Search Results

Search found 267 results on 11 pages for 'benchmarking'.

Page 4/11 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  | Next Page >

  • How come i7 (desktop) dominates Xeon (server)?

    - by grant tailor
    I have been using this performance benchmark results http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html to select what CPUs to use on my web server and to my surprise...looks like i7 CPUs dominates the list pushing Xeon CPUs into the bush. Why is this? Why is Intel making the i7 perform better than the Xeon. Are Desktop CPUs supposed to perform better than server grade Xeon CPUs? I really don't get this and will like to know what you think or why this is so. Also i am thinking about getting a new web server and thinking between the i7-2600 VS the Xeon E3-1245. The i7-2600 is higher up in the performance benchmark but i am thinking the Xeon E3-1245 is server grade...so what do you guys think? Should i go for the i7-2600? Or is the Xeon E3-1245 a server grade CPU for a reason?

    Read the article

  • How benchmark server with load balancer

    - by Fajkowsky
    Hey I have four computers(with linux): two with mediawiki(mirror, both connected to one db) one with mysql one server(DHCP,DNS etc) I configured on my server load balancer and now hen I type in browser name.local for example I get one of my mediawiki servers. I press f5 really fast and then I see in top command both computers are being loaded but not much. I used tool ab (apache benchamrk) but if I run it always is connected to one server never alternately. I use this settings: ab -n 100 -c 10 http://name.local/

