Search Results

Search found 48586 results on 1944 pages for 'page performance'.

Page 36/1944 | < Previous Page | 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43  | Next Page >

• Best performance approach to history mechanism?

  - by Royi Namir

  We are going to create History Mechanism for our changes in DB (DART in pic) via Triggers. we have 600 tables. Each record that will be changed - the trigger will insert the deleted one into XXX. regarding to the XXX : option 1 : clone each table in "Dart" DB and each table now will have a "sister table" e.g. : Table1 will have Table1_History problems : we will have 1200 tables programmer can do mistakes by working on wrong tables... option 2 : make a new DB (DART_2005 in pic) and the history tables will be there option 3 : use linked server which stores the Db which will contain the history tables. question : 1) which option gives the best performance ( I guess 3 is not - but is it 1 or 2 or same ?) 2) Does option 2 is acting like "linked server" ( in queries we will need to select from both DB's...) 3) What is the best practice approach ?

  Read the article

• Performance characteristics of pthreads vs ucontext

  - by Robert Mason

  I'm trying to port a library that uses ucontext over to a platform which supports pthreads but not ucontext. The code is pretty well written so it should be relatively easy to replace all the calls to the ucontext API with a call to pthread routines. However, does this introduce a significant amount of additional overhead? Or is this a satisfactory replacement. I'm not sure how ucontext maps to operating system threads, and the purpose of this facility is to make coroutine spawning fairly cheap and easy. So, question is: Does replacing ucontext calls with pthread calls significantly change the performance characteristics of a library?

  Read the article

• MongoDB: embedding performance question

  - by Alex

  I just started learning MongoDB, and I really like the idea of embedding collections instead of referencing them. MongoDB's documentation recommends to use embedding if performance is needed. I just thought about a simple forum model. Let's say, every board category has several boards, every board has several topics, and every topic has several messages. All of these collections are embedded. After some time the size of the board category will be huge. Way more than the 2MB limit. Does this mean that there's a flaw in this design?

  Read the article

• django url tag performance

  - by zxygentoo

  I was trying to integrate django-voting into my project following the RedditStyleVoting instruction. In my urls.py, i did something like this: url(r'^sections/(?P<object_id>\d+)/(?P<direction>up|down|clear)vote/?$', vote_on_object, dict( model=Section, template_object_name='section', template_name='script/section_confirm_vote.html', allow_xmlhttprequest=True ), name="section_vote", then, in my template: {% vote_by_user user on section as vote %} {% score_for_object section as score %} {% vote_by_user user on section as vote %} {% score_for_object section as score %} {{ score.score|default:0 }} It takes over 1.3s to load the page, but by hard coding it like this: {% vote_by_user user on section as vote %} {% score_for_object section as score %} {{ score.score|default:0 }} I got 50ms. Just avoid the url tag resolving stuff I got a 20+ times performance improvement. Is there something I did wrong? If not, then what's the best practice here, should we do things the right way or the fast way?

  Read the article

• Display another field in the referenced table for multiple columns with performance issues in mind

  - by israkir

  I have a table of edge like this: ------------------------------- | id | arg1 | relation | arg2 | ------------------------------- | 1 | 1 | 3 | 4 | ------------------------------- | 2 | 2 | 6 | 5 | ------------------------------- where arg1, relation and arg2 reference to the ids of objects in another object table: -------------------- | id | object_name | -------------------- | 1 | book | -------------------- | 2 | pen | -------------------- | 3 | on | -------------------- | 4 | table | -------------------- | 5 | bag | -------------------- | 6 | in | -------------------- What I want to do is that, considering performance issues (a very big table more than 50 million of entries) display the object_name for each edge entry rather than id such as: --------------------------- | arg1 | relation | arg2 | --------------------------- | book | on | table | --------------------------- | pen | in | bag | --------------------------- What is the best select query to do this? Also, I am open to suggestions for optimizing the query - adding more index on the tables etc... EDIT: Based on the comments below: 1) @Craig Ringer: PostgreSQL version: 8.4.13 and only index is id for both tables. 2) @andrefsp: edge is almost x2 times bigger than object.

