Search Results

Search found 6587 results on 264 pages for 'slow motion'.

Page 35/264 | < Previous Page | 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42  | Next Page >

  • Videoediting slow on windows with HD footage in fileformat .MOV

    - by Joakim
    Hi, My camera a Canon 5D mark II serves me .mov files in HD - but these are a pain in the neck to edit on my pc. I have tried Premier, Vegas, Pinnacle etc - but it is almost impossible to edit and do a movie. I do have a good computer with windows7 but that doesnt help me, and I dont want to buy a new monster pc just for that task. Question: I could manage to convert the files, but what would be the best format? I dont want to loose to much quality. Anyone have any ideas? Best regards, Joakim

    Read the article

  • Word documents very slow to open over network, but fine when opened locally - on one machine

    - by Craig H
    Windows XP, Word 2003, patched. The issue is happening with several Word documents stored on a network drive. The Word documents are clearly a bit wonky (i.e. one is 675k, but if you copy everything but the last paragraph marker into a new document, the new document is only 30k). But that's only part of the problem. On one weird machine, and one machine only, it takes ~20 seconds to open these Word documents from the network drive. Copy the file to C: on that werid machine? Opens immediately. Go to other machines (that are very similar - same patch level, etc.) and open the same document from the network? Opens immediately. Delete normal.dot? 20 seconds. Login with a different user on the weird machine? 20 seconds. Plug wonky machine into a different network port? 20 seconds. So the problem appears to be hardware related (i.e. wonky internal NIC) or related to a setting that is not profile specific. Any ideas? "Scrubbing" all the documents isn't ideal for several reasons. This is driving me nuts because I swear I ran into this before many years ago and eventually figured it out. But I appear to have lost my notes.

    Read the article

  • Google images sometimes terribly slow when using dnsmasq

    - by Joril
    Hi everyone! I am the admin of a small LAN of 10+ computers. I've set up a dnsmasq server for DHCP and DNS resolution, and it's working almost fine.. My problem is that when I try to use Google images, sometimes it takes ages to show the actual images. I get just the textual part of the page (menus and so on) while the images themselves are shown as the still-loading-white boxes.. When I use the DSL router directly as DNS, the site works fine all the time. The problem sometimes presents itself with Google maps too.. The map takes ages to load. Any idea on what I could try to troubleshoot this? (dnsmasq 2.47 on CentOS 5.2 64bit, our outside connection is an asymmetrical 4Mbps DSL)

    Read the article

  • Google images sometimes terribly slow when using dnsmasq

    - by Joril
    Hi everyone! I am the admin of a small LAN of 10+ computers. I've set up a dnsmasq server for DHCP and DNS resolution, and it's working almost fine.. My problem is that when I try to use Google images, sometimes it takes ages to show the actual images. I get just the textual part of the page (menus and so on) while the images themselves are shown as the still-loading-white boxes.. When I use the DSL router directly as DNS, the site works fine all the time. The problem sometimes presents itself with Google maps too.. The map takes ages to load. Any idea on what I could try to troubleshoot this? (dnsmasq 2.47 on CentOS 5.2 64bit, our outside connection is an asymmetrical 4Mbps DSL)

    Read the article

  • Network connection to Firebird 2.1 became slow after upgrading to Ubuntu 10.04

    - by lyle
    We've got a setup that we're using for different clients : a program connecting to a Firebird server on a local network. So far we mostly used 32bit processors running Ubuntu LTS (recently upgraded to 10.04). Now we introduced servers running on 64bit processors, running Ubuntu 10.04 64bit. Suddenly some queries run slower than they used to. In short: running the query locally works fine on both 64bit and 32bit servers, but when running the same queries over the network the 64bit server is suddenly much slower. We did a few checks with both local and remote connections to both 64bit and 32bit servers, using identical databases and identical queries, running in Flamerobin. Running the query locally takes a negligible amount of time: 0.008s on the 64bit server, 0.014s on the 32bit servers. So the servers themselves are running fine. Running the queries over the network, the 64bit server suddenly needs up to 0.160s to respond, while the 32bit server responds in 0.055s. So the older servers are twice as fast over the network, in spite of the newer servers being twice as fast if run locally. Apart from that the setup is identical. All servers are running the same installation of Ubuntu 10.04, same version of Firebird and so on, the only difference is that some are 64 and some 32bit. Any idea?? I tried to google it, but I couldn't find any complains that Firebird 64bit is slower than Firebird 32bit, except that the Firebird 2.1 change log mentions that there's a new network API which is twice as fast, as soon as the drivers are updated to use it. So I could imagine that the 64bit driver is still using the old API, but that's a bit of a stretch, I guess. Thanx in advance for any replies! :)