    Read the article

  • Node.js vs PHP processing speed

    - by Cody Craven
    I've been looking into node.js recently and wanted to see a true comparison of processing speed for PHP vs Node.js. In most of the comparisons I had seen, Node trounced Apache/PHP set ups handily. However all of the tests were small 'hello worlds' that would not accurately reflect any webpage's markup. So I decided to create a basic HTML page with 10,000 hello world paragraph elements. In these tests Node with Cluster was beaten to a pulp by PHP on Nginx utilizing PHP-FPM. So I'm curious if I am misusing Node somehow or if Node is really just this bad at processing power. Note that my results were equivalent outputting "Hello world\n" with text/plain as the HTML, but I only included the HTML as it's closer to the use case I was investigating. My testing box: Core i7-2600 Intel CPU (has 8 threads with 4 cores) 8GB DDR3 RAM Fedora 16 64bit Node.js v0.6.13 Nginx v1.0.13 PHP v5.3.10 (with PHP-FPM) My test scripts: Node.js script var cluster = require('cluster'); var http = require('http'); var numCPUs = require('os').cpus().length; if (cluster.isMaster) { // Fork workers. for (var i = 0; i < numCPUs; i++) { cluster.fork(); } cluster.on('death', function (worker) { console.log('worker ' + worker.pid + ' died'); }); } else { // Worker processes have an HTTP server. http.Server(function (req, res) { res.writeHead(200, {'Content-Type': 'text/html'}); res.write('<html>\n<head>\n<title>Speed test</title>\n</head>\n<body>\n'); for (var i = 0; i < 10000; i++) { res.write('<p>Hello world</p>\n'); } res.end('</body>\n</html>'); }).listen(80); } This script is adapted from Node.js' documentation at http://nodejs.org/docs/latest/api/cluster.html PHP script <?php echo "<html>\n<head>\n<title>Speed test</title>\n</head>\n<body>\n"; for ($i = 0; $i < 10000; $i++) { echo "<p>Hello world</p>\n"; } echo "</body>\n</html>"; My results Node.js $ ab -n 500 -c 20 http://speedtest.dev/ This is ApacheBench, Version 2.3 <$Revision: 655654 $> Copyright 1996 Adam Twiss, Zeus Technology Ltd, http://www.zeustech.net/ Licensed to The Apache Software Foundation, http://www.apache.org/ Benchmarking speedtest.dev (be patient) Completed 100 requests Completed 200 requests Completed 300 requests Completed 400 requests Completed 500 requests Finished 500 requests Server Software: Server Hostname: speedtest.dev Server Port: 80 Document Path: / Document Length: 190070 bytes Concurrency Level: 20 Time taken for tests: 14.603 seconds Complete requests: 500 Failed requests: 0 Write errors: 0 Total transferred: 95066500 bytes HTML transferred: 95035000 bytes Requests per second: 34.24 [#/sec] (mean) Time per request: 584.123 [ms] (mean) Time per request: 29.206 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests) Transfer rate: 6357.45 [Kbytes/sec] received Connection Times (ms) min mean[+/-sd] median max Connect: 0 0 0.2 0 2 Processing: 94 547 405.4 424 2516 Waiting: 0 331 399.3 216 2284 Total: 95 547 405.4 424 2516 Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms) 50% 424 66% 607 75% 733 80% 813 90% 1084 95% 1325 98% 1843 99% 2062 100% 2516 (longest request) PHP/Nginx $ ab -n 500 -c 20 http://speedtest.dev/test.php This is ApacheBench, Version 2.3 <$Revision: 655654 $> Copyright 1996 Adam Twiss, Zeus Technology Ltd, http://www.zeustech.net/ Licensed to The Apache Software Foundation, http://www.apache.org/ Benchmarking speedtest.dev (be patient) Completed 100 requests Completed 200 requests Completed 300 requests Completed 400 requests Completed 500 requests Finished 500 requests Server Software: nginx/1.0.13 Server Hostname: speedtest.dev Server Port: 80 Document Path: /test.php Document Length: 190070 bytes Concurrency Level: 20 Time taken for tests: 0.130 seconds Complete requests: 500 Failed requests: 0 Write errors: 0 Total transferred: 95109000 bytes HTML transferred: 95035000 bytes Requests per second: 3849.11 [#/sec] (mean) Time per request: 5.196 [ms] (mean) Time per request: 0.260 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests) Transfer rate: 715010.65 [Kbytes/sec] received Connection Times (ms) min mean[+/-sd] median max Connect: 0 0 0.2 0 1 Processing: 3 5 0.7 5 7 Waiting: 1 4 0.7 4 7 Total: 3 5 0.7 5 7 Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms) 50% 5 66% 5 75% 5 80% 6 90% 6 95% 6 98% 6 99% 6 100% 7 (longest request) Additional details Again what I'm looking for is to find out if I'm doing something wrong with Node.js or if it is really just that slow compared to PHP on Nginx with FPM. I certainly think Node has a real niche that it could fit well, however with these test results (which I really hope I made a mistake with - as I like the idea of Node) lead me to believe that it is a horrible choice for even a modest processing load when compared to PHP (let alone JVM or various other fast solutions). As a final note, I also tried running an Apache Bench test against node with $ ab -n 20 -c 20 http://speedtest.dev/ and consistently received a total test time of greater than 0.900 seconds.

    Read the article

  • How to benchmark on multi-core processors

    - by Pascal Cuoq
    I am looking for ways to perform micro-benchmarks on multi-core processors. Context: At about the same time desktop processors introduced out-of-order execution that made performance hard to predict, they, perhaps not coincidentally, also introduced special instructions to get very precise timings. Example of these instructions are rdtsc on x86 and rftb on PowerPC. These instructions gave timings that were more precise than could ever be allowed by a system call, allowed programmers to micro-benchmark their hearts out, for better or for worse. On a yet more modern processor with several cores, some of which sleep some of the time, the counters are not synchronized between cores. We are told that rdtsc is no longer safe to use for benchmarking, but I must have been dozing off when we were explained the alternative solutions. Question: Some systems may save and restore the performance counter and provide an API call to read the proper sum. If you know what this call is for any operating system, please let us know in an answer. Some systems may allow to turn off cores, leaving only one running. I know Mac OS X Leopard does when the right Preference Pane is installed from the Developers Tools. Do you think that this make rdtsc safe to use again? More context: Please assume I know what I am doing when trying to do a micro-benchmark. If you are of the opinion that if an optimization's gains cannot be measured by timing the whole application, it's not worth optimizing, I agree with you, but I cannot time the whole application until the alternative data structure is finished, which will take a long time. In fact, if the micro-benchmark were not promising, I could decide to give up on the implementation now; I need figures to provide in a publication whose deadline I have no control over.

