Search Results

Search found 2287 results on 92 pages for 'reads'.

Page 7/92 | < Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >

  • Django code organization

    - by iHeartDucks
    I am working on a Django app and I have a class which reads the contents of a file and returns a Django model. My question is where do I store this class in the file system? All this does is reads the file, populates a Django model and returns it. Thanks

    Read the article

  • How to write to stdin of another app?

    - by blez
    I have a module that reads StandartError of a process, all works fine, but I want to do something different. I don't know how redirect stdin like the native way: app1.exe -someargs | app2.exe -someargs Where app2 reads all the stdout of app1 in its stdin.

    Read the article

  • Java: thread-safe RandomAccessFile

    - by Folkert van Heusden
    Hi, After some serious googleing I found out that the RandomAccessFile-class is not thread-safe. Now I could use one semaphore to lock all reads and writes but I don't think that performs very well. In theory it should be possible to do multiple reads and one write at a time. How can I do this in Java? Is it possible at all? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Bash: how to process variables from an input file?

    - by gilgongo
    I've got a bash script that reads input from a file like this: while IFS="|" read -r a b do echo "$a something $b somethingelse" done < "$FILE" The file it reads looketh like this: http://someurl1.com|label1 http://someurl2.com|label2 However, I'd like to be able to insert the names of variables into that file when it suits me, and have the script process them when it sees them, so the file might look like this: http://someurl1.com?$VAR|label1 http://someurl2.com|label2 So $VAR could be, for example, today's date, producing an output like this: http://someurl1.com something label1 somethingelse http://someurl2.com?20100320 something label2 somethingelse

    Read the article

  • Handling of data truncation in FUSE

    - by Vi
    I expect any good program should do all their reads and writes in a loop until all data written/read without relying that write will write everything (even with regular files). Am I right? Implemented simple FUSE filesystem which only allows reading and writing with small buffers, very often returning that it is written less bytes that in a buffer (using -o direct_io). Some programs work, some not. Are them buggy or programs should not expect truncated writes and reads from the regular files?

    Read the article

  • C# Retrieve Canon Specific EXIF Data

    - by dkpatt
    I have wrote an app that reads the basic EXIF data from an image via the PropertyItems exposed in .Net's System.Drawing.Image class. However, I cannot retrieve Canon specific EXIF data via these properties. How does one read this information? I know it exist in the file as Photoshop reads it.

    Read the article

  • applescript for sqlite

    - by user1212108
    I have a Windows app called via Shell from MS Word that reads and writes to Sqlite. I'm porting it to Mac. On windows I have a batch file: SQLite3.exe pathtodb\databasename <sqlitecommands.txt This batch calls the Sqlite command line program, attachs the database, and reads the command from sqlitecommands.txt. The sqlitecommands is dynamically modified(by Word VBA) to read (Select) Write (Update) to/from the database. What is the format of an applescript to do the same thing in Mac OSX?

    Read the article

  • 2 drives, slow software RAID1 (md)

    - by bart613
    Hello, I've got a server from hetzner.de (EQ4) with 2* SAMSUNG HD753LJ drives (750G 32MB cache). OS is CentOS 5 (x86_64). Drives are combined together into two RAID1 partitions: /dev/md0 which is 512MB big and has only /boot partitions /dev/md1 which is over 700GB big and is one big LVM which hosts other partitions Now, I've been running some benchmarks and it seems like even though exactly the same drives, speed differs a bit on each of them. # hdparm -tT /dev/sda /dev/sda: Timing cached reads: 25612 MB in 1.99 seconds = 12860.70 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 352 MB in 3.01 seconds = 116.80 MB/sec # hdparm -tT /dev/sdb /dev/sdb: Timing cached reads: 25524 MB in 1.99 seconds = 12815.99 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 342 MB in 3.01 seconds = 113.64 MB/sec Also, when I run eg. pgbench which is stressing IO quite heavily, I can see following from iostat output: Device: rrqm/s wrqm/s r/s w/s rsec/s wsec/s avgrq-sz avgqu-sz await svctm %util sda 0.00 231.40 0.00 298.00 0.00 9683.20 32.49 0.17 0.58 0.34 10.24 sda1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sda2 0.00 231.40 0.00 298.00 0.00 9683.20 32.49 0.17 0.58 0.34 10.24 sdb 0.00 231.40 0.00 301.80 0.00 9740.80 32.28 14.19 51.17 3.10 93.68 sdb1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sdb2 0.00 231.40 0.00 301.80 0.00 9740.80 32.28 14.19 51.17 3.10 93.68 md1 0.00 0.00 0.00 529.60 0.00 9692.80 18.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 md0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 dm-0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.00 4.80 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 dm-1 0.00 0.00 0.00 529.00 0.00 9688.00 18.31 24.51 49.91 1.81 95.92 Device: rrqm/s wrqm/s r/s w/s rsec/s wsec/s avgrq-sz avgqu-sz await svctm %util sda 0.00 152.40 0.00 330.60 0.00 5176.00 15.66 0.19 0.57 0.19 6.24 sda1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sda2 0.00 152.40 0.00 330.60 0.00 5176.00 15.66 0.19 0.57 0.19 6.24 sdb 0.00 152.40 0.00 326.20 0.00 5118.40 15.69 19.96 55.36 3.01 98.16 sdb1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sdb2 0.00 152.40 0.00 326.20 0.00 5118.40 15.69 19.96 55.36 3.01 98.16 md1 0.00 0.00 0.00 482.80 0.00 5166.40 10.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 md0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 dm-0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 dm-1 0.00 0.00 0.00 482.80 0.00 5166.40 10.70 30.19 56.92 2.05 99.04 Device: rrqm/s wrqm/s r/s w/s rsec/s wsec/s avgrq-sz avgqu-sz await svctm %util sda 0.00 181.64 0.00 324.55 0.00 5445.11 16.78 0.15 0.45 0.21 6.87 sda1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sda2 0.00 181.64 0.00 324.55 0.00 5445.11 16.78 0.15 0.45 0.21 6.87 sdb 0.00 181.84 0.00 328.54 0.00 5493.01 16.72 18.34 61.57 3.01 99.00 sdb1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sdb2 0.00 181.84 0.00 328.54 0.00 5493.01 16.72 18.34 61.57 3.01 99.00 md1 0.00 0.00 0.00 506.39 0.00 5477.05 10.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 md0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 dm-0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 dm-1 0.00 0.00 0.00 506.39 0.00 5477.05 10.82 28.77 62.15 1.96 99.00 And this is completely getting me confused. How come two exactly the same specced drives have such a difference in write speed (see util%)? I haven't really paid attention to those speeds before, so perhaps that something normal -- if someone could confirm I would be really grateful. Otherwise, if someone have seen such behavior again or knows what is causing such behavior I would really appreciate answer. I'll also add that both "smartctl -a" and "hdparm -I" output are exactly the same and are not indicating any hardware problems. The slower drive was changed already two times (to new ones). Also I asked to change the drives with places, and then sda were slower and sdb quicker (so the slow one was the same drive). SATA cables were