Search Results

Search found 13249 results on 530 pages for 'performance tuning'.

Page 43/530 | < Previous Page | 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50  | Next Page >

  • The Convergence of Risk and Performance Management

    Historically, the market has viewed Enterprise Performance Management (EPM) and Governance, Risk and Compliance (GRC) as separate processes and solutions. But these two worlds are coming together-in fact industry analyst firms such as AMR Research believe that by the end of 2009, risk management will be part of every EPM discussion. Tune into this conversation with John O'Rourke, VP of Product Marketing for Oracle Enterprise Performance Management Solutions, and Karen dela Torre, Senior Director of Product Marketing for Financial Applications to learn how EPM and GRC are converging, what the integration points are, and what Oracle is doing to help customers perform more effective risk and performance management.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET Performance Framework

    At the start of the year, I finished a 5 part series on ASP.NET performance - focusing on largely generic ways to improve website performance rather than specific ASP.NET performance tricks. The series focused on a number of topics, including merging and shrinking files, using modules to remove unecessary headers and setting caching headers, enabling cache busting and automatically generating cache busted referneces in css, as well as an introduction to nginx. Yesterday I managed to put a number...Did you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

    Read the article

  • GlusterFs - high load 90-107% CPU

    - by Sara
    I try and try and try to performance and fix problem with gluster, i try all. I served on gluster webpages, php files, images etc. I have problem after update from 3.3.0 to 3.3.1. I try 3.4 when i think maybe fix it but still the same problem. I temporarily have 1 brick, but before upgrade will be fine. Config: Volume Name: ... Type: Replicate Volume ID: ... Status: Started Number of Bricks: 0 x 2 = 1 Transport-type: tcp Bricks: Brick1: ...:/... Options Reconfigured: cluster.stripe-block-size: 128KB performance.cache-max-file-size: 100MB performance.flush-behind: on performance.io-thread-count: 16 performance.cache-size: 256MB auth.allow: ... performance.cache-refresh-timeout: 5 performance.write-behind-window-size: 1024MB I use fuse, hmm "Maybe the high load is due to the unavailable brick" i think about it, but i cant find information on how to safely change type of volume. Maybe u know how?

    Read the article

  • recyle application pool,Warm up scripts-Performance tuning in Sharepoint WCM site

    - by joel14141
    I was trying to tune WCM public facing site we have in Sharepoint . I have following doubts By default application pools are set to recycle themselves at 2 am in night and because of that we need warm up scripts . But As I was googling on this topic I found mixed reactions on this some MVP are saying its not advisable to recycle application pool daily and some say otherwise so I am confused. Because if I am not doing recycling application pool then I don't hv to use warmup scripts . But as my site is public facing and its all around the globe so is it advisable that I should recycle it daily as it will affect the performance of my site even though I would run warm up scripts once I don't think so it wud be as good as it should be ....Any advice on that?

    Read the article

  • recyle application pool,Warm up scripts-Performance tuning in Sharepoint WCM site

    - by joel14141
    I was trying to tune WCM public facing site we have in Sharepoint . I have following doubts By default application pools are set to recycle themselves at 2 am in night and because of that we need warm up scripts . But As I was googling on this topic I found mixed reactions on this some MVP are saying its not advisable to recycle application pool daily and some say otherwise so I am confused. Because if I am not doing recycling application pool then I don't hv to use warmup scripts . But as my site is public facing and its all around the globe so is it advisable that I should recycle it daily as it will affect the performance of my site even though I would run warm up scripts once I don't think so it wud be as good as it should be ....Any advice on that?

    Read the article

  • What performance degradation to expect with Nginx over raw Gunicorn+Gevent?