  Read the article

• Tool to monitor IE performance running JavaScript

  - by StefanE

  Hi, Company I work for are one of the largest betting companies in Europe and the website has thousands of lines of JavaScript on all our pages. Lately Internet Explorer versions earlier than version 9 are running painfully slow and I want to be able to monitor what parts of a page load (including scripts) that are slow. I know that IE are slower in general and has DOM API issues etc. What I want to accomplish is a way to quickly identify slow parts and see if we can replace the code with IE specific code that will render with higher performance. Cheers, Stefan

  Read the article

• .NET Performance: Deep Recursion vs Queue

  - by JeffN825

  I'm writing a component that needs to walk large object graphs, sometimes 20-30 levels deep. What is the most performant way of walking the graph? A. Enqueueing "steps" so as to avoid deep recursion or B. A DFS (depth first search) which may step many levels deep and have a "deep" stack trace at times. I guess the question I'm asking is: Is there a performance hit in .NET for doing a DFS that causes a "deep" stack trace? If so, what is the hit? And would I better better off with some BFS by means of queueing up steps that would have been handled recursively in a DFS? Sorry if I'm being unclear. Thanks.

  Read the article

• C# Dynamic From Components (Performance problem)

  - by Svisstack

  Hello, I have a problem with performance of my code under Windows Forms. Have a form, her layout is depending on constructor data, because he layout must be OnLoad or in Constructor generated. I generation is simple, base FlowLayoutPanel have other FlowLayoutPanels, for each have a Label and TextBox with DataBinding. Problem is this is VERY SLOW, up to 20 seconds, i drawing less than 100 controls, from Performace Session i know a problem is on 70% procesing functions: System.Windows.Forms.Control.ControlCollection.Add(class System.Windows.Forms.Control) System.Windows.Forms.ControlBindingsCollection.Add(class System.Windows.Forms.Binding) How i can do with this? Anyone help me in this problem? How solve the dynamic form layout problem?

  Read the article

• Function calls in virtual machine killing performance

  - by GenTiradentes

  I wrote a virtual machine in C, which has a call table populated by pointers to functions that provide the functionality of the VM's opcodes. When the virtual machine is run, it first interprets a program, creating an array of indexes corresponding to the appropriate function in the call table for the opcode provided. It then loops through the array, calling each function until it reaches the end. Each instruction is extremely small, typically one line. Perfect for inlining. The problem is that the compiler doesn't know when any of the virtual machine's instructions are going to be called, as it's decided at runtime, so it can't inline them. The overhead of function calls and argument passing is killing the performance of my VM. Any ideas on how to get around this?

  Read the article

• How to track IIS server performance

  - by Chris Brandsma

  I have a reoccurring issue where a customer calls up and complains that the web site is too slow. Specifically, if they are inactive for a short period of time, then go back to the site, there will be a minute-two minute delay before the user sees a response. (the standard browser is Firefox in this case) I have Perfmon up and running, the cpu utilization is usually below 20% (single proc...don't ask). The database is humming along. And I'm pulling my hair out. So, what metrics/tools do you find useful when evaluating IIS performance?

  Read the article

• How can I measure file access performance (and volume) of a (Java) application

  - by stmoebius

  Given an application, how can I measure the amount of data read and written by that application? the time spent reading/writing to disk? The specific application is Java-based (JBoss), and multi-threaded, and running as a service on Windows 7/2008 x64. The overall goal I have is determining whether and why file access is a bottleneck in my application. Therefore, running the application in a defined and repeatable scenario is a given. File access may be local as well as on network shares. Windows performance monitor appears to be too hard to use (unless someone can point me to a helpful explanation). Any ideas?

