Search Results

Search found 6355 results on 255 pages for 'slow downs'.

Page 54/255 | < Previous Page | 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61  | Next Page >

  • XBMC is slow and sluggish in Ubuntu 13.04; how can I speed it up?

    - by Dreamdealer
    I have a Zotac ZBOX ID84 with Intel D2550 proc and Nvidia GT520M GPU, 2GB memory and 320GB hard disk. I tried XBMCbuntu first and it ran perfectly for a few months until I started to mess around with the Terminal. After a re-install I could get the HDMI sound to work again so I installed the latest version of Ubuntu (13.04) instead. That worked fine. The sound and everything worked right away, but the interface of Ubuntu is sluggish and XBMC doesn't run as good as it did in XBMCbuntu. The video playback is slow and it stutters. It speeds up and slows down with the complexity of the video. So, the PC is more than capable to run XBMC and play the videos, but something in Ubuntu (GUI?) slows it down to an unusable pace. Can anybody tell me what I can do to speed things up? Since I'm new to Ubuntu I have no clue where to start looking.

    Read the article

  • Slow in the Application, Fast in SSMS? Understanding Performance Mysteries

    When I read various forums about SQL Server, I frequently see questions from deeply mystified posters. They have identified a slow query or stored procedure in their application. They cull the SQL batch from the application and run it in SQL Server Management Studio (SSMS) to analyse it, only to find that the response is instantaneous. At this point they are inclined to think that SQL Server is all about magic. A similar mystery is when a developer has extracted a query in his stored procedure to run it stand-alone only to find that it runs much faster – or much slower – than inside the procedure.

    Read the article

  • Why is FTP file transfer from Android Phone Slow?

    - by Frychiko
    To transfer files from my Android phone to Ubuntu, I use an app that creates a FTP server on the phone. Copying files to Ubuntu 12.04 (same with 12.10) I get up to 260 KB/s. Copying files to Windows 7 I get up to 1050 KB/s. I am currently on a fresh install of 12.10 with barely anything installed with the same results. I have tested with both a Galaxy S3 and HTC Desire HD with identical results. I have tested about 5 apps with the same results. Why is it slow on Ubuntu?

    Read the article

  • Why is my mdadm raid-1 recovery so slow?