    Read the article

  • pathinfo vs fnmatch

    - by zaf
    There was a small debate regarding the speed of fnmatch over pathinfo here : http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2692536/how-to-check-if-file-is-php I wasn't totally convinced so decided to benchmark the two functions. Using dynamic and static paths showed that pathinfo was faster. Is my benchmarking logic and conclusion valid? I include a sample of the results which are in seconds for 100,000 iterations on my machine : dynamic path pathinfo 3.79311800003 fnmatch 5.10071492195 x1.34 static path pathinfo 1.03921294212 fnmatch 2.37709188461 x2.29 Code: <pre> <?php $iterations=100000; // Benchmark with dynamic file path print("dynamic path\n"); $i=$iterations; $t1=microtime(true); while($i-->0){ $f='/'.uniqid().'/'.uniqid().'/'.uniqid().'/'.uniqid().'.php'; if(pathinfo($f,PATHINFO_EXTENSION)=='php') $d=uniqid(); } $t2=microtime(true) - $t1; print("pathinfo $t2\n"); $i=$iterations; $t1=microtime(true); while($i-->0){ $f='/'.uniqid().'/'.uniqid().'/'.uniqid().'/'.uniqid().'.php'; if(fnmatch('*.php',$f)) $d=uniqid(); } $t3 = microtime(true) - $t1; print("fnmatch $t3\n"); print('x'.round($t3/$t2,2)."\n\n"); // Benchmark with static file path print("static path\n"); $f='/'.uniqid().'/'.uniqid().'/'.uniqid().'/'.uniqid().'.php'; $i=$iterations; $t1=microtime(true); while($i-->0) if(pathinfo($f,PATHINFO_EXTENSION)=='php') $d=uniqid(); $t2=microtime(true) - $t1; print("pathinfo $t2\n"); $i=$iterations; $t1=microtime(true); while($i-->0) if(fnmatch('*.php',$f)) $d=uniqid(); $t3=microtime(true) - $t1; print("fnmatch $t3\n"); print('x'.round($t3/$t2,2)."\n\n"); ?> </pre>

    Read the article

  • Why is an inverse loop faster than a normal loop (test included)

    - by Saif Bechan
    I have been running some small tests in PHP on loops. I do not know if my method is good. I have found that a inverse loop is faster than a normal loop. I have also found that a while-loop is faster than a for-loop. Setup <?php $counter = 10000000; $w=0;$x=0;$y=0;$z=0; $wstart=0;$xstart=0;$ystart=0;$zstart=0; $wend=0;$xend=0;$yend=0;$zend=0; $wstart = microtime(true); for($w=0; $w<$counter; $w++){ echo ''; } $wend = microtime(true); echo "normal for: " . ($wend - $wstart) . "<br />"; $xstart = microtime(true); for($x=$counter; $x>0; $x--){ echo ''; } $xend = microtime(true); echo "inverse for: " . ($xend - $xstart) . "<br />"; echo "<hr> normal - inverse: " . (($wend - $wstart) - ($xend - $xstart)) . "<hr>"; $ystart = microtime(true); $y=0; while($y<$counter){ echo ''; $y++; } $yend = microtime(true); echo "normal while: " . ($yend - $ystart) . "<br />"; $zstart = microtime(true); $z=$counter; while($z>0){ echo ''; $z--; } $zend = microtime(true); echo "inverse while: " . ($zend - $zstart) . "<br />"; echo "<hr> normal - inverse: " . (($yend - $ystart) - ($zend - $zstart)) . "<hr>"; echo "<hr> inverse for - inverse while: " . (($xend - $xstart) - ($zend - $zstart)) . "<hr>"; ?> Average Results The difference in for-loop normal for: 1.0908501148224 inverse for: 1.0212800502777 normal - inverse: 0.069570064544678 The difference in while-loop normal while: 1.0395669937134 inverse while: 0.99321985244751 normal - inverse: 0.046347141265869 The difference in for-loop and while-loop inverse for - inverse while: 0.0280601978302 Questions My question is can someone explain these differences in results? And is my method of benchmarking been correct?