  Read the article

• Java generic Interface performance

  - by halfwarp

  Simple question, but tricky answer I guess. Does using Generic Interfaces hurts performance? Example: public interface Stuff<T> { void hello(T var); } vs public interface Stuff { void hello(Integer var); <---- Integer used just as an example } My first thought is that it doesn't. Generics are just part of the language and the compiler will optimize it as though there were no generics (at least in this particular case of generic interfaces). Is this correct?

  Read the article

• AS3: Performance question calling an event function with null param

  - by adehaas

  Lately I needed to call a listener function without an actual listener like so: foo(null); private function foo(event:Event):void { //do something } So I was wondering if there is a significant difference regarding performance between this and using the following, in which I can prevent the null in calling the function without the listener, but am still able to call it with a listener as well: foo(); private function foo(event:Event = null):void { } I am not sure wether it is just a question of style, or actually bad practice and I should write two similar functions, one with and one without the event param (which seems cumbersome to me). Looking forward to your opinions, thx.

  Read the article

• c# performance- create font

  - by user85917

  I have performance issues in this code segment which I think is caused by the "new Font". Will it be faster if fonts are static/global ? if (row.StartsWith(TILD_BEGIN)) { rtbTrace.SelectionColor = Color.Maroon; rtbTrace.SelectionFont = new Font(myFont, (float)8.25, FontStyle.Regular); if (row.StartsWith(BEGIN) ) rtbTrace.AppendText(Environment.NewLine + row + Environment.NewLine); else rtbTrace.AppendText(Environment.NewLine + row.Substring(1) + Environment.NewLine); continue; } if (row.StartsWith(EXCL_BEGIN)) { -- similar block } if (row.StartsWith(DLR_BEGIN)) { -- similar block } . . .

  Read the article

• SSRS Performance Mystery

  - by user101654

  I have a stored procedure that returns about 50000 records in 10sec using at most 2 cores in SSMS. The SSRS report using the stored procedure was taking 20min and would max out the processor on an 8 core server for the entire time. The report was relatively simple (i.e. no graphs, calculations). The report did not appear to be the issue as I wrote the 50K rows to a temp table and the report could display the data in a few seconds. I tried many different ideas for testing altering the stored procedure each time, but keeping the original code in a separate window to revert back to. After one Alter of the stored procedure, going back to the original code, the report and server utilization started running fast, comparable to the performance of the stored procedure alone. Everything is fine for now, but I am would like to get to the bottom of what caused this in case it happens again. Any ideas?

  Read the article

• C# chart control Performance with large amounts of data

  - by user3642115

  I am using a chart control with a range bar graph to basically make a gantt chart for lots of people and lots of projects, say about 1000 total series. The issue that I am running in to is that once I have all my data added to the chart, which takes some time but that is to be expected, and I go to scroll down on my graph it freezes the whole application and takes a while before it unfreezes and scrolls down. Is there any way to improve the performance of this? I tried adding the graph to a panel and growing the graph size dynamically and then scrolling down from the panel but that cause a whole plethora of other issues. Any tips for speeding this up? I don't think it is my code as it has already finished running when this issue happens. Thanks.

  Read the article

• OpenGL performance on rendering "virtual gallery" (textures)

  - by maticus

  I have a considerable (120-240) amount of 640x480 images that will be displayed as textured flat surfaces (4 vertex polygons) in a 3D environment. About 30-50% of them will be visible in a given frame. It is possible for them to crossover. Nothing else will be present in the environment. The question is - will the modern and/or few-years-old (lets say Radeon 9550) GPU cope with that, and what frame rate can I expect? I aim for 20FPS, but 30-40 would be nice. Would changing the resolution to 320x240 make it more probable to happen? I do not have any previous experience with performance issues of 3D graphics on modern GPUs, and unfortunately I must make a design choice. I don't want to waste time on doing something that couldn't have worked :-)