    - by dimmer
    On a system I'm running Ubuntu 10.04. My raid-1 restore started out fast but quickly became ridiculously slow (at this rate the restore will take 150 days!): dimmer@paimon:~$ cat /proc/mdstat Personalities : [linear] [multipath] [raid0] [raid1] [raid6] [raid5] [raid4] [raid10] md0 : active raid1 sdc1[2] sdb1[1] 1953513408 blocks [2/1] [_U] [====>................] recovery = 24.4% (477497344/1953513408) finish=217368.0min speed=113K/sec unused devices: <none> Eventhough I have set the kernel variables to reasonably quick values: dimmer@paimon:~$ cat /proc/sys/dev/raid/speed_limit_min 1000000 dimmer@paimon:~$ cat /proc/sys/dev/raid/speed_limit_max 100000000 I am using 2 2.0TB Western Digital Hard Disks, WDC WD20EARS-00M and WDC WD20EARS-00J. I believe they have been partitioned such that their sectors are aligned. dimmer@paimon:/sys$ sudo parted /dev/sdb GNU Parted 2.2 Using /dev/sdb Welcome to GNU Parted! Type 'help' to view a list of commands. (parted) p Model: ATA WDC WD20EARS-00M (scsi) Disk /dev/sdb: 2000GB Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/512B Partition Table: gpt Number Start End Size File system Name Flags 1 1049kB 2000GB 2000GB ext4 (parted) unit s (parted) p Number Start End Size File system Name Flags 1 2048s 3907028991s 3907026944s ext4 (parted) q dimmer@paimon:/sys$ sudo parted /dev/sdc GNU Parted 2.2 Using /dev/sdc Welcome to GNU Parted! Type 'help' to view a list of commands. (parted) p Model: ATA WDC WD20EARS-00J (scsi) Disk /dev/sdc: 2000GB Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/4096B Partition Table: gpt Number Start End Size File system Name Flags 1 1049kB 2000GB 2000GB ext4 I am beginning to think that I have a hardware problem, otherwise I can't imagine why the mdadm restore should be so slow. I have done a benchmark on /dev/sdc using Ubuntu's disk utility GUI app, and the results looked normal so I know that sdc has the capability to write faster than this. I also had the same problem on a similar WD drive that I RMAd because of bad sectors. I suppose it's possible they sent me a replacement with bad sectors too, although there are no SMART values showing them yet. Any ideas? Thanks. As requested, output of top sorted by cpu usage (notice there is ~0 cpu usage). iowait is also zero which seems strange: top - 11:35:13 up 2 days, 9:40, 3 users, load average: 2.87, 2.58, 2.30 Tasks: 142 total, 1 running, 141 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 0.0%us, 0.2%sy, 0.0%ni, 99.8%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Mem: 3096304k total, 1482164k used, 1614140k free, 617672k buffers Swap: 1526132k total, 0k used, 1526132k free, 535416k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 45 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0 0.0 2:17.02 scsi_eh_0 1 root 20 0 2808 1752 1204 S 0 0.1 0:00.46 init 2 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0 0.0 0:00.00 kthreadd 3 root RT 0 0 0 0 S 0 0.0 0:00.02 migration/0 4 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0 0.0 0:00.17 ksoftirqd/0 5 root RT 0 0 0 0 S 0 0.0 0:00.00 watchdog/0 6 root RT 0 0 0 0 S 0 0.0 0:00.02 migration/1 ... dmesg errors, definitely looking like hardware: [202884.000157] ata5.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x0 action 0x6 frozen [202884.007015] ata5.00: failed command: FLUSH CACHE EXT [202884.013728] ata5.00: cmd ea/00:00:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/a0 tag 0 [202884.013730] res 40/00:00:ff:59:2e/00:00:35:00:00/e0 Emask 0x4 (timeout) [202884.033667] ata5.00: status: { DRDY } [202884.040329] ata5: hard resetting link [202889.400050] ata5: link is slow to respond, please be patient (ready=0) [202894.048087] ata5: COMRESET failed (errno=-16) [202894.054663] ata5: hard resetting link [202899.412049] ata5: link is slow to respond, please be patient (ready=0) [202904.060107] ata5: COMRESET failed (errno=-16) [202904.066646] ata5: hard resetting link [202905.840056] ata5: SATA link up 3.0 Gbps (SStatus 123 SControl 300) [202905.849178] ata5.00: configured for UDMA/133 [202905.849188] ata5: EH complete [203899.000292] ata5.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x0 action 0x6 frozen [203899.007096] ata5.00: failed command: IDENTIFY DEVICE [203899.013841] ata5.00: cmd ec/00:01:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/00 tag 0 pio 512 in [203899.013843] res 40/00:00:ff:f9:f6/00:00:38:00:00/e0 Emask 0x4 (timeout) [203899.041232] ata5.00: status: { DRDY } [203899.048133] ata5: hard resetting link [203899.816134] ata5: SATA link up 3.0 Gbps (SStatus 123 SControl 300) [203899.826062] ata5.00: configured for UDMA/133 [203899.826079] ata5: EH complete [204375.000200] ata5.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x0 action 0x6 frozen [204375.007421] ata5.00: failed command: IDENTIFY DEVICE [204375.014799] ata5.00: cmd ec/00:01:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/00 tag 0 pio 512 in [204375.014800] res 40/00:00:ff:0c:0f/00:00:39:00:00/e0 Emask 0x4 (timeout) [204375.044374] ata5.00: status: { DRDY } [204375.051842] ata5: hard resetting link [204380.408049] ata5: link is slow to respond, please be patient (ready=0) [204384.440076] ata5: SATA link up 3.0 Gbps (SStatus 123 SControl 300) [204384.449938] ata5.00: configured for UDMA/133 [204384.449955] ata5: EH complete [204395.988135] ata5.00: exception Emask 0x0 SAct 0x0 SErr 0x0 action 0x6 frozen [204395.988140] ata5.00: failed command: IDENTIFY DEVICE [204395.988147] ata5.00: cmd ec/00:01:00:00:00/00:00:00:00:00/00 tag 0 pio 512 in [204395.988149] res 40/00:00:ff:0c:0f/00:00:39:00:00/e0 Emask 0x4 (timeout) [204395.988151] ata5.00: status: { DRDY } [204395.988156] ata5: hard resetting link [204399.320075] ata5: SATA link up 3.0 Gbps (SStatus 123 SControl 300) [204399.330487] ata5.00: configured for UDMA/133 [204399.330503] ata5: EH complete

    Read the article

  • How to slow down a sprite that updates every frame?

    - by xiaohouzi79
    I am going through a Allegro 5 tutorial which has a game loop. There is also a variable "active" which determines if a key is being held down. Thus if the left key is being held down active is on and it begins looping through the row on the sprite sheet that corresponds to moving left. The problem is that this logic is checked everytime the loop is performed thus at approximately 60 fps the three images that are used to do the left walking animation cycle round super fast which means my character looks like it is in a rush. Total beginner question: so what is the correct way to slow down the transition between sprites so that the walking looks like it is done at a moderate pace. Here is the code used to transition across the sprite between the three different phases of the person walking: if (active) { sourceX += al_get_bitmap_width(player) / 3; } else { sourceX = 32; } if (sourceX >= al_get_bitmap_width(player)) { sourceX = 0; } I can kind of guess what it should be in plain English: update sourceX only every certain part of a second but I can't think of how to put this into code.

    Read the article

  • Why Are Minimized Programs Often Slow to Open Again?