    - by bouke
    I'm trying to get a very high performing webserver setup for handling long-polling, websockets etc. I have a VM running (Rackspace) with 1GB RAM / 4 cores. I've setup a very simple gunicorn 'hello world' application with (async) gevent workers. In front of gunicorn, I put Nginx with a simple proxy to Gunicorn. Using ab, Gunicorn spits out 7700 requests/sec, where Nginx only does a 5000 request/sec. Is such a performance degradation expected? Hello world: #!/usr/bin/env python def application(environ, start_response): start_response("200 OK", [("Content-type", "text/plain")]) return [ "Hello World!" ] Gunicorn: gunicorn -w8 -k gevent --keep-alive 60 application:application Nginx (stripped): user www-data; worker_processes 4; pid /var/run/nginx.pid; events { worker_connections 768; } http { sendfile on; tcp_nopush on; tcp_nodelay on; keepalive_timeout 65; types_hash_max_size 2048; upstream app_server { server 127.0.0.1:8000 fail_timeout=0; } server { listen 8080 default; keepalive_timeout 5; root /home/app/app/static; location / { proxy_set_header X-Forwarded-For $proxy_add_x_forwarded_for; proxy_set_header Host $http_host; proxy_redirect off; proxy_pass http://app_server; } } } Benchmark: (results: nginx TCP, nginx UNIX, gunicorn) ab -c 32 -n 12000 -k http://localhost:[8000|8080]/ Running gunicorn over a unix socket gives somewhat higher throughput (5500 r/s), but it still does't match raw gunicorn's performance.

    Read the article

  • SQL Server 2000, large transaction log, almost empty, performance issue?

    - by Mafu Josh
    For a company that I have been helping troubleshoot their database. In SQL Server 2000, database is about 120 gig. Something caused the transaction log to grow MUCH larger than normal to over 100 gig, some hung transaction that didn't commit or roll back for a few days. That has been resolved and it now stays around 1% full or less, due to its hourly transaction log backups. It IS my understanding that a GROWING transaction log file size can cause performance issues. But what I am a little paranoid about is the size. Although mainly empty, MIGHT it be having a negative effect on performance? But I haven't found any documentation that suggests this is true. I did find this link: http://www.bigresource.com/MS_SQL-Large-Transaction-Log-dramatically-Slows-down-processing-any-idea-why--2ahzP5wK.html but in this post I can't tell if their log was full or empty, and there is not any replies to the post in this link. So I am guessing it is not a problem, anyone know for sure?

    Read the article

  • Decrease in disk performance after partitioning and encryption, is this much of a drop normal?

    - by Biohazard
    I have a server that I only have remote access to. Earlier in the week I repartitioned the 2 disk raid as follows: Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/mapper/sda1_crypt 363G 1.8G 343G 1% / tmpfs 2.0G 0 2.0G 0% /lib/init/rw udev 2.0G 140K 2.0G 1% /dev tmpfs 2.0G 0 2.0G 0% /dev/shm /dev/sda5 461M 26M 412M 6% /boot /dev/sda7 179G 8.6G 162G 6% /data The raid consists of 2 x 300gb SAS 15k disks. Prior to the changes I made, it was being used as a single unencrypted root parition and hdparm -t /dev/sda was giving readings around 240mb/s, which I still get if I do it now: /dev/sda: Timing buffered disk reads: 730 MB in 3.00 seconds = 243.06 MB/sec Since the repartition and encryption, I get the following on the separate partitions: Unencrypted /dev/sda7: /dev/sda7: Timing buffered disk reads: 540 MB in 3.00 seconds = 179.78 MB/sec Unencrypted /dev/sda5: /dev/sda5: Timing buffered disk reads: 476 MB in 2.55 seconds = 186.86 MB/sec Encrypted /dev/mapper/sda1_crypt: /dev/mapper/sda1_crypt: Timing buffered disk reads: 150 MB in 3.03 seconds = 49.54 MB/sec I expected a drop in performance on the encrypted partition, but not that much, but I didn't expect I would get a drop in performance on the other partitions at all. The other hardware in the server is: 2 x Quad Core Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5405 @ 2.00GHz and 4gb RAM $ cat /proc/scsi/scsi Attached devices: Host: scsi0 Channel: 00 Id: 32 Lun: 00 Vendor: DP Model: BACKPLANE Rev: 1.05 Type: Enclosure ANSI SCSI revision: 05 Host: scsi0 Channel: 02 Id: 00 Lun: 00 Vendor: DELL Model: PERC 6/i Rev: 1.11 Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 05 Host: scsi1 Channel: 00 Id: 00 Lun: 00 Vendor: HL-DT-ST Model: CD-ROM GCR-8240N Rev: 1.10 Type: CD-ROM ANSI SCSI revision: 05 I'm guessing this means the server has a PERC 6/i RAID controller? The encryption was done with default settings during debian 6 installation. I can't recall the exact specifics and am not sure how I go about finding them? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Changing time intervals for vSphere performance monitoring, and is there a better way?