    Read the article

  • slow network in centos5 VM with centos5 host running KVM

    - by dan
    I setup KVM following the guide here: http://www.cyberciti.biz/faq/centos-rhel-linux-kvm-virtulization-tutorial/ I setup a bridged network and it worked fine except that the transfer speed is 200KB/s instead of the gigabit speed that I get on the host machine by itself. I tried editing the guest network settings to set "model=virtio" http://wiki.libvirt.org/page/Virtio but this just moves ifconfig-eth0 to ifconfig-eth0.bak in the VM and networking doesn't work at all. I tried moving ifconfig-eth0 back and starting up eth0, which works, but now the transfer speed is ~ 60KB/s I have no idea what else to try. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Slow NFS transfer performance of small files

    - by Arie K
    I'm using Openfiler 2.3 on an HP ML370 G5, Smart Array P400, SAS disks combined using RAID 1+0. I set up an NFS share from ext3 partition using Openfiler's web based configuration, and I succeeded to mount the share from another host. Both host are connected using dedicated gigabit link. Simple benchmark using dd: $ dd if=/dev/zero of=outfile bs=1000 count=2000000 2000000+0 records in 2000000+0 records out 2000000000 bytes (2.0 GB) copied, 34.4737 s, 58.0 MB/s I see it can achieve moderate transfer speed (58.0 MB/s). But if I copy a directory containing many small files (.php and .jpg, around 1-4 kB per file) of total size ~300 MB, the cp process ends in about 10 minutes. Is NFS not suitable for small file transfer like above case? Or is there some parameters that must be adjusted?

    Read the article

  • Script Editor in Snow Leopard painfully slow after adding apps to Library

    - by Kio Dane
    I have four different Macs that I use from time to time, and on each of them I notice a constant: adding more items to AppleScript Editor's Library window slows performance of mundane operations (opening a dictionary, switching between Library window and editor window, scrolling in the Library window, etc). In Leopard, I noticed little to no latency in opening a dictionary in Script Editor, but Snow Leopard's AppleScript Editor kills my productivity by making me wait on it with most UI interactions with the Library window.

    Read the article

  • Rails3 environment running very slow on Windows XP, Ubuntu 9.04, Ubuntu 9.10

    - by bergyman
    I've tried all three (granted the Ubuntu versions were via VirtualBox with XP as a host, but I gave the images all the available RAM my system has). Loading the rails environment is taking 30-60 seconds. rails console, rake test:units - anything that requires rails to load up. And not just on the first go - every time. I've even used autotest to see if it helps with execution time for unit tests, but it doesn't. Any time I change one test, it still takes 30 seconds to load them, and then about 4 seconds to execute. Has anyone else come across this issue? Has anyone figured out any way to fix this?

    Read the article

  • Slow upload speeds with pfsense virtual appliance

    - by Justin Shin
    I have a pfSense virtual appliance set up in front of a Windows server. The pfSense appliance has been configured with two L2L IPSec VPN sites and not too much else. The appliance has two vNics which both exist on the same VLAN, but one is "WAN" and the other is "LAN." When I run speedtest.net on my Windows server when I have configured it to use a static WAN address and gateway, I get great speeds - maybe around 50 down, 15 up. However, when I configure it with a private IP address, I get similar download speeds but terrible upload speeds - around 2 or 3 Mbps consistently. I used Wireshark to see what gives but there didn't appear to be too much helpful information there, or I just could not find it. Besides the L2L VPNs, other configurations include: Automatic Outbound NAT Virtual P-ARP IP for the Windows Server WAN Firewall rule to allow * to * on RDP WAN Firewall rule to allow * to * (enabled this just for testing... didn't help!) No DHCP or any other services besides IPSec VPN No Errors LAN or WAN No collisions LAN or WAN I would be happy to post the full config file if it would help. I've been scratching my head at this one all day!

    Read the article

  • PXE boot very slow when PXE server is virtualbox

    - by sqrtsben
    As I read in questions here and on the Internet, PXE and Virtualbox don't seem to like each other too much. My problem is the following: I have a virtualized machine which hosts the DHCP and PXE server for 10 native clients. They are rebooted roughly every 10 mins and on each reboot, they need to boot a small linux (the initrd is ~4MB). Before, I had a native machine running and booting via PXE was very fast. Now, looking at the output of nload, I only get 500kbit/s whenever one machine is booting. The machines are connected via a GBit switch, so that can't be it. Also, when testing the connection speed to the outside, I have the full bandwidth available. Is VBox just unable to deal with large amounts of UDP packets? Can anyone point me in the right direction here?

    Read the article

  • Terribly slow Apache2 on VM Virtualbox

    - by cadavre
    I just launched VM Virtualbox with guest Ubuntu Server on host Windows 8. Both 64bit. Everything works perfectly fine. Maybe it's because I'm not using any X... Htop shows ~25% of memory usage, everything is fine, but not Apache2. Normally it's fine, but when I send request from my browser on host (networking mode set to Bridge mode), Apache2 is turning into 1-minute-long loading process with 100% CPU time. Any ideas how to debug it? Any ideas about solving this throat problem?