    - by Jason Fitzpatrick
    It seems particularly counterintuitive: you minimize an application because you plan on returning to it later and wish to skip shutting the application down and restarting it later, but sometimes maximizing it takes even longer than launching it fresh. What gives? Today’s Question & Answer session comes to us courtesy of SuperUser—a subdivision of Stack Exchange, a community-driven grouping of Q&A web sites. The Question SuperUser reader Bart wants to know why he’s not saving any time with application minimization: I’m working in Photoshop CS6 and multiple browsers a lot. I’m not using them all at once, so sometimes some applications are minimized to taskbar for hours or days. The problem is, when I try to maximize them from the taskbar – it sometimes takes longer than starting them! Especially Photoshop feels really weird for many seconds after finally showing up, it’s slow, unresponsive and even sometimes totally freezes for minute or two. It’s not a hardware problem as it’s been like that since always on all on my PCs. Would I also notice it after upgrading my HDD to SDD and adding RAM (my main PC holds 4 GB currently)? Could guys with powerful pcs / macs tell me – does it also happen to you? I guess OSes somehow “focus” on active software and move all the resources away from the ones that run, but are not used. Is it possible to somehow set RAM / CPU / HDD priorities or something, for let’s say, Photoshop, so it won’t slow down after long period of inactivity? So what is the deal? Why does he find himself waiting to maximize a minimized app? The Answer SuperUser contributor Allquixotic explains why: Summary The immediate problem is that the programs that you have minimized are being paged out to the “page file” on your hard disk. This symptom can be improved by installing a Solid State Disk (SSD), adding more RAM to your system, reducing the number of programs you have open, or upgrading to a newer system architecture (for instance, Ivy Bridge or Haswell). Out of these options, adding more RAM is generally the most effective solution. Explanation The default behavior of Windows is to give active applications priority over inactive applications for having a spot in RAM. When there’s significant memory pressure (meaning the system doesn’t have a lot of free RAM if it were to let every program have all the RAM it wants), it starts putting minimized programs into the page file, which means it writes out their contents from RAM to disk, and then makes that area of RAM free. That free RAM helps programs you’re actively using — say, your web browser — run faster, because if they need to claim a new segment of RAM (like when you open a new tab), they can do so. This “free” RAM is also used as page cache, which means that when active programs attempt to read data on your hard disk, that data might be cached in RAM, which prevents your hard disk from being accessed to get that data. By using the majority of your RAM for page cache, and swapping out unused programs to disk, Windows is trying to improve responsiveness of the program(s) you are actively using, by making RAM available to them, and caching the files they access in RAM instead of the hard disk. The downside of this behavior is that minimized programs can take a while to have their contents copied from the page file, on disk, back into RAM. The time increases the larger the program’s footprint in memory. This is why you experience that delay when maximizing Photoshop. RAM is many times faster than a hard disk (depending on the specific hardware, it can be up to several orders of magnitude). An SSD is considerably faster than a hard disk, but it is still slower than RAM by orders of magnitude. Having your page file on an SSD will help, but it will also wear out the SSD more quickly than usual if your page file is heavily utilized due to RAM pressure. Remedies Here is an explanation of the available remedies, and their general effectiveness: Installing more RAM: This is the recommended path. If your system does not support more RAM than you already have installed, you will need to upgrade more of your system: possibly your motherboard, CPU, chassis, power supply, etc. depending on how old it is. If it’s a laptop, chances are you’ll have to buy an entire new laptop that supports more installed RAM. When you install more RAM, you reduce memory pressure, which reduces use of the page file, which is a good thing all around. You also make available more RAM for page cache, which will make all programs that access the hard disk run faster. As of Q4 2013, my personal recommendation is that you have at least 8 GB of RAM for a desktop or laptop whose purpose is anything more complex than web browsing and email. That means photo editing, video editing/viewing, playing computer games, audio editing or recording, programming / development, etc. all should have at least 8 GB of RAM, if not more. Run fewer programs at a time: This will only work if the programs you are running do not use a lot of memory on their own. Unfortunately, Adobe Creative Suite products such as Photoshop CS6 are known for using an enormous amount of memory. This also limits your multitasking ability. It’s a temporary, free remedy, but it can be an inconvenience to close down your web browser or Word every time you start Photoshop, for instance. This also wouldn’t stop Photoshop from being swapped when minimizing it, so it really isn’t a very effective solution. It only helps in some specific situations. Install an SSD: If your page file is on an SSD, the SSD’s improved speed compared to a hard disk will result in generally improved performance when the page file has to be read from or written to. Be aware that SSDs are not designed to withstand a very frequent and constant random stream of writes; they can only be written over a limited number of times before they start to break down. Heavy use of a page file is not a particularly good workload for an SSD. You should install an SSD in combination with a large amount of RAM if you want maximum performance while preserving the longevity of the SSD. Use a newer system architecture: Depending on the age of your system, you may be using an out of date system architecture. The “system architecture” is generally defined as the “generation” (think generations like children, parents, grandparents, etc.) of the motherboard and CPU. Newer generations generally support faster I/O (input/output), better memory bandwidth, lower latency, and less contention over shared resources, instead providing dedicated links between components. For example, starting with the “Nehalem” generation (around 2009), the Front-Side Bus (FSB) was eliminated, which removed a common bottleneck, because almost all system components had to share the same FSB for transmitting data. This was replaced with a “point to point” architecture, meaning that each component gets its own dedicated “lane” to the CPU, which continues to be improved every few years with new generations. You will generally see a more significant improvement in overall system performance depending on the “gap” between your computer’s architecture and the latest one available. For example, a Pentium 4 architecture from 2004 is going to see a much more significant improvement upgrading to “Haswell” (the latest as of Q4 2013) than a “Sandy Bridge” architecture from ~2010. Links Related questions: How to reduce disk thrashing (paging)? Windows Swap (Page File): Enable or Disable? Also, just in case you’re considering it, you really shouldn’t disable the page file, as this will only make matters worse; see here. And, in case you needed extra convincing to leave the Windows Page File alone, see here and here. Have something to add to the explanation? Sound off in the the comments. Want to read more answers from other tech-savvy Stack Exchange users? Check out the full discussion thread here.     