  Read the article

• Columnstore Case Study #1: MSIT SONAR Aggregations

  - by aspiringgeek

  Preamble This is the first in a series of posts documenting big wins encountered using columnstore indexes in SQL Server 2012 & 2014.  Many of these can be found in this deck along with details such as internals, best practices, caveats, etc.  The purpose of sharing the case studies in this context is to provide an easy-to-consume quick-reference alternative. Why Columnstore? If we’re looking for a subset of columns from one or a few rows, given the right indexes, SQL Server can do a superlative job of providing an answer. If we’re asking a question which by design needs to hit lots of rows—DW, reporting, aggregations, grouping, scans, etc., SQL Server has never had a good mechanism—until columnstore. Columnstore indexes were introduced in SQL Server 2012. However, they're still largely unknown. Some adoption blockers existed; yet columnstore was nonetheless a game changer for many apps.  In SQL Server 2014, potential blockers have been largely removed & they're going to profoundly change the way we interact with our data.  The purpose of this series is to share the performance benefits of columnstore & documenting columnstore is a compelling reason to upgrade to SQL Server 2014. App: MSIT SONAR Aggregations At MSIT, performance & configuration data is captured by SCOM. We archive much of the data in a partitioned data warehouse table in SQL Server 2012 for reporting via an application called SONAR.  By definition, this is a primary use case for columnstore—report queries requiring aggregation over large numbers of rows.  New data is refreshed each night by an automated table partitioning mechanism—a best practices scenario for columnstore. The Win Compared to performance using classic indexing which resulted in the expected query plan selection including partition elimination vs. SQL Server 2012 nonclustered columnstore, query performance increased significantly.  Logical reads were reduced by over a factor of 50; both CPU & duration improved by factors of 20 or more.  Other than creating the columnstore index, no special modifications or tweaks to the app or databases schema were necessary to achieve the performance improvements.  Existing nonclustered indexes were rendered superfluous & were deleted, thus mitigating maintenance challenges such as defragging as well as conserving disk capacity. Details The table provides the raw data & summarizes the performance deltas. Logical Reads (8K pages) CPU (ms) Durn (ms) Columnstore 160,323 20,360 9,786 Conventional Table & Indexes 9,053,423 549,608 193,903 ? x56 x27 x20 The charts provide additional perspective of this data.  "Conventional vs. Columnstore Metrics" document the raw data.  Note on this linear display the magnitude of the conventional index performance vs. columnstore.  The “Metrics (?)” chart expresses these values as a ratio. Summary For DW, reports, & other BI workloads, columnstore often provides significant performance enhancements relative to conventional indexing.  I have documented here, the first in a series of reports on columnstore implementations, results from an initial implementation at MSIT in which logical reads were reduced by over a factor of 50; both CPU & duration improved by factors of 20 or more.  Subsequent features in this series document performance enhancements that are even more significant. 