    Read the article

  • slow network in centos5 VM with centos5 host running KVM

    - by dan
    I setup KVM following the guide here: http://www.cyberciti.biz/faq/centos-rhel-linux-kvm-virtulization-tutorial/ I setup a bridged network and it worked fine except that the transfer speed is 200KB/s instead of the gigabit speed that I get on the host machine by itself. I tried editing the guest network settings to set "model=virtio" http://wiki.libvirt.org/page/Virtio but this just moves ifconfig-eth0 to ifconfig-eth0.bak in the VM and networking doesn't work at all. I tried moving ifconfig-eth0 back and starting up eth0, which works, but now the transfer speed is ~ 60KB/s I have no idea what else to try. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Slow logins with roaming profiles

    - by tliff
    We are running an ActiveDirectory environment with Windows 2008 as DC and Samba 3.3 as fileserver, using roaming profiles. Some of our offices are connected to HQ via slowish links (1/2 Mbit). Naturally this is not very fast but that was expected. What I do not understand is, that if a user logs out (taking a long time to sync, as expected) and then logs in again the next day it also takes a long time to login. And that is what I don't understand. Shouldn't the sync recognize that nothing has changed rather quickly? Also: Is there any decent docu on how the synchronization is implemented?

    Read the article

  • Jboss unreachable/ slow behind apache with ajp

    - by Niels
    I have an linux server running with a JBoss Instance with apache2. Apache2 will use AJP connection to reverse proxy to JBoss. I found these messages in the apache error.log: [error] (70007)The timeout specified has expired: ajp_ilink_receive() can't receive header [error] ajp_read_header: ajp_ilink_receive failed [error] (120006)APR does not understand this error code: proxy: read response failed from 8.8.8.8:8009 (hostname) [error] (111)Connection refused: proxy: AJP: attempt to connect to 8.8.8.8:8009 (hostname) failed [error] ap_proxy_connect_backend disabling worker for (hostname) [error] proxy: AJP: failed to make connection to backend: hostname [error] proxy: AJP: disabled connection for (hostname)25 I googled around but I can't seem to find any related topics. There are people say this behavior can be caused by misconfigured apache vs jboss. Telling the max amount of connections apache allows are far greater then jboss, causing the apache connection to time out. But I know the app isn't used by thousands of simultaneous connections at the time not even hundreds of connections so I don't believe this could be a cause. Does anybody have an idea? Or could tell me how to debug this problem? I'm using these versions: Debian 4.3.5-4 64Bit Apache Version 2.2.16 JBOSS Version 4.2.3.GA Thanks

    Read the article

  • Is Flash typically slow on Linux?

    - by CSarnia
    Specifically, I'm running Mint 8 (Helena). I'm extremely new to Linux, and was searching for a solution that was user-friendly and GUI oriented. The box won't be used for much other than web browsing and word processing. Anyway, it runs relatively smoothly, except for Youtube videos... especially full-screen, which runs at like 1 FPS, and even after closing, slows Firefox to a crawl until I restart it. I'd seen an xkcd comic on the matter, but regarded it as a joke until now. Is this actually a problem? Are there any remedies I can try to smooth the applications?

    Read the article

  • Macports Apache Slow to Start/Stop

    - by moranjk
    I am running OSX 10.8.5 (Mountain Lion) with Apache2 from MacPorts for local development, and just recently I noticed it is taking almost a minute to restart Apache. I wouldn't think anything of it except it normally would restart in less than a second. I had all but given up Googling when I noticed that if I turned off the WiFi (I haven't tried hardwire yet) Apache would restart just as it use to. What would cause Apache to take longer to start when I am connected to the LAN? What can be done to mitigate this issue?

    Read the article

  • Ubuntu server very slow out of the blue sky (Rails, passenger, nginx)

    - by snitko
    I run Ubuntu server 8.04 on Linode with multiple Rails apps under Passenger + nginx. Today I've noticed it takes quite a lot of time to load a page (5-10 secs). And it's not only websites, ssh seems to be affected too. Having no clue why this may be happening, I started to check different things. I checked how the log files are rotated, I checked if there's enough free disk space and memory. I also checked IO rate, here's the output: $ iostat avg-cpu: %user %nice %system %iowait %steal %idle 0.17 0.00 0.02 0.57 0.16 99.07 Device: tps Blk_read/s Blk_wrtn/s Blk_read Blk_wrtn xvda 2.25 39.50 16.08 147042 59856 xvdb 0.00 0.05 0.00 192 0 xvdc 2.20 25.93 24.93 96530 92808 xvdd 0.01 0.12 0.00 434 16 xvde 0.04 0.23 0.35 858 1304 xvdf 0.37 0.31 4.12 1162 15352 Rebooting didn't help either. Any ideas where should I be looking?