    Read the article

  • Internet unusably slow with Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTL8111/8168B card

    - by user42424
    So I have recently installed Ubuntu 11.10 for a dual boot with wind 7. After the install I had like 300 updates, so I installed them. At first I could use the internet, although it was extremely slow. However now I cannot, sometimes it will load and others it will simply time out. When I try to download something it will either take forever or will not at all. This is a wired system. On Windows side my speeds are fine. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Also like I said I am new to Linux/Ubuntu so please be nice. One last thing, I also installed 11.10 for same dual boot on my laptop, and wireless speed is the same as on Windows? Only the wired desktop gives me the problem? Hear is some hardware info.. Hope it helps. Mobo: Gigabyte GA=880GMA- AMD / CPU: AMD Phenom (tm) IIx4 965 / 16 GB Ram / Realtek PCIe GBE Family Controller / Cisco Linksys E2000 / Ethernet controller: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTL8111/8168B PCI Express Gigabit Ethernet controller (rev 06) / eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 50:e5:49:33:64:cf inet addr:192.168.1.118 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::52e5:49ff:fe33:64cf/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:76722 errors:0 dropped:76722 overruns:0 frame:76722 TX packets:49692 errors:0 dropped:65 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:107956638 (107.9 MB) TX bytes:4342553 (4.3 MB) Interrupt:44 Base address:0x2000 thanks to roadmr problem solved! I powered down PC, un plugged power from pc end, waited a few (maybe 3)minutes. plugged power back in, pushed and held power button for 30 + seconds. Let go, powered on PC, and my Internet is fine! downloads and web speed blaze, just like on my Win 7 boot, maybe even faster. Problem Solved, Thanks to all!! **

    Read the article

  • Recent 12.04 Upgrade Makes My System and Internet Run Extremely SLOW!

    - by Sterling
    I'm running a Dell Inspiron 1564 with Windows7/Ubuntu dual booting. I haven't logged into the Ubuntu OS partition for some time until recently (trying to force myself into a Linux environment to learn) and when I did, It asked me to upgrade to 12.04 and so I did, restarted and since, everything seems to run extremely slow (startup, opening applications, running applications, switching windows, etc., etc... Another thing is that the Internet cuts out intermittently on my browser. Some pages within my Firefox tabs I can access, some I cant. Almost always while running Skype or some other Internet using application. So I know that I'm getting Internet, I can chat with friends over Skype but certain pages wont load during my Skype calls; the pages just hang upon resfreshing... I can eventually get the page to load after an indefinite amount of waiting and refreshing but this is very annoying. I am extremely new to Linux so I apologize in advance for my absolute ignorance. I am willing to post whatever information you Linux gurus have me type into the terminal in hopes that you can help me =) Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • Why does my system slow down or freeze when there is heavy disk activity?

    - by user72270
    Im a first-time user to Ubuntu-12.04 with WUBI installation. My NoteBook Information : Dell vostro 3450 : i5 2410m, 3 gb ram, intel hd3000, amd 6630m hybrid. Surfing and playing games works flawlessly, however, I'm having huge problems when installing applications and generally copying and moving files. When doing so, system is significantly slower and freezes quite often (Firefox gets bluish, sometimes even black n white). I would say that Ubuntu allocates too much resources on file transfers and installing, but even these tasks are very slow. Here is very specific example : today, i tried to move 6 GB file from win 7 installation. It was good at first, i jumped to firefox but after a while firefox started to randomly turn bluish and mouse was randomly stopping working. It was gradually worse and worse and it got to a point when firefox black n whited and mouse wasn't working at all. I raged and went for some meal, when i got back screen was black. It probably unlogged me due to inactivity, when i pushed random button to bring screen to life i had to wait few minutes to let it show me only my screen background. No log in screen, just background and working mouse. NoteBook fan was working at 100 % so I assumed that file transfer was going on and I left it to work. Nothing then changed for a full hour so I hard rebooted it. File transfer unsuccessful, It transfered hardly 2 gigs. Is this normal ? What to do in these situations ? It didn't let me load system manager and not even terminal. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Xubuntu 13.10 64bit - Slow and buggy "log out" process?