  Read the article

• Columnstore Case Study #1: MSIT SONAR Aggregations

  - by aspiringgeek

  Preamble This is the first in a series of posts documenting big wins encountered using columnstore indexes in SQL Server 2012 & 2014.  Many of these can be found in this deck along with details such as internals, best practices, caveats, etc.  The purpose of sharing the case studies in this context is to provide an easy-to-consume quick-reference alternative. Why Columnstore? If we’re looking for a subset of columns from one or a few rows, given the right indexes, SQL Server can do a superlative job of providing an answer. If we’re asking a question which by design needs to hit lots of rows—DW, reporting, aggregations, grouping, scans, etc., SQL Server has never had a good mechanism—until columnstore. Columnstore indexes were introduced in SQL Server 2012. However, they're still largely unknown. Some adoption blockers existed; yet columnstore was nonetheless a game changer for many apps.  In SQL Server 2014, potential blockers have been largely removed & they're going to profoundly change the way we interact with our data.  The purpose of this series is to share the performance benefits of columnstore & documenting columnstore is a compelling reason to upgrade to SQL Server 2014. App: MSIT SONAR Aggregations At MSIT, performance & configuration data is captured by SCOM. We archive much of the data in a partitioned data warehouse table in SQL Server 2012 for reporting via an application called SONAR.  By definition, this is a primary use case for columnstore—report queries requiring aggregation over large numbers of rows.  New data is refreshed each night by an automated table partitioning mechanism—a best practices scenario for columnstore. The Win Compared to performance using classic indexing which resulted in the expected query plan selection including partition elimination vs. SQL Server 2012 nonclustered columnstore, query performance increased significantly.  Logical reads were reduced by over a factor of 50; both CPU & duration improved by factors of 20 or more.  Other than creating the columnstore index, no special modifications or tweaks to the app or databases schema were necessary to achieve the performance improvements.  Existing nonclustered indexes were rendered superfluous & were deleted, thus mitigating maintenance challenges such as defragging as well as conserving disk capacity. Details The table provides the raw data & summarizes the performance deltas. Logical Reads (8K pages) CPU (ms) Durn (ms) Columnstore 160,323 20,360 9,786 Conventional Table & Indexes 9,053,423 549,608 193,903 ? x56 x27 x20 The charts provide additional perspective of this data.  "Conventional vs. Columnstore Metrics" document the raw data.  Note on this linear display the magnitude of the conventional index performance vs. columnstore.  The “Metrics (?)” chart expresses these values as a ratio. Summary For DW, reports, & other BI workloads, columnstore often provides significant performance enhancements relative to conventional indexing.  I have documented here, the first in a series of reports on columnstore implementations, results from an initial implementation at MSIT in which logical reads were reduced by over a factor of 50; both CPU & duration improved by factors of 20 or more.  Subsequent features in this series document performance enhancements that are even more significant. 