    Read the article

  • Benchmark Linq2SQL, Subsonic2, Subsonic3 - Any other ideas to make them faster ?

    - by Aristos
    I am working with Subsonic 2 more than 3 years now... After Linq appears and then Subsonic 3, I start thinking about moving to the new Linq futures that are connected to sql. I must say that I start move and port my subsonic 2 with SubSonic 3, and very soon I discover that the speed was so slow thats I didn't believe it - and starts all that tests. Then I test Linq2Sql and see also a delay - compare it with Subsonic 2. My question here is, especial for the linq2sql, and the up-coming dotnet version 4, what else can I do to speed it up ? What else on linq2sql settings, or classes, not on this code that I have used for my messures I place here the project that I make the tests, also the screen shots of the results. How I make the tests - and the accurate of my measures. I use only for my question Google chrome, because its difficult for me to show here a lot of other measures that I have done with more complex programs. This is the most simple one, I just measure the Data Read. How can I prove that. I make a simple Thread.Sleep(10 seconds) and see if I see that 10 seconds on Google Chrome Measure, and yes I see it. here are more test with this Sleep thead to see whats actually Chrome gives. 10 seconds delay 100 ms delay Zero delay There is only a small 15ms thats get on messure, is so small compare it with the rest of my tests that I do not care about. So what I measure I measure just the data read via each method - did not count the data or database delay, or any disk read or anything like that. Later on the image with the result I show that no disk activity exist on the measures See this image to see what really I measure and if this is correct Why I chose this kind of test Its simple, it's real, and it's near my real problem that I found the delay of subsonic 3 in real program with real data. Now lets tests the dals Start by see this image I have 4-5 calls on every method, the one after the other. The results are. For a loop of 100 times, ask for 5 Rows, one not exist, approximatively.. Simple adonet:81ms SubSonic 2 :210ms linq2sql :1.70sec linq2sql using CompiledQuery.Compile :239ms Subsonic 3 :15.00sec (wow - extreme slow) The project http://www.planethost.gr/DalSpeedTests.rar Can any one confirm this benchmark, or make any optimizations to help me out ? Other tests Some one publish here this link http://ormbattle.net/ (and then remove it - don not know why) In this page you can find a really useful advanced tests for all, except subsonic 2 and subsonic 3 that I have here ! Optimizing What I really ask here is if some one can now any trick how to optimize the DALs, not by changing the test code, but by changing the code and the settings on each dal. For example... Optimizing Linq2SQL I start search how to optimize Linq2sql and found this article, and maybe more exist. Finally I make the tricks from that page to run, and optimize the code using them all. The speed was near 1.50sec from 1.70.... big improvement, but still slow. Then I found a different way - same idea article, and wow ! the speed is blow up. Using this trick with CompiledQuery.Compile, the time from 1.5sec is now 239ms. Here is the code for the precompiled... Func<DataClassesDataContext, int, IQueryable<Product>> compiledQuery = CompiledQuery.Compile((DataClassesDataContext meta, int IdToFind) => (from myData in meta.Products where myData.ProductID.Equals(IdToFind) select myData)); StringBuilder Test = new StringBuilder(); int[] MiaSeira = { 5, 6, 10, 100, 7 }; using (DataClassesDataContext context = new DataClassesDataContext()) { context.ObjectTrackingEnabled = false; for (int i = 0; i < 100; i++) { foreach (int EnaID in MiaSeira) { var oFindThat2P = compiledQuery(context, EnaID); foreach (Product One in oFindThat2P) { Test.Append("<br />"); Test.Append(One.ProductName); } } } } Optimizing SubSonic 3 and problems I make many performance profiling, and start change the one after the other and the speed is better but still too slow. I post them on subsonic group but they ignore the problem, they say that everything is fast... Here is some capture of my profiling and delay points inside subsonic source code I have end up that subsonic3 make more call on the structure of the database rather than on data itself. Needs to reconsider the hole way of asking for data, and follow the subsonic2 idea if this is possible. Try to make precompile to subsonic 3 like I did in linq2Sql but fail for the moment... Optimizing SubSonic 2 After I discover that subsonic 3 is extreme slow, I start my checks on subsonic 2 - that I have never done before believing that is fast. (and it is) So its come up with some points that can be faster. For example there are many loops like this ones that actually is slow because of string manipulation and compares inside the loop. I must say to you that this code called million of times ! on a period of few minutes ! of data asking from the program. On small amount of tables and small fields maybe this is not a big think for some people, but on large amount of tables, the delay is even more. So I decide and optimize the subsonic 2 by my self, by replacing the string compares, with number compares! Simple. I do that almost on every point that profiler say that is slow. I change also all small points that can be even a little faster, and disable some not so used thinks. The results, 5% faster on NorthWind database, near 20% faster on my database with 250 tables. That is count with 500ms less in 10 seconds process on northwind, 100ms faster on my database on 500ms process time. I do not have captures to show you for that because I have made them with different code, different time, and track them down on paper. Anyway this is my story and my question on all that, what else do you know to make them even faster... For this measures I have use Subsonic 2.2 optimized by me, Subsonic 3.0.0.3 a little optimized by me, and Dot.Net 3.5