    - by user991710
    I have a set of experiments running on a cluster node which is running ESXi 5.1, and I want to monitor the resource consumption on the node itself. Specifically, I am currently running experiments on a subset of the VMs on the ESXi host and wish to monitor resource consumption on those specific VMs. Right now, since I'm using only a single ESXi host, I am using vSphere to access it and the performance reports. Ideally, I would like to get these reports for different time intervals. I can already get the charts for a time interval of 1h, but these are rather long-running experiments and something like 2h, 3h,... would be preferable. However, I cannot seem to change the time interval. Here is an example of what my Customize Performance Chart dialog shows: I am also running on a trial key at the moment. How can I change this interval? Do I need a standard license, or do I just need to turn off the VM (unlikely, but I haven't attempted it yet as these are long-running experiments)? Any help (or pointers to documentation which deals with the above -- I've already looked but did not find much) would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • SQL SERVER – Fundamentals of Columnstore Index

    - by pinaldave
    There are two kind of storage in database. Row Store and Column Store. Row store does exactly as the name suggests – stores rows of data on a page – and column store stores all the data in a column on the same page. These columns are much easier to search – instead of a query searching all the data in an entire row whether the data is relevant or not, column store queries need only to search much lesser number of the columns. This means major increases in search speed and hard drive use. Additionally, the column store indexes are heavily compressed, which translates to even greater memory and faster searches. I am sure this looks very exciting and it does not mean that you convert every single index from row store to column store index. One has to understand the proper places where to use row store or column store indexes. Let us understand in this article what is the difference in Columnstore type of index. Column store indexes are run by Microsoft’s VertiPaq technology. However, all you really need to know is that this method of storing data is columns on a single page is much faster and more efficient. Creating a column store index is very easy, and you don’t have to learn new syntax to create them. You just need to specify the keyword “COLUMNSTORE” and enter the data as you normally would. Keep in mind that once you add a column store to a table, though, you cannot delete, insert or update the data – it is READ ONLY. However, since column store will be mainly used for data warehousing, this should not be a big problem. You can always use partitioning to avoid rebuilding the index. A columnstore index stores each column in a separate set of disk pages, rather than storing multiple rows per page as data traditionally has been stored. The difference between column store and row store approaches is illustrated below: In case of the row store indexes multiple pages will contain multiple rows of the columns spanning across multiple pages. In case of column store indexes multiple pages will contain multiple single columns. This will lead only the columns needed to solve a query will be fetched from disk. Additionally there is good chance that there will be redundant data in a single column which will further help to compress the data, this will have positive effect on buffer hit rate as most of the data will be in memory and due to same it will not need to be retrieved. Let us see small example of how columnstore index improves the performance of the query on a large table. As a first step let us create databaseset which is large enough to show performance impact of columnstore index. The time taken to create sample database may vary on different computer based on the resources. USE AdventureWorks GO -- Create New Table CREATE TABLE [dbo].[MySalesOrderDetail]( [SalesOrderID] [int] NOT NULL, [SalesOrderDetailID] [int] NOT NULL, [CarrierTrackingNumber] [nvarchar](25) NULL, [OrderQty] [smallint] NOT NULL, [ProductID] [int] NOT NULL, [SpecialOfferID] [int] NOT NULL, [UnitPrice] [money] NOT NULL, [UnitPriceDiscount] [money] NOT NULL, [LineTotal] [numeric](38, 6) NOT NULL, [rowguid] [uniqueidentifier] NOT NULL, [ModifiedDate] [datetime] NOT NULL ) ON [PRIMARY] GO -- Create clustered index CREATE CLUSTERED INDEX [CL_MySalesOrderDetail] ON [dbo].[MySalesOrderDetail] ( [SalesOrderDetailID]) GO -- Create Sample Data Table -- WARNING: This Query may run upto 2-10 minutes based on your systems resources INSERT INTO [dbo].[MySalesOrderDetail] SELECT S1.* FROM Sales.SalesOrderDetail S1 GO 100 Now let us do quick performance test. I have kept STATISTICS IO ON for measuring how much IO following queries take. In my test first I will run query which will use regular index. We will note the IO usage of the query. After that we will create columnstore index and will measure the IO of the same. -- Performance Test -- Comparing Regular Index with ColumnStore Index USE AdventureWorks GO SET STATISTICS IO ON GO -- Select Table with regular Index SELECT ProductID, SUM(UnitPrice) SumUnitPrice, AVG(UnitPrice) AvgUnitPrice, SUM(OrderQty) SumOrderQty, AVG(OrderQty) AvgOrderQty FROM [dbo].[MySalesOrderDetail] GROUP BY ProductID ORDER BY ProductID GO -- Table 'MySalesOrderDetail'. Scan count 1, logical reads 342261, physical reads 0, read-ahead reads 0. -- Create ColumnStore Index CREATE NONCLUSTERED COLUMNSTORE INDEX [IX_MySalesOrderDetail_ColumnStore] ON [MySalesOrderDetail] (UnitPrice, OrderQty, ProductID) GO -- Select Table with Columnstore Index SELECT ProductID, SUM(UnitPrice) SumUnitPrice, AVG(UnitPrice) AvgUnitPrice, SUM(OrderQty) SumOrderQty, AVG(OrderQty) AvgOrderQty FROM [dbo].[MySalesOrderDetail] GROUP BY ProductID ORDER BY ProductID GO It is very clear from the results that query is performance extremely fast after creating ColumnStore Index. The amount of the pages it has to read to run query is drastically reduced as the column which are needed in the query are stored in the same page and query does not have to go through every single page to read those columns. If we enable execution plan and compare we can see that column store index performance way better than regular index in this case. Let us clean up the database. -- Cleanup DROP INDEX [IX_MySalesOrderDetail_ColumnStore] ON [dbo].[MySalesOrderDetail] GO TRUNCATE TABLE dbo.MySalesOrderDetail GO DROP TABLE dbo.MySalesOrderDetail GO In future posts we will see cases where Columnstore index is not appropriate solution as well few other tricks and tips of the columnstore index. Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.SQLAuthority.com) Filed under: Pinal Dave, PostADay, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Index, SQL Optimization, SQL Performance, SQL Query, SQL Scripts, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, T SQL, Technology