  Read the article

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

  - by Mat Keep

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

  Read the article

• sharepoint custom aspx page with database connection

  - by Megini

  hi there i have created a custom aspx page whithin my sharepoint site with a sql server connection to a database on that server to select data when i view the page it works but when another user tries to view it it gives the following error : Server Error in '/' Application. Login failed for user 'GRINCOR\GuguK'. Description: An unhandled exception occurred during the execution of the current web request. Please review the stack trace for more information about the error and where it originated in the code. Exception Details: System.Data.SqlClient.SqlException: Login failed for user 'GRINCOR\GuguK'. Source Error: The source code that generated this unhandled exception can only be shown when compiled in debug mode. To enable this, please follow one of the below steps, then request the URL: Add a "Debug=true" directive at the top of the file that generated the error. Example: <%@ Page Language="C#" Debug="true" % or: 2) Add the following section to the configuration file of your application: Note that this second technique will cause all files within a given application to be compiled in debug mode. The first technique will cause only that particular file to be compiled in debug mode. Important: Running applications in debug mode does incur a memory/performance overhead. You should make sure that an application has debugging disabled before deploying into production scenario. Stack Trace: [SqlException (0x80131904): Login failed for user 'GRINCOR\GuguK'.] System.Data.SqlClient.SqlInternalConnection.OnError(SqlException exception, Boolean breakConnection) +248 System.Data.SqlClient.TdsParser.ThrowExceptionAndWarning(TdsParserStateObject stateObj) +245 System.Data.SqlClient.TdsParser.Run(RunBehavior runBehavior, SqlCommand cmdHandler, SqlDataReader dataStream, BulkCopySimpleResultSet bulkCopyHandler, TdsParserStateObject stateObj) +2811 System.Data.SqlClient.SqlInternalConnectionTds.CompleteLogin(Boolean enlistOK) +53 System.Data.SqlClient.SqlInternalConnectionTds.AttemptOneLogin(ServerInfo serverInfo, String newPassword, Boolean ignoreSniOpenTimeout, Int64 timerExpire, SqlConnection owningObject) +327 System.Data.SqlClient.SqlInternalConnectionTds.LoginNoFailover(String host, String newPassword, Boolean redirectedUserInstance, SqlConnection owningObject, SqlConnectionString connectionOptions, Int64 timerStart) +2445370 System.Data.SqlClient.SqlInternalConnectionTds.OpenLoginEnlist(SqlConnection owningObject, SqlConnectionString connectionOptions, String newPassword, Boolean redirectedUserInstance) +2445224 System.Data.SqlClient.SqlInternalConnectionTds..ctor(DbConnectionPoolIdentity identity, SqlConnectionString connectionOptions, Object providerInfo, String newPassword, SqlConnection owningObject, Boolean redirectedUserInstance) +354 System.Data.SqlClient.SqlConnectionFactory.CreateConnection(DbConnectionOptions options, Object poolGroupProviderInfo, DbConnectionPool pool, DbConnection owningConnection) +703 System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionFactory.CreatePooledConnection(DbConnection owningConnection, DbConnectionPool pool, DbConnectionOptions options) +54 System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionPool.CreateObject(DbConnection owningObject) +2414776 System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionPool.UserCreateRequest(DbConnection owningObject) +92 System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionPool.GetConnection(DbConnection owningObject) +1657 System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionFactory.GetConnection(DbConnection owningConnection) +84 System.Data.ProviderBase.DbConnectionClosed.OpenConnection(DbConnection outerConnection, DbConnectionFactory connectionFactory) +1645767 System.Data.SqlClient.SqlConnection.Open() +258 ASP.d7922f0d_ac20_4f87_91a2_a99a52c2b2fa__233736835.DisplayData() in C:\inetpub\wwwroot\wss\VirtualDirectories\80\sites\hrportal2\tester.aspx:151 ASP.d7922f0d_ac20_4f87_91a2_a99a52c2b2fa_233736835._RenderMain(HtmlTextWriter __w, Control parameterContainer) in C:\inetpub\wwwroot\wss\VirtualDirectories\80\sites\hrportal2\tester.aspx:346 System.Web.UI.Control.RenderChildrenInternal(HtmlTextWriter writer, ICollection children) +115 System.Web.UI.Control.RenderChildrenInternal(HtmlTextWriter writer, ICollection children) +240 System.Web.UI.HtmlControls.HtmlContainerControl.Render(HtmlTextWriter writer) +42 System.Web.UI.Control.RenderChildrenInternal(HtmlTextWriter writer, ICollection children) +240 System.Web.UI.HtmlControls.HtmlForm.RenderChildren(HtmlTextWriter writer) +253 System.Web.UI.HtmlControls.HtmlForm.Render(HtmlTextWriter output) +87 System.Web.UI.HtmlControls.HtmlForm.RenderControl(HtmlTextWriter writer) +53 System.Web.UI.Control.RenderChildrenInternal(HtmlTextWriter writer, ICollection children) +240 System.Web.UI.HtmlControls.HtmlContainerControl.Render(HtmlTextWriter writer) +42 System.Web.UI.Control.RenderChildrenInternal(HtmlTextWriter writer, ICollection children) +240 System.Web.UI.Control.RenderChildrenInternal(HtmlTextWriter writer, ICollection children) +240 System.Web.UI.Page.Render(HtmlTextWriter writer) +38 System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequestMain(Boolean includeStagesBeforeAsyncPoint, Boolean includeStagesAfterAsyncPoint) +4240 Version Information: Microsoft .NET Framework Version:2.0.50727.3603; ASP.NET Version:2.0.50727.3601 can someone give me a solution to this problem ? i am using sharepoint services 3.0