    - by MrKatSwordfish
    I'm a Windows convert who has done only a little bit of dabbling in Ubuntu in the past (back in Dapper Drake a few years back). A lot has changes since then, and I've been yearning to jump back into linux again! So, having just bought a new SSD, I felt that this would be as good of a time as any to set up a dual-boot system again. I've messed around with Ubuntu 13.10 a bit, and while Unity has its issues, I think that it still needs some time to develop. I looked into XFCE and liked it a lot, so I went with Xubuntu. I've installed Xubuntu, and for the most part it's running smoothly and it a pleasure to work with. The customization is great and the minimalistic look and feel is really nice! But here's my problem, whenever I select the "Log Out" option from either the application menu, or the user profiles menu, my PC comes to a crawl, and the dialog box with all the options (shut down, restart, log out, etc.) takes maybe a minute or more to appear. I click the log out button, my PC is brought to a snail's pace, and I have to wait for what seems like an eternity for the logout options to appear! If i try to open something else (even a terminal window) while it's loading the logout options, that other program won't finish loading until the logout screen finally appears. Keep in mind, this is a pretty much vanilla install of Xubuntu 13.10 64bit, on a PC with an intel i7, an SSD, 6gb DDR3 RAM, and a new AMD 7770 gpu (drivers haven't been installed yet, though). Everything else runs fast, most applications open near-instantly! It must be an issue with how the logout options screen initializes or something, but I'm not sure exactly how I can fix it.. Edit - Extra Info: This problem is very consistent when using the "Log Out" buttons in Xubuntu. However, I've found that I'm able to reboot and shutdown much more quickly by going through the "Switch User" screen, and using the reboot or shutdown buttons on that screen. I'm nearly certain that it has something to do with the little Log Out options screen that appears when I select Log Out from the menu, and not the actual process of shutting down.. So what should I do? I really like XFCE so far, and I've never tried a non-ubuntu based distro before, but should I just switch to something else? Is there any known fix for this issue? Are there any work-arounds for logging out/shutting down/rebooting via the terminal so that I can avoid this irritating bug? Is there any that I can monitor the progress of the log out via terminal, allowing me to see which parts are causing the slow-down? What is the best way to report this bug to someone?

    Read the article

  • Very very slow transfer speeds between Windows 7 and samba server running on Ubuntu 11.10/12.04 minimal

    - by kuzyt
    As mentioned in the title I tried transferring files between Windows 7 and the samba server running on both Ubuntu 11.10 and 12.04 but both showed very slow transfer speeds. Can someone please guide me in the right direction to debug this problem ? wget --output-document=/dev/null http://tokyo1.linode.com/100MB-tokyo.bin --2012-08-21 22:02:17-- http://tokyo1.linode.com/100MB-tokyo.bin Resolving tokyo1.linode.com (tokyo1.linode.com)... 106.187.33.12 Connecting to tokyo1.linode.com (tokyo1.linode.com)|106.187.33.12|:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK Length: 104857600 (100M) [application/octet-stream] Saving to: `/dev/null' 8% [=============> ] 8,923,980 64.8K/s eta 15m 0s wlan0 IEEE 802.11abgn ESSID:"TNET" Mode:Managed Frequency:2.462 GHz Access Point: 58:6D:8F:26:20:7A Bit Rate=117 Mb/s Tx-Power=20 dBm Retry long limit:7 RTS thr:off Fragment thr:off Power Management:off Link Quality=57/70 Signal level=-53 dBm Rx invalid nwid:0 Rx invalid crypt:0 Rx invalid frag:0 Tx excessive retries:101 Invalid misc:2448 Missed beacon:0 03:00.0 Network controller: Atheros Communications Inc. AR9300 Wireless LAN adaptor (rev 01) Subsystem: Atheros Communications Inc. Device 3112 Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- Stepping- SERR- FastB2B- DisINTx- Status: Cap+ 66MHz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=fast >TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR- INTx+ Latency: 0, Cache Line Size: 64 bytes Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 16 Region 0: Memory at fea00000 (64-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=128K] Expansion ROM at fea20000 [disabled] [size=64K] Capabilities: [40] Power Management version 3 Flags: PMEClk- DSI- D1+ D2- AuxCurrent=375mA PME(D0+,D1+,D2-,D3hot+,D3cold-) Status: D0 NoSoftRst- PME-Enable- DSel=0 DScale=0 PME- Capabilities: [50] MSI: Enable- Count=1/4 Maskable+ 64bit+ Address: 0000000000000000 Data: 0000 Masking: 00000000 Pending: 00000000 Capabilities: [70] Express (v2) Endpoint, MSI 00 DevCap: MaxPayload 128 bytes, PhantFunc 0, Latency L0s <1us, L1 <8us ExtTag- AttnBtn- AttnInd- PwrInd- RBE+ FLReset- DevCtl: Report errors: Correctable- Non-Fatal- Fatal- Unsupported- RlxdOrd- ExtTag- PhantFunc- AuxPwr- NoSnoop- MaxPayload 128 bytes, MaxReadReq 512 bytes DevSta: CorrErr- UncorrErr- FatalErr- UnsuppReq- AuxPwr- TransPend- LnkCap: Port #0, Speed 2.5GT/s, Width x1, ASPM L0s L1, Latency L0 <2us, L1 <64us ClockPM- Surprise- LLActRep- BwNot- LnkCtl: ASPM Disabled; RCB 64 bytes Disabled- Retrain- CommClk+ ExtSynch- ClockPM- AutWidDis- BWInt- AutBWInt- LnkSta: Speed 2.5GT/s, Width x1, TrErr- Train- SlotClk+ DLActive- BWMgmt- ABWMgmt- DevCap2: Completion Timeout: Not Supported, TimeoutDis+ DevCtl2: Completion Timeout: 50us to 50ms, TimeoutDis- LnkCtl2: Target Link Speed: 2.5GT/s, EnterCompliance- SpeedDis-, Selectable De-emphasis: -6dB Transmit Margin: Normal Operating Range, EnterModifiedCompliance- ComplianceSOS- Compliance De-emphasis: -6dB LnkSta2: Current De-emphasis Level: -6dB Capabilities: [100 v1] Advanced Error Reporting UESta: DLP- SDES- TLP- FCP- CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt- RxOF- MalfTLP- ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol- UEMsk: DLP- SDES- TLP- FCP- CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt- RxOF- MalfTLP- ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol- UESvrt: DLP+ SDES+ TLP- FCP+ CmpltTO- CmpltAbrt- UnxCmplt- RxOF+ MalfTLP+ ECRC- UnsupReq- ACSViol- CESta: RxErr- BadTLP- BadDLLP- Rollover- Timeout- NonFatalErr- CEMsk: RxErr- BadTLP- BadDLLP- Rollover- Timeout- NonFatalErr+ AERCap: First Error Pointer: 00, GenCap- CGenEn- ChkCap- ChkEn- Capabilities: [140 v1] Virtual Channel Caps: LPEVC=0 RefClk=100ns PATEntryBits=1 Arb: Fixed- WRR32- WRR64- WRR128- Ctrl: ArbSelect=Fixed Status: InProgress- VC0: Caps: PATOffset=00 MaxTimeSlots=1 RejSnoopTrans- Arb: Fixed- WRR32- WRR64- WRR128- TWRR128- WRR256- Ctrl: Enable+ ID=0 ArbSelect=Fixed TC/VC=01 Status: NegoPending- InProgress- Capabilities: [300 v1] Device Serial Number 00-00-00-00-00-00-00-00 Kernel driver in use: ath9k Kernel modules: ath9k