    Read the article

  • Benchmark for a .NET WinPcap wrapper

    - by brickner
    I'm developing a .NET wrapper for WinPcap called Pcap.Net. I'm trying to make sure this wrapper has high performance and I want to compare it to WinPcap and to other .net wrappers for WinPcap. The features I want to profile are: WinPcap native features (sending packets in different ways, receiving packets in different ways...) Interpreting packets that Pcap.Net knows how to interpret (like Etherent, IPv4, UDP, TCP, ICMP, ...) Building packet that Pcap.Net knows how to build (the same types it knows how to interpret). I also want to be able to profile the benchmark using Visual Studio 2010 Ultimate profiling tools. My question is: What should my benchmark exactly do to cover these issues and how would you suggest to build it?

    Read the article

  • Changing POST data used by Apache Bench per iteration

    - by Alabaster Codify
    I'm using ab to do some load testing, and it's important that the supplied querystring (or POST) parameters change between requests. I.e. I need to make requests to URLs like: http://127.0.0.1:9080/meth?param=0 http://127.0.0.1:9080/meth?param=1 http://127.0.0.1:9080/meth?param=2 ... to properly exercise the application. ab seems to only read the supplied POST data file once, at startup, so changing its content during the test run is not an option. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • How to benchmark apache/nginx setup

    - by Saif Bechan
    I am planning to setup nginx as reverse proxy. I will have apache to deliver my dynamic content, and nginx will deliver the static content. My configuration i have now is just Apache with fastCGI. This gives me no configuration problems and runs great. After I have set up nginx I want to run some benchmarks to see if I really got some performance increases, else i will switch back. Does anyone know how I can benchmark this type of setup? Or maybe someone did this already and have some canned results, I will be glad to hear them. PS. I know this is more a serverfault type of question, but i have seen numerous posts about apache and nginx so i thought i give it a try

    Read the article

  • Can the STREAM and GUPS (single CPU) benchmark use non-local memory in NUMA machine