    Read the article

  • In the Firing Line: The impact of project and portfolio performance on the CEO

    - by Melissa Centurio Lopes
    Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* 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-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} What are the primary measurements for rating CEO performance? For corporate boards, business analysts, investors, and the trade press the metrics they deploy are relatively binary in nature; what is being done to generate earnings, and what is being done to build and sustain high performance? As for the market, interest is primarily aroused when operational and financial performance falls outside planned commitments for the year. When organizations announce better than predicted results, they usually experience an immediate increase in share price. Likewise, poor results have an obviously negative impact on the share price and impact the role and tenure of the incumbent CEO. The danger for the CEO is that the risk of failure is ever present, ranging from manufacturing delays and supply chain issues to labor shortages and scope creep. This risk is enhanced by the involvement of secondary suppliers providing services critical to overall work schedules, and magnified further across a portfolio of programs and projects underway at any one time – and all set within a global context. All can impact planned return on investment and have an inevitable impact on the share price – the primary empirical measure of day-to-day performance. Read this complete complementary report, In the Firing Line and explore what is the direct link between the health of the portfolio and CEO performance. This report will provide an overview of the responsibility the CEO has for implementing and maintaining a culture of accountability, offer examples of some of the higher profile project failings in recent years, and detail the capabilities available to the CEO to mitigate the risks residing in their own portfolios. Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 /* 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-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}

    Read the article

  • What is better for the overall performance and feel of the game: one setInterval performing all the work, or many of them doing individual tasks?

    - by Bane
    This question is, I suppose, not limited to Javascript, but it is the language I use to create my game, so I'll use it as an example. For now, I have structured my HTML5 game like this: var fps = 60; var game = new Game(); setInterval(game.update, 1000/fps); And game.update looks like this: this.update = function() { this.parseInput(); this.logic(); this.physics(); this.draw(); } This seems a bit inefficient, maybe I don't need to do all of those things at once. An obvious alternative would be to have more intervals performing individual tasks, but is it worth it? var fps = 60; var game = new Game(); setInterval(game.draw, 1000/fps); setInterval(game.physics, 1000/a); //where "a" is some constant, performing the same function as "fps" ... With which approach should I go and why? Is there a better alternative? Also, in case the second approach is the best, how frequently should I perform the tasks?

    Read the article

  • Why your Netapp is so slow...

    - by Darius Zanganeh
    Have you ever wondered why your Netapp FAS box is slow and doesn't perform well at large block workloads?  In this blog entry I will give you a little bit of information that will probably help you understand why it’s so slow, why you shouldn't use it for applications that read and write in large blocks like 64k, 128k, 256k ++ etc..  Of course since I work for Oracle at this time, I will show you why the ZS3 storage boxes are excellent choices for these types of workloads. Netapp’s Fundamental Problem The fundamental problem you have running these workloads on Netapp is the backend block size of their WAFL file system.  Every application block on a Netapp FAS ends up in a 4k chunk on a disk. Reference:  Netapp TR-3001 Whitepaper Netapp has proven this lacking large block performance fact in at least two different ways. They have NEVER posted an SPC-2 Benchmark yet they have posted SPC-1 and SPECSFS, both recently. In 2011 they purchased Engenio to try and fill this GAP in their portfolio. Block Size Matters So why does block size matter anyways?  Many applications use large block chunks of data especially in the Big Data movement.  Some examples are SAS Business Analytics, Microsoft SQL, Hadoop HDFS is even 64MB! Now let me boil this down for you.  If an application such MS SQL is writing data in a 64k chunk then before Netapp actually writes it on disk it will have to split it into 16 different 4k writes and 16 different disk IOPS.  When the application later goes to read that 64k chunk the Netapp will have to again do 16 different disk IOPS.  In comparison the ZS3 Storage Appliance can write in variable block sizes ranging from 512b to 1MB.  So if you put the same MSSQL database on a ZS3 you can set the specific LUNs for this database to 64k and then when you do an application read/write it requires only a single disk IO.  That is 16x faster!  But, back to the problem with your Netapp, you will VERY quickly run out of disk IO and hit a wall.  Now all arrays will have some fancy pre fetch algorithm and some nice cache and maybe even flash based cache such as a PAM card in your Netapp but with large block workloads you will usually blow through the cache and still need significant disk IO.  Also because these datasets are usually very large and usually not dedupable they are usually not good candidates for an all flash system.  You can do some simple math in excel and very quickly you will see why it matters.  Here are a couple of READ examples using SAS and MSSQL.  Assume these are the READ IOPS the application needs even after all the fancy cache and algorithms.   Here is an example with 128k blocks.  Notice the numbers of drives on the Netapp! Here is an example with 64k blocks You can easily see that the Oracle ZS3 can do dramatically more work with dramatically less drives.  This doesn't even take into account that the ONTAP system will likely run out of CPU way before you get to these drive numbers so you be buying many more controllers.  So with all that said, lets look at the ZS3 and why you should consider it for any workload your running on Netapp today.  ZS3 World Record Price/Performance in the SPC-2 benchmark ZS3-2 is #1 in Price Performance $12.08ZS3-2 is #3 in Overall Performance 16,212 MBPS Note: The number one overall spot in the world is held by an AFA 33,477 MBPS but at a Price Performance of $29.79.  A customer could purchase 2 x ZS3-2 systems in the benchmark with relatively the same performance and walk away with $600,000 in their pocket.