    Read the article

  • virtual directory make file copy operation extremely slow on UNC Path (IIS 7.5 bug?)

    - by user144737
    When i create a website/virtual directory pointing to UNC path, its make our file copy extremely slow on the UNC path. 6 seconds for file copy (~13 M) on the UNC path without any virtual directory/website pointing to it. over 1 mins. for file copy (same files ~13M) on the same UNC path with virtual directory/website pointing to it. All file copy operation run on web server side. Our setting as below: Web server - Windows Server standard R2 2008 / IIS 7.5 File server - Windows Server standard 2003 I have tested this case on 3 servers (Windows Server standard R2 2008 / IIS 7.5) and got same result. I also tested this case on 2 windows 2003 / IIS 6, it won't slow down the file copy. Is it IIS 7.5 bug? any patch/hotfix to solve this case? Thank you. Gordon

    Read the article

  • Our wi-fi at work is ridiculously slow, will adding more range extenders improve it?

    - by john
    At work, we have two wireless networks (e.g., Work1 Work2); the Work2 is used downstairs and Work1 is used upstairs. However, both are notoriously slow. The connection is better when we are wired in, but unfortunately due to our building being very old and our company growing very fast, most employees are not seated near the walls where the ethernet cables are. I had Cox, our ISP, run a bandwidth utilization test and it doesn't seem like we are capping out on upstream/downstream, which leads me to believe that it's strictly an issue with the wireless networks (which were implemented before I got there). The wireless networks are both Apple Airport Extremes. Is there anything I can do to improve the situation for everyone? Speeds are extremely slow, and sometimes drops out.

    Read the article

  • How can I simulate a slow machine in a VM?

    - by Nathan Long
    I'm testing an AJAX-heavy web-application. I develop on a new Mac, but I use VmWare Fusion (currently 3.1.2) to test in Windows XP, using IETester to simulate older versions of IE. This lets me see how older IE versions would render the site, but I'd also like to see how the site would perform on an older machine. I see in the VM's settings that I can decrease the RAM; is there a way to also dial down the processor speed? How else might I simulate a slow machine? (I am also going to check out how to simulate a slow internet connection.)

    Read the article

  • Why is my iPhone WIFI so slow at home?

    - by John Fouhy
    When my iPhone is connected to my home wireless network, the internet is unusably slow. I installed the speedtest.net application; here are some results from tonight: Down: 0.0kB/s, Up: 0.0kB/s, ping: 2230ms Down: 2.5kB/s, Up: 40.5kB/s, ping: 2182ms Down: 0.0kB/s, Up: 20.0kB/s, ping: 197ms For comparison, here is the result from my iMac to the same server, which is on the same wireless network (and has no wired connection): Down: 139kB/s, Up: 53.8kB/s, ping: 182ms Neither my iMac nor the Dell laptop also on the network have experienced the wifi problems I get with my iPhone. On the other hand, I tried browsing a website on the wireless network at work with no problems. EDIT: SpeedTest at work gives me 156kB/s down. EDIT2: Girlfriend (owner of the Dell) reports actually the internet is sometimes very slow. Perhaps there is more going on. No problems with my iMac. My router is a ASUS WL-500g Premium V2 running OpenWrt Kamikaze with X-Wrt Extensions 8.09.