    Read the article

  • Samsung 830 very slow benchmark numbers

    - by alekop
    I just bought a new SSD, and installed a fresh copy of Windows on it. I didn't see any noticeable difference in boot times, app start-up times, so I decided to benchmark it. Asus P7P55D-E Intel i5-760 Samsung 830 256GB SATA III Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit The Windows experience index gave the drive a 7.3 rating, but real-world performance is not particularly impressive. Any ideas why the numbers are so low? UPDATE: It turns out that SATA III support is turned off by default on the P7P55D motherboard. After enabling it in BIOS (Tools - Level Up), the scores went up: Read Write Seq 325 183 4K 16 49 IOPS 32K 28K It's an improvement, but still far below what they should be for this drive.

    Read the article

  • very slow bridge detection

    - by deddihp
    hello everyone, I have setup some bridge interface with 4 ethernet port. My problem is, when they detect some network topology change, the bridge really need a lot of time to have done it. Is there any solution, so the bridge can detect topology change faster ? thanks.

    Read the article

  • Slow INFORMATION_SCHEMA query

    - by Thomas
    We have a .NET Windows application that runs the following query on login to get some information about the database: SELECT t.TABLE_NAME, ISNULL(pk_ccu.COLUMN_NAME,'') PK, ISNULL(fk_ccu.COLUMN_NAME,'') FK FROM INFORMATION_SCHEMA.TABLES t LEFT JOIN INFORMATION_SCHEMA.TABLE_CONSTRAINTS pk_tc ON pk_tc.TABLE_NAME = t.TABLE_NAME AND pk_tc.CONSTRAINT_TYPE = 'PRIMARY KEY' LEFT JOIN INFORMATION_SCHEMA.CONSTRAINT_COLUMN_USAGE pk_ccu ON pk_ccu.CONSTRAINT_NAME = pk_tc.CONSTRAINT_NAME LEFT JOIN INFORMATION_SCHEMA.TABLE_CONSTRAINTS fk_tc ON fk_tc.TABLE_NAME = t.TABLE_NAME AND fk_tc.CONSTRAINT_TYPE = 'FOREIGN KEY' LEFT JOIN INFORMATION_SCHEMA.CONSTRAINT_COLUMN_USAGE fk_ccu ON fk_ccu.CONSTRAINT_NAME = fk_tc.CONSTRAINT_NAME Usually this runs in a couple seconds, but on one server running SQL Server 2000, it is taking over four minutes to run. I ran it with the execution plan enabled, and the results are huge, but this part caught my eye (it won't let me post an image): http://img35.imageshack.us/i/plank.png/ I then updated the statistics on all of the tables that were mentioned in the execution plan: update statistics sysobjects update statistics syscolumns update statistics systypes update statistics master..spt_values update statistics sysreferences But that didn't help. The index tuning wizard doesn't help either, because it doesn't let me select system tables. There is nothing else running on this server, so nothing else could be slowing it down. What else can I do to diagnose or fix the problem on that server?

    Read the article

  • Slow solid state drive on laptop running Linux

    - by wcyang
    I installed a solid state drive on my laptop, but I don't get the blazing speeds which people write about. My system: Laptop: Acer Aspire 7552G-6061 Solid state drive: Crucial 256GB M4 CT256M4SSD2 Operating system: Linux (Trisquel 5.5, a derivative of Ubuntu) I am using AHCI. I installed the operating system onto the solid state drive (as opposed to copying it). How can I make the solid state drive faster? Could the problem be with the block or sector alignment?

    Read the article

  • Command line is horribly slow in Ubuntu Server

    - by hekevintran
    I am running Ubuntu Server on VirtualBox. I am not using X Windows, only the command line. It looks like it is redrawing the screen for every line that causes the screen to shift down. In other words if there is empty space on the screen below the current line, it works normally, but if the current line is at the bottom of the screen, when the system moves to the next line it refreshes the whole screen line by line. This causes the system to run very slowly because I have to wait for the whole screen to refresh for every line and it hits the CPU at 90%. I installed Debian Lenny in VirtualBox and it didn't do this. Why does Ubuntu Server redraw the screen for each line? Is there a way to make this behaviour go away?

    Read the article

  • Apache Slow Over http, Fast Over https

    - by Josh Pennington
    I have an Apache server running Debian. I am having this very strange situation where loading a page takes about 2 to 3 times longer to load over http than https. The primary use of the website is Magento, but I am seeing similar results with other things that we have loaded on the website. I don't have the first clue where to even look on our server or what the problem could be. Does anyone have any insight as to what could be going on or where to look. Josh

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42  | Next Page >