    Read the article

  • Performance Improvement: Session State

    Performance is critical to today's successful applications and web sites. If you design with an awareness of the session state management challenges you can always change your strategies to match your performance needs.

    Read the article

  • Performance Improvement: Session State

    Performance is critical to today's successful applications and web sites. If you design with an awareness of the session state management challenges you can always change your strategies to match your performance needs.

    Read the article

  • FREE eBook: .NET Performance Testing and Optimization (Part 1)

    In this this first part of complete guide to performance profiling, Paul Glavich and Chris Farrell explain why performance testing is a good idea and walk you through everything you need to know to set up a test environment. This comprehensive guide to getting started is an essential handbook to any programmer looking to set up a .NET testing environment and get the best results out of it. Download your free copy now span.fullpost {display:none;}

    Read the article

  • Google I/O 2011: High-performance GWT: best practices for writing smaller, faster apps

    Google I/O 2011: High-performance GWT: best practices for writing smaller, faster apps David Chandler The GWT compiler isn't just a Java to JavaScript transliterator. In this session, we'll show you compiler optimizations to shrink your app and make it compile and run faster. Learn common performance pitfalls, how to use lightweight cell widgets, how to use code splitting with Activities and Places, and compiler options to reduce your app's size and compile time. From: GoogleDevelopers Views: 4791 21 ratings Time: 01:01:32 More in Science & Technology