    - by osgx
    Hello I want to run some tests from HPCC, STREAM and GUPS. They will test memory bandwidth, latency, and throughput (in term of random accesses). Can I start Single CPU test STREAM or Single CPU GUPS on NUMA node with memory interleaving enabled? (Is it allowed by the rules of HPCC - High Performance Computing Challenge?) Usage of non-local memory can increase GUPS results, because it will increase 2- or 4- fold the number of memory banks, available for random accesses. (GUPS typically limited by nonideal memory-subsystem and by slow memory bank opening/closing. With more banks it can do update to one bank, while the other banks are opening/closing.) Thanks. UPDATE: (you may nor reorder the memory accesses that the program makes). But can compiler reorder loops nesting? E.g. hpcc/RandomAccess.c /* Perform updates to main table. The scalar equivalent is: * * u64Int ran; * ran = 1; * for (i=0; i<NUPDATE; i++) { * ran = (ran << 1) ^ (((s64Int) ran < 0) ? POLY : 0); * table[ran & (TableSize-1)] ^= stable[ran >> (64-LSTSIZE)]; * } */ for (j=0; j<128; j++) ran[j] = starts ((NUPDATE/128) * j); for (i=0; i<NUPDATE/128; i++) { /* #pragma ivdep */ for (j=0; j<128; j++) { ran[j] = (ran[j] << 1) ^ ((s64Int) ran[j] < 0 ? POLY : 0); Table[ran[j] & (TableSize-1)] ^= stable[ran[j] >> (64-LSTSIZE)]; } } The main loop here is for (i=0; i<NUPDATE/128; i++) { and the nested loop is for (j=0; j<128; j++) {. Using 'loop interchange' optimization, compiler can convert this code to for (j=0; j<128; j++) { for (i=0; i<NUPDATE/128; i++) { ran[j] = (ran[j] << 1) ^ ((s64Int) ran[j] < 0 ? POLY : 0); Table[ran[j] & (TableSize-1)] ^= stable[ran[j] >> (64-LSTSIZE)]; } } It can be done because this loop nest is perfect loop nest. Is such optimization prohibited by rules of HPCC?

    Read the article

  • PHP Performance Metrics

    - by bigstylee
    I am currently developing a PHP MVC Framework for a personal project. While I am developing the framework I am interested to see any notable performance by implementing different techniques for optimization. I have implemented a crude BenchMark class that logs mircotime. The problem is I have no frame of reference for execution times. I am very near the beginnig of this project with a database connection and a few queries but no output (bar some debugging text and BenchMark log). I have a current execution time of 0.01917 seconds. I was expecting this to be lower but as I said before I have no frame of reference. I appreciate there are many variables to take into account when juding performance but I am hoping to find some sort of metric to a) techniques to measure performance for example requests per second and b) compare results for example; how a "moderately" sized PHP application on a "standard" webserver will perform. I appreciate "moderately" and "standard" are very subjective words so perhaps a table of known execution times for a particular application (eg StackOverFlow's executing time). What are other techniques of measuring performance are there other than execution time? When looking at MVC Framework Performance Comparisom it talks about Requests Per Second (RPS). How is this calculated? I am guessing with my current execution time of 0.01917 seconds can handle 52 RPS (= 1 / 0.01917 ). This seems to be significantly lower than that quoted on the graph especially when you consider my current limited funcitonality.

    Read the article

  • Are jQuery's :first and :eq(0) selectors functionally equivalent?