    Read the article

  • How can I fix a computer that is literally too slow to do anything?

    - by fredley
    I'm troubleshooting a Windows 7 PC for a friend. A couple of days ago it started running 'slow'. It turns out 'slow' is about 15 minutes to the first glimpse of the desktop, and another 30 to show icons. It is possible to open Task Manager, and nothing seems awry, CPU usage at 1-5%, plenty of memory free. The machine is clearly infested with malware though, in particular a program called 'Optimizer Pro' is demanding money to 'remove 5102 files slowing down my computer'. This seems highly suspicious. My problem is though, that I can't access msconfig (I left it for a couple of hours after having hopefully typed it into the Start Menu and hit enter - nothing seems to have loaded), or anything at all basically. I can boot from a Linux Live CD, but can I actually do anything useful from there? System Restore hasn't fixed it either, and Safe Mode exhibits the same behavior.

    Read the article

  • How can I enable MySQL's slow query log without restarting MySQL?

    - by mmattax
    I followed the instructions here: http://crazytoon.com/2007/07/23/mysql-changing-runtime-variables-with-out-restarting-mysql-server/ but that seems to only set the threshold. Do I need to do anything else like set the filepath? According to MySQL's docs If no file_name value is given for --log-slow-queries, the default name is host_name-slow.log. The server creates the file in the data directory unless an absolute path name is given to specify a different directory. Running SHOW VARIABLES doesn't indicate any log file path and I don't see any slow query log file on my server...

    Read the article

  • Is the method addSubview of NSView inherently slow? (Cocoa OSX)

    - by Michael Minerva
    I am trying to speed my gui that loads very slow slow when I am loading a large project (the gui is a representation of groups and sub groups and is made up of many views). During this process I was looking at how long certain code segments take to execute and I have found that a call to addsubview is taking between 10 and 20 milliseconds most of the time. The subview I was looking at is a disclosure button. I am wondering if this method is just inherently slow or is their some other factor at work here? Is the time it takes to add the subview dependent on the complexity of the subview or is that not a factor? Also, is there some other method that can be used to add a subview that might be faster?

    Read the article

  • Core Data Model Design Question - Changing "Live" Objects also Changes Saved Objects

    - by mwt
    I'm working on my first Core Data project (on iPhone) and am really liking it. Core Data is cool stuff. I am, however, running into a design difficulty that I'm not sure how to solve, although I imagine it's a fairly common situation. It concerns the data model. For the sake of clarity, I'll use an imaginary football game app as an example to illustrate my question. Say that there are NSMO's called Downs and Plays. Plays function like templates to be used by Downs. The user creates Plays (for example, Bootleg, Button Hook, Slant Route, Sweep, etc.) and fills in the various properties. Plays have a to-many relationship with Downs. For each Down, the user decides which Play to use. When the Down is executed, it uses the Play as its template. After each down is run, it is stored in history. The program remembers all the Downs ever played. So far, so good. This is all working fine. The question I have concerns what happens when the user wants to change the details of a Play. Let's say it originally involved a pass to the left, but the user now wants it to be a pass to the right. Making that change, however, not only affects all the future executions of that Play, but also changes the details of the Plays stored in history. The record of Downs gets "polluted," in effect, because the Play template has been changed. I have been rolling around several possible fixes to this situation, but I imagine the geniuses of SO know much more about how to handle this than I do. Still, the potential fixes I've come up with are: 1) "Versioning" of Plays. Each change to a Play template actually creates a new, separate Play object with the same name (as far as the user can tell). Underneath the hood, however, it is actually a different Play. This would work, AFAICT, but seems like it could potentially lead to a wild proliferation of Play objects, esp. if the user keeps switching back and forth between several versions of the same Play (creating object after object each time the user switches). Yes, the app could check for pre-existing, identical Plays, but... it just seems like a mess. 2) Have Downs, upon saving, record the details of the Play they used, but not as a Play object. This just seems ridiculous, given that the Play object is there to hold those just those details. 3) Recognize that Play objects are actually fulfilling 2 functions: one to be a template for a Down, and the other to record what template was used. These 2 functions have a different relationship with a Down. The first (template) has a to-many relationship. But the second (record) has a one-to-one relationship. This would mean creating a second object, something like "Play-Template" which would retain the to-many relationship with Downs. Play objects would get reconfigured to have a one-to-one relationship with Downs. A Down would use a Play-Template object for execution, but use the new kind of Play object to store what template was used. It is this change from a to-many relationship to a one-to-one relationship that represents the crux of the problem. Even writing this question out has helped me get clearer. I think something like solution 3 is the answer. However if anyone has a better idea or even just a confirmation that I'm on the right track, that would be helpful. (Remember, I'm not really making a football game, it's just faster/easier to use a metaphor everyone understands.) Thanks.

    Read the article

  • PHP scripts randomly becoming really slow to respond - Database lockup?