    Read the article

  • Improved Performance on PeopleSoft Combined Benchmark using SPARC T4-4

    - by Brian
    Oracle's SPARC T4-4 server running Oracle's PeopleSoft HCM 9.1 combined online and batch benchmark achieved a world record 18,000 concurrent users experiencing subsecond response time while executing a PeopleSoft Payroll batch job of 500,000 employees in 32.4 minutes. This result was obtained with a SPARC T4-4 server running Oracle Database 11g Release 2, a SPARC T4-4 server running PeopleSoft HCM 9.1 application server and a SPARC T4-2 server running Oracle WebLogic Server in the web tier. The SPARC T4-4 server running the application tier used Oracle Solaris Zones which provide a flexible, scalable and manageable virtualization environment. The average CPU utilization on the SPARC T4-2 server in the web tier was 17%, on the SPARC T4-4 server in the application tier it was 59%, and on the SPARC T4-4 server in the database tier was 47% (online and batch) leaving significant headroom for additional processing across the three tiers. The SPARC T4-4 server used for the database tier hosted Oracle Database 11g Release 2 using Oracle Automatic Storage Management (ASM) for database files management with I/O performance equivalent to raw devices. Performance Landscape Results are presented for the PeopleSoft HRMS Self-Service and Payroll combined benchmark. The new result with 128 streams shows significant improvement in the payroll batch processing time with little impact on the self-service component response time. PeopleSoft HRMS Self-Service and Payroll Benchmark Systems Users Ave Response Search (sec) Ave Response Save (sec) Batch Time (min) Streams SPARC T4-2 (web) SPARC T4-4 (app) SPARC T4-4 (db) 18,000 0.988 0.539 32.4 128 SPARC T4-2 (web) SPARC T4-4 (app) SPARC T4-4 (db) 18,000 0.944 0.503 43.3 64 The following results are for the PeopleSoft HRMS Self-Service benchmark that was previous run. The results are not directly comparable with the combined results because they do not include the payroll component. PeopleSoft HRMS Self-Service 9.1 Benchmark Systems Users Ave Response Search (sec) Ave Response Save (sec) Batch Time (min) Streams SPARC T4-2 (web) SPARC T4-4 (app) 2x SPARC T4-2 (db) 18,000 1.048 0.742 N/A N/A The following results are for the PeopleSoft Payroll benchmark that was previous run. The results are not directly comparable with the combined results because they do not include the self-service component. PeopleSoft Payroll (N.A.) 9.1 - 500K Employees (7 Million SQL PayCalc, Unicode) Systems Users Ave Response Search (sec) Ave Response Save (sec) Batch Time (min) Streams SPARC T4-4 (db) N/A N/A N/A 30.84 96 Configuration Summary Application Configuration: 1 x SPARC T4-4 server with 4 x SPARC T4 processors, 3.0 GHz 512 GB memory Oracle Solaris 11 11/11 PeopleTools 8.52 PeopleSoft HCM 9.1 Oracle Tuxedo, Version 10.3.0.0, 64-bit, Patch Level 031 Java Platform, Standard Edition Development Kit 6 Update 32 Database Configuration: 1 x SPARC T4-4 server with 4 x SPARC T4 processors, 3.0 GHz 256 GB memory Oracle Solaris 11 11/11 Oracle Database 11g Release 2 PeopleTools 8.52 Oracle Tuxedo, Version 10.3.0.0, 64-bit, Patch Level 031 Micro Focus Server Express (COBOL v 5.1.00) Web Tier Configuration: 1 x SPARC T4-2 server with 2 x SPARC T4 processors, 2.85 GHz 256 GB memory Oracle Solaris 11 11/11 PeopleTools 8.52 Oracle WebLogic Server 10.3.4 Java Platform, Standard Edition Development Kit 6 Update 32 Storage Configuration: 1 x Sun Server X2-4 as a COMSTAR head for data 4 x Intel Xeon X7550, 2.0 GHz 128 GB memory 1 x Sun Storage F5100 Flash Array (80 flash modules) 1 x Sun Storage F5100 Flash Array (40 flash modules) 