    - by travis
    I'm not sure whether to use :first or :eq(0) in a selector. I'm pretty sure that they'll always return the same object, but is one speedier than the other? I'm sure someone here must have benchmarked these selectors before and I'm not really sure the best way to test if one is faster. Update: here's the bench I ran: /* start bench */ for (var count = 0; count < 5; count++) { var i = 0, limit = 10000; var start, end; start = new Date(); for (i = 0; i < limit; i++) { var $radeditor = $thisFrame.parents("div.RadEditor.Telerik:eq(0)"); } end = new Date(); alert("div.RadEditor.Telerik:eq(0) : " + (end-start)); var start = new Date(); for (i = 0; i < limit; i++) { var $radeditor = $thisFrame.parents("div.RadEditor.Telerik:first"); } end = new Date(); alert("div.RadEditor.Telerik:first : " + (end-start)); start = new Date(); for (i = 0; i < limit; i++) { var radeditor = $thisFrame.parents("div.RadEditor.Telerik")[0]; } end = new Date(); alert("(div.RadEditor.Telerik)[0] : " + (end-start)); start = new Date(); for (i = 0; i < limit; i++) { var $radeditor = $($thisFrame.parents("div.RadEditor.Telerik")[0]); } end = new Date(); alert("$((div.RadEditor.Telerik)[0]) : " + (end-start)); } /* end bench */ I assumed that the 3rd would be the fastest and the 4th would be the slowest, but here's the results that I came up with: FF3: :eq(0) :first [0] $([0]) trial1 5275 4360 4107 3910 trial2 5175 5231 3916 4134 trial3 5317 5589 4670 4350 trial4 5754 4829 3988 4610 trial5 4771 6019 4669 4803 Average 5258.4 5205.6 4270 4361.4 IE6: :eq(0) :first [0] $([0]) trial1 13796 15733 12202 14014 trial2 14186 13905 12749 11546 trial3 12249 14281 13421 12109 trial4 14984 15015 11718 13421 trial5 16015 13187 11578 10984 Average 14246 14424.2 12333.6 12414.8 I was correct about just returning the first native DOM object being the fastest ([0]), but I can't believe the wrapping that object in the jQuery function was faster that both :first and :eq(0)! Unless I'm doing it wrong.

    Read the article

  • Measuring Web Page Performance on Client vs. Server

    - by Yaakov Ellis
    I am working with a web page (ASP.net 3.5) that is very complicated and in certain circumstances has major performance issues. It uses Ajax (through the Telerik AjaxManager) for most of its functionality. I would like to be able to measure in some way the amounts of time for the following, for each request: On client submitting request to server Client-to-Server On server initializing request On server processing request Server-to-Client Client rendering, JavaScript processing I have monitored the database traffic and cannot find any obvious culprit. On the other hand, I have a suspicion that some of the Ajax interactions are causing performance issues. However, until I have a way to track the times involved, make a baseline measurement, and measure performance as I tweak, it will be hard to work on the issue. So what is the best way to measure all of these? Is there one tool that can do it? Combination of FireBug and logging inserted into different places in the page life-cycle?

    Read the article

  • Memory footprint of a parsed XML file in Classic ASP?

    - by Pete Duncanson
    Anyone know of a way to find out the amount of memory/size of a XMLDocument once it has parsed a XML file? I've been doing "beer mat" calculations so far but have been asked to come up with some more legit numbers through monitoring some how. I need to create about 1500 XML files (via FreeThreadedXMl-DOM object), which verge between 3-9K in size and store them in Application vars but our SysAdmin is worried about us gobbling up too much memory. Other than the crude method of booting up a fresh IIS instance and then loading everything in and monitoring before and after memory usage in Task Manager I can't think of a way of doing it with a bit more accuracy.