    - by webnoob
    Hi All, I wasn't sure whether to post this here or on stackoverflow, so apologies if its in the wrong place. I have about 7 php scripts running on a centOS VPS. Each of these scripts contacts a game server and processes the logs, with the logs it either does some database queries or sends info back to the game server. I am having an issue where some of the scripts will randomly become REALLY slow to respond and I don't know where to start with my debugging. Each script connects to its own database schema but on the same MySQL server. Each script will do about 4 inserts per second and twice as many select statements on their respective databases. I thought a database lockup may cause the issue but some console messages that are read from the database are sent to the game servers console without issue every 30 seconds, even when the script is slow to responding to other commands. Non of the scripts are using a lot of memory or CPU power. About 0.1% each. I know this information is really vague but I don't know linux very well at all (in fact, top is about my limit) and I really don't know where to start debugging this. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Why a 10 years old software still is so slow even today?

    - by Cawas
    I just noted this question due to a game (which happens to be Diablo 2), but the matter of fact is: why is my brand new mac book pro, made in 2009 with latest technology (tho it's the cheapest one) can't rival my computer which used to run this much faster back in 2000? Really, it was much faster on my AMD K6 450 back in those days, and I could even run two clients at same time with no slow down. I've always had the feeling this machine was slow, but this is a very odd way to attest it. Granted, the machine is smaller, runs on wifi and "boots" way faster thanks to sleep mode. But other than that, what have we evolved after all?! I'm pretty sure this shouldn't be graphical card's fault. Sure if I buy latest technology it will run fast, and probably most people here can confirm this and won't even understand my question. But the thing is, all the hardware is supposedly much faster and better than the stuff from 10 years ago. The software and operating system became more complex, but also more well refined. Now I'm trying a piece of software that is actually 10 years old and it's not getting any better results! Why?

    Read the article

  • Copy past speed very slow for a large number of tiny files on Windows but not on linux

    - by Arno2501
    I've got this folder which contains 15'000 of tiny images (around 400 bytes each). If I copy past this folder on my laptop (Windows 7, i7 latest gen, superfast ssd) it takes about 30 seconds (yes for 7 megs !!!) the average transfer rate is 400 KBytes / second which is so slow. I mean my usual transfer rate is more like hundreds of MBytes per second !!! I get the same problem on my servers (Windows 2003, 2008 /r2) and on every Windows box that I could get my hands on. On the other hand if I do the same on a linux box (debian base, Ext3 FS) (which runs on the same SAN than all the windows servers I've tested) It's nearly instantaneous !!! I'm pretty sure the size / number of the files may stress such filesystem more than another but such differences !? Why is that ? Why is it so slow on the windows boxes (more that 30 sec for 7 MB) and so fast on the linux ones (one sec or so) (I mean this was not a hardlink that I've created it was a true copy). Is it a normal behaviour or something unusual ?

    Read the article

  • Where do these mysterious DNS lookups come from and why are they slow?

    - by Hongli
    I have recently obtained a new dedicated server which I'm now setting up. It's running on 64-bit Debian 6.0. I have cloned a fairly large git repository (177 MB including working files) onto this server. Switching to a different branch is very very slow. On my laptop it takes 1-2 seconds, on this server it can take half a minute. After some investigation it turns out to be some kind of DNS timeout. Here's an exhibit from strace -s 128 git checkout release: stat("/etc/resolv.conf", {st_mode=S_IFREG|0644, st_size=132, ...}) = 0 socket(PF_INET, SOCK_DGRAM|SOCK_NONBLOCK, IPPROTO_IP) = 5 connect(5, {sa_family=AF_INET, sin_port=htons(53), sin_addr=inet_addr("213.133.99.99")}, 16) = 0 poll([{fd=5, events=POLLOUT}], 1, 0) = 1 ([{fd=5, revents=POLLOUT}]) sendto(5, "\235\333\1\0\0\1\0\0\0\0\0\0\35Debian-60-squeeze-64-minimal\n\17happyponies\3com\0\0\1\0\1", 67, MSG_NOSIGNAL, NULL, 0) = 67 poll([{fd=5, events=POLLIN}], 1, 5000) = 0 (Timeout) This snippet repeats several times per 'git checkout' call. My server's hostname was originally Debian-60-squeeze-64-minimal. I had changed it to shell.happyponies.com by running hostname shell.happyponies.com, editing /etc/hostname and rebooting the server. I don't understand the DNS protocol, but it looks like Git is trying to lookup the IP for Debian-60-squeeze-64-minimal as well as for happyponies.com. Why does Debian-60-squeeze-64-minimal come back even though I've already changed the host name? Why does Git perform DNS lookups at all? Why are these lookups so slow? I've already verified that all DNS servers in /etc/resolv.conf are up and responding slowly, yet Git's own lookups time out. Changing the host name back to Debian-60-squeeze-64-minimal seems to fix the slowness. Basically I just want to fix whatever DNS issues my server has because I'm sure they will cause more problems that just slowing down git checkout. But I'm not sure sure what the problem exactly is and what these symptoms mean.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61  | Next Page >