1 x Sun Fire X4275 as a COMSTAR head for redo logs 12 x 2 TB SAS disks with Niwot Raid controller Benchmark Description This benchmark combines PeopleSoft HCM 9.1 HR Self Service online and PeopleSoft Payroll batch workloads to run on a unified database deployed on Oracle Database 11g Release 2. The PeopleSoft HRSS benchmark kit is a Oracle standard benchmark kit run by all platform vendors to measure the performance. It's an OLTP benchmark where DB SQLs are moderately complex. The results are certified by Oracle and a white paper is published. PeopleSoft HR SS defines a business transaction as a series of HTML pages that guide a user through a particular scenario. Users are defined as corporate Employees, Managers and HR administrators. The benchmark consist of 14 scenarios which emulate users performing typical HCM transactions such as viewing paycheck, promoting and hiring employees, updating employee profile and other typical HCM application transactions. All these transactions are well-defined in the PeopleSoft HR Self-Service 9.1 benchmark kit. This benchmark metric is the weighted average response search/save time for all the transactions. The PeopleSoft 9.1 Payroll (North America) benchmark demonstrates system performance for a range of processing volumes in a specific configuration. This workload represents large batch runs typical of a ERP environment during a mass update. The benchmark measures five application business process run times for a database representing large organization. They are Paysheet Creation, Payroll Calculation, Payroll Confirmation, Print Advice forms, and Create Direct Deposit File. The benchmark metric is the cumulative elapsed time taken to complete the Paysheet Creation, Payroll Calculation and Payroll Confirmation business application processes. The benchmark metrics are taken for each respective benchmark while running simultaneously on the same database back-end. Specifically, the payroll batch processes are started when the online workload reaches steady state (the maximum number of online users) and overlap with online transactions for the duration of the steady state. Key Points and Best Practices Two PeopleSoft Domain sets with 200 application servers each on a SPARC T4-4 server were hosted in 2 separate Oracle Solaris Zones to demonstrate consolidation of multiple application servers, ease of administration and performance tuning. Each Oracle Solaris Zone was bound to a separate processor set, each containing 15 cores (total 120 threads). The default set (1 core from first and third processor socket, total 16 threads) was used for network and disk interrupt handling. This was done to improve performance by reducing memory access latency by using the physical memory closest to the processors and offload I/O interrupt handling to default set threads, freeing up cpu resources for Application Servers threads and balancing application workload across 240 threads. A total of 128 PeopleSoft streams server processes where used on the database node to complete payroll batch job of 500,000 employees in 32.4 minutes. See Also Oracle PeopleSoft Benchmark White Papers oracle.com SPARC T4-2 Server oracle.com OTN SPARC T4-4 Server oracle.com OTN PeopleSoft Enterprise Human Capital Managementoracle.com OTN PeopleSoft Enterprise Human Capital Management (Payroll) oracle.com OTN Oracle Solaris oracle.com OTN Oracle Database 11g Release 2 oracle.com OTN Disclosure Statement Copyright 2012, Oracle and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Oracle and Java are registered trademarks of Oracle and/or its affiliates. Other names may be trademarks of their respective owners. Results as of 8 November 2012.