  Read the article

• Improve SQL Server 2005 Query Performance

  - by user366810

  I have a course search engine and when I try to do a search, it takes too long to show search results. You can try to do a search here http://76.12.87.164/cpd/testperformance.cfm At that page you can also see the database tables and indexes, if any. I'm not using Stored Procedures - the queries are inline using Coldfusion. I think I need to create some indexes but I'm not sure what kind (clustered, non-clustered) and on what columns. Thanks

  Read the article

• Page output caching for dynamic web applications

  - by Mike Ellis

  I am currently working on a web application where the user steps (forward or back) through a series of pages with "Next" and "Previous" buttons, entering data until they reach a page with the "Finish" button. Until finished, all data is stored in Session state, then sent to the mainframe database via web services at the end of the process. Some of the pages display data from previous pages in order to collect additional information. These pages can never be cached because they are different for every user. For pages that don't display this dynamic data, they can be cached, but only the first time they load. After that, the data that was previously entered needs to be displayed. This requires Page_Load to fire, which means the page can't be cached at that point. A couple of weeks ago, I knew almost nothing about implementing page caching. Now I still don't know much, but I know a little bit, and here is the solution that I developed with the help of others on my team and a lot of reading and trial-and-error. We have a base page class defined from which all pages inherit. In this class I have defined a method that sets the caching settings programmatically. For pages that can be cached, they call this base page method in their Page_Load event within a if(!IsPostBack) block, which ensures that only the page itself gets cached, not the data on the page. if(!IsPostBack) {     ...     SetCacheSettings();     ... } protected void SetCacheSettings() {     Response.Cache.AddValidationCallback(new HttpCacheValidateHandler(Validate), null);     Response.Cache.SetExpires(DateTime.Now.AddHours(1));     Response.Cache.SetSlidingExpiration(true);     Response.Cache.SetValidUntilExpires(true);     Response.Cache.SetCacheability(HttpCacheability.ServerAndNoCache); } The AddValidationCallback sets up an HttpCacheValidateHandler method called Validate which runs logic when a cached page is requested. The Validate method signature is standard for this method type. public static void Validate(HttpContext context, Object data, ref HttpValidationStatus status) {     string visited = context.Request.QueryString["v"];     if (visited != null && "1".Equals(visited))     {         status = HttpValidationStatus.IgnoreThisRequest; //force a page load     }     else     {         status = HttpValidationStatus.Valid; //load from cache     } } I am using the HttpValidationStatus values IgnoreThisRequest or Valid which forces the Page_Load event method to run or allows the page to load from cache, respectively. Which one is set depends on the value in the querystring. The value in the querystring is set up on each page in the "Next" and "Previous" button click event methods based on whether the page that the button click is taking the user to has any data on it or not. bool hasData = HasPageBeenVisited(url); if (hasData) {     url += VISITED; } Response.Redirect(url); The HasPageBeenVisited method determines whether the destination page has any data on it by checking one of its required data fields. (I won't include it here because it is very system-dependent.) VISITED is a string constant containing "?v=1" and gets appended to the url if the destination page has been visited. The reason this logic is within the "Next" and "Previous" button click event methods is because 1) the Validate method is static which doesn't allow it to access non-static data such as the data fields for a particular page, and 2) at the time at which the Validate method runs, either the data has not yet been deserialized from Session state or is not available (different AppDomain?) because anytime I accessed the Session state information from the Validate method, it was always empty.

