Business Intelligence app, and various other small client server apps. The three most heavy hitting apps each have the following server requirements. So, if I bought three physical servers, this would be the requirements for each of them Processor - Dual 2.83 GHZ (or faster) Ram - 4 GB Raid 5 - 50-100GB usable space NIC - 1 GB Web Server - this will run one asp.net e-business app that will talk to our dedicated SQL server and the three app servers above. The E-Business software has these requirements for the web server Processor - Quad 2.83 GHZ (or faster) Ram - 8 GB Raid 5 - 50-100GB usable space NIC - 1 GB What is the best tool to determine what I need from a hardware standpoing in a virtual server? I am planning on using VMWare.

    Read the article

  • Why is USB-sticks so much slower than Solid State Drives?

    - by Jonas
    From what I understand, USB flash memory and Solid State Drives are based on similar technologies, NAND flash memory. But USB-sticks is usually quite slow with a read and write speed of 5-10MB per second while Solid State Drives usually is very fast, usually 100-570MB per second. Why are Solid State Drives so much faster than USB-sticks? And why isn't USB-sticks faster than 5-10MB per second? Is it simply that SSD-drives uses parallel access to the NAND flash memory or are there other reasons?

    Read the article

  • Windows 7 Slow Searching

    - by Guy Thomas
    I have a new Windows 7 machine with twice as much RAM and a faster processor than my old Windows Server 2008 R2 Machine. I am disappointed that searching amongst my 10,000 image files takes twice as long on my new Windows 7 machine. Both machines have their own copy of these same files. In other respects e.g. opening my huge Outlook files, the new machine is faster. The Windows Search Service has started. And I set indexing on the image folder about 3 days ago. Any ideas why I suffer from this poor index / search experience? Other than adding / removing folders, is there anything I can do to tweak indexing?

    Read the article

  • Network Drive Via Ethernet Port for Speed?

    - by Yar
    I have a Macbook with Firewire 400 and USB 2.0, so the only way I can get fast external storage is through the Ethernet port. A really fast firewire 800 drive on ANOTHER computer is actually much faster than the built-in drive (according to XBench). So I thought I would try to go one better and buy an ethernet-ready drive. I bought a Seagate GoFlex™ Home Network Storage System, and it seems like the only way to get it to work is to plug it into a router. Can this drive be used without a router (i.e., direct to computer)? Are there any drives that can be plugged directly into the ethernet port for fast access? I don't want the drive on my router: I want it on my computer. Ideally I'd need 7200rpm or faster, too... Update: Just chatted with Seagate and they said that this particular drive will not work that way. Will any others?

    Read the article

  • Adobe Reader - Content Preparation progress

    - by kubal5003
    Hello, I was wondering recently if is it just me or anyone else noticed it: why Adobe Reader after opening every single document displays "Content preparation" window with progress bar and it lasts for ages.. ? On linux pdf readers work hell lot better (faster), on windows other readers also work faster. Some years back in the past Adobe Reader also used to be quick. What has happened? PDF files aren't bigger/more complex compared to 3-4 years ago. Computers are at least dual core and with much more ram and displaying pdf files is getting slower and slower..

    Read the article

  • What has changed to make it possible to develop USB3.0

    - by RoboShop
    Like I know the transfer speeds are vastly different. But I don't understand is why they are faster. And why couldn't they have implemented USB 3.0 when they released 1.0? Like what technical breakthrough was required to get transfer speeds that fast? Was it cost? capacities of computer? like they couldn't read the data fast enough? Although USB is still well below hard drive transfer speeds engineering breakthrough? They found some new material which could transfer at a faster rate? Was this in the cable itself? In the hardware?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37  | Next Page >