    Read the article

  • Tester la performance de votre réseau avec Iperf, un tutoriel par Nicolas Hennion

    Bonjour à tous !La rubrique Réseaux vous propose un article expliquant comment tester les performances du réseau avec Iperf par nicolargo : Tester la performance de votre réseau avec Iperf. Citation: Iperf est un des outils indispensables pour tout administrateur réseau qui se respecte. En effet, ce logiciel de mesure de performance réseau, disponible sur de nombreuses plateformes (Linux, BSD, Mac, Windows?) se présente sous la forme d'une ligne de commande à exécuter sur deux machines...

    Read the article

  • Data Quality Services Performance Best Practices Guide

    This guide details high-level performance numbers expected and a set of best practices on getting optimal performance when using Data Quality Services (DQS) in SQL Server 2012 with Cumulative Update 1. Schedule Azure backupsRed Gate’s Cloud Services makes it simple to create and schedule backups of your SQL Azure databases to Azure blob storage or Amazon S3. Try it for free today.

    Read the article

  • Talend vs. SSIS: A Simple Performance Comparison

    With all of the ETL tools in the marketplace, which one is best? Jeff Singleton brings us simple performance comparison pitting SSIS against open source powerhouse Talend. Optimize SQL Server performance“With SQL Monitor, we can be proactive in our optimization process, instead of waiting until a customer reports a problem,” John Trumbul, Sr. Software Engineer. Optimize your servers with a free trial.

    Read the article

  • Profiling SharePoint with ANTS Performance Profiler 5.2

    Using ANTS Performance Profiler with SharePoint has, previously, been possible, but not easy. Version 5.2 of ANTS Performance Profiler changes all that, and Chris Allen has put together a straight-forward guide to profiling SharePoint, demonstrating just how much easier it has become.

    Read the article

  • Will using FAT32 provide better pagefile performance than NTFS?

    - by llazzaro
    Hello, I was discussing with my others personalities, and came up with a conflict. In http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc938440.aspx , says that FAT32 is faster when using smaller volumes. Ok separate disk, will give more performance than same disk. But did anyone test this? Scenario 1 : Separate hard disk FAT32 (small volume) Scenario 2 : Separate hard disk NTFS which one will win? minimum gain?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50  | Next Page >