    Read the article

  • Getting timing consistency in Linux

    - by Jim Hunziker
    I can't seem to get a simple program (with lots of memory access) to achieve consistent timing in Linux. I'm using a 2.6 kernel, and the program is being run on a dual-core processor with realtime priority. I'm trying to disable cache effects by declaring the memory arrays as volatile. Below are the results and the program. What are some possible sources of the outliers? Results: Number of trials: 100 Range: 0.021732s to 0.085596s Average Time: 0.058094s Standard Deviation: 0.006944s Extreme Outliers (2 SDs away from mean): 7 Average Time, excluding extreme outliers: 0.059273s Program: #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <math.h> #include <sched.h> #include <sys/time.h> #define NUM_POINTS 5000000 #define REPS 100 unsigned long long getTimestamp() { unsigned long long usecCount; struct timeval timeVal; gettimeofday(&timeVal, 0); usecCount = timeVal.tv_sec * (unsigned long long) 1000000; usecCount += timeVal.tv_usec; return (usecCount); } double convertTimestampToSecs(unsigned long long timestamp) { return (timestamp / (double) 1000000); } int main(int argc, char* argv[]) { unsigned long long start, stop; double times[REPS]; double sum = 0; double scale, avg, newavg, median; double stddev = 0; double maxval = -1.0, minval = 1000000.0; int i, j, freq, count; int outliers = 0; struct sched_param sparam; sched_getparam(getpid(), &sparam); sparam.sched_priority = sched_get_priority_max(SCHED_FIFO); sched_setscheduler(getpid(), SCHED_FIFO, &sparam); volatile float* data; volatile float* results; data = calloc(NUM_POINTS, sizeof(float)); results = calloc(NUM_POINTS, sizeof(float)); for (i = 0; i < REPS; ++i) { start = getTimestamp(); for (j = 0; j < NUM_POINTS; ++j) { results[j] = data[j]; } stop = getTimestamp(); times[i] = convertTimestampToSecs(stop-start); } free(data); free(results); for (i = 0; i < REPS; i++) { sum += times[i]; if (times[i] > maxval) maxval = times[i]; if (times[i] < minval) minval = times[i]; } avg = sum/REPS; for (i = 0; i < REPS; i++) stddev += (times[i] - avg)*(times[i] - avg); stddev /= REPS; stddev = sqrt(stddev); for (i = 0; i < REPS; i++) { if (times[i] > avg + 2*stddev || times[i] < avg - 2*stddev) { sum -= times[i]; outliers++; } } newavg = sum/(REPS-outliers); printf("Number of trials: %d\n", REPS); printf("Range: %fs to %fs\n", minval, maxval); printf("Average Time: %fs\n", avg); printf("Standard Deviation: %fs\n", stddev); printf("Extreme Outliers (2 SDs away from mean): %d\n", outliers); printf("Average Time, excluding extreme outliers: %fs\n", newavg); return 0; }

    Read the article

  • Is the first persistance of an Entity Data Model in EF 4.0 slower due to the connection cost ?

    - by Scott Davies
    Hi, I've got a console app written that persists an object graph via Entity Framework 4.0. I loop through this to dump the execution times for each persistance. The first persistance is always the largest. Is this due to EF making the initial connection to the database and/or JIT'ing ? Here's a sample of the output: Persisted graph in **3318** millseconds. Persisted graph in 25 millseconds. Persisted graph in 26 millseconds. Persisted graph in 22 millseconds. Thanks, Scott

    Read the article

  • Why is go language so slow?

    - by oraz
    As we can see from The Computer Language Benchmarks Game: go is in average 10x slower then C go is 3x slower then Java !? How it can be bearing in mind that go compiler produces native code for execution? Immature compilers for go? Or there is some intrinsic problem with the go language?

    Read the article

  • id vs class selection benchmark

    - by zaf
    Has anybody bench marked selecting elements with id's and class's from CSS and javascript? It would make sense that an element with an id is faster to select than if it had a class even if it was the only element with that class. Do I really need to be concerned?

    Read the article

  • Developer oriented hardware benchmarks?

    - by Promit
    Perhaps I'm looking in the wrong places, but every hardware benchmark I've found, for nearly any component, is oriented towards gamers and/or workstations (video editing etc). Is there anyone doing benchmarks that are relevant to software developers? For example, take SSDs. I don't care how fast Crysis loads off an SSD -- that is completely worthless information. What I want to know is, which drive yields the quickest build times? What about Intellisense and refactoring operations? What RAID configuration has the biggest benefit? I could probably come up with more examples, but you get the point. Long story short, where are the benchmarks that tell me which hardware will be most effective in helping me be a productive software developer?

    Read the article

  • Grails benchmarks compared to other web MVC platform (Rails, Django, ASP MVC)?

    - by fabien7474
    I have been searching the web for recent benchmarks measuring Grails overall performance compared to its competitors (Rails, Django, ASP.NET MVC...), but I didn't find anything more recent than a 3 years-old article with obsolete grails version (0.5). See here and here. So, starting from grails 1.2, are there any more recent grails benchmarks you are aware of ? Or do you have your own performance tests for grails (compared to others if possible) ?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11  | Next Page >