  Read the article

• Single page not appearing in Google Search

  - by Dan

  Description I have a static franchise website which has various sub pages each dedicated to an individual franchisee. For each franchisee the page, the only thing slightly similar between all of them are the page titles, they follow this structure: <title> Welcome to THE_COMPANY - PRODUCT_DESCRIPTION Services, THE_LOCATION </title> THE_COMPANY and PRODUCT_DESCRIPTION are the same across all franchisees, however THE_LOCATION changes depeding on where they are located in the UK. Each franchisee page has the following <meta /> tags: <meta name="DC.creator" content="user"/> <meta name="DC.format" content="text/html"/> <meta name="DC.language" content="en"/> <meta name="DC.date.modified" content="2014-01-23T11:22:31+00:00"/> <meta name="DC.date.created" content="2014-01-23T11:22:09+00:00"/> <meta name="DC.type" content="Page"/> <meta name="DC.distribution" content="Global"/> <meta name="robots" content="ALL"/> <meta name="distribution" content="Global"/> The main content on each franchisee page is completely different. The Problem There is one particular franchisee page, located in Area A.. Which will not appear in Google Search results at all. However every single other franchisee (if you Google Search for "THE_COMPANY, THE_LOCATION" is number 1). And if I do the same search on Bing, Yahoo or DuckDuckGo, the Area A franchisee is the first result on all of them. Has Google for some reason black listed one page on the site? What I Have Tried Ensuring the page is referenced in my sitemap.xml file 'Fetching as Google Bot' the link www.the_company.co.uk/areaa When that came back as OK I would submit to index Resubmitting the sitemap.xml file in Webmaster Tools Linking to the Area A page from another pages content For this I also waited about 3 weeks before checking again to give Google time to re-index Making a change to the page content and waiting another 2 / 3 weeks Removing the page completely and recreating it with an alternative URL The closest thing I have found to this issue is this StackOverflow question but this particular franchisee has existed for almost a year, it used to appear on Google searches however no longer does. I'm guessing the Panda update wasn't too happy with something on the page, but it hasn't effected anything else on the site and I am at a loss for things to try. I would greatly appreciate any information or thoughts as to what could have caused this Thanks. Update In line with Daniel Fukudas answer below, I have followed some of his steps but everything seems to check out alright: HTTP Headers HTTP/1.1 200 OK => Date => Tue, 25 Feb 2014 16:31:29 GMT Server => Zope/(2.12.16, python 2.6.6, linux2) ZServer/1.1 Content-Length => 40078 Expires => Sat, 01 Jan 2000 00:00:00 GMT Content-Type => text/html;charset=utf-8 Content-Language => en Vary => Accept-Encoding Connection => close Robots <meta /> tag: <meta name="robots" content="ALL"/> I have updated this <meta /> tag to read content="INDEX" instead now. robots.txt: User-agent: * Disallow: User-Agent: Googlebot Disallow: /*sendto_form$ Disallow: /*folder_factories$ Using site:THE_COMPANY.co.uk: Searching for 'AREA A site:THE_COMPANY.co.uk' does not return the page, but regardless of that searching just for site:THE_COMPANY.co.uk will not necessarily return every indexed page, or so I understand... Update It appears Google likes to drop pages every now and then from the index, despite my steps above, I left the site alone and the page appeared back in the SERPs by itself.

  Read the article

• How to improve WinForms MSChart performance?

  - by Marcel

  Hi all, I have created some simple charts (of type FastLine) with MSChart and update them with live data, like below: . To do so, I bind an observable collection of a custom type to the chart like so: // set chart data source this._Chart.DataSource = value; //is of type ObservableCollection<SpectrumLevels> //define x and y value members for each series this._Chart.Series[0].XValueMember = "Index"; this._Chart.Series[1].XValueMember = "Index"; this._Chart.Series[0].YValueMembers = "Channel0Level"; this._Chart.Series[1].YValueMembers = "Channel1Level"; // bind data to chart this._Chart.DataBind(); //lasts 1.5 seconds for 8000 points per series At each refresh, the dataset completely changes, it is not a scrolling update! With a profiler I have found that the DataBind() call takes about 1.5 seconds. The other calls are negligible. How can I make this faster? Should I use another type than ObservableCollection? An array probably? Should I use another form of data binding? Is there some tweak for the MSChart that I may have missed? Should I use a sparsed set of date, having one value per pixel only? Have I simply reached the performance limit of MSCharts? From the type of the application to keep it "fluent", we should have multiple refreshes per second. Thanks for any hints!

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43  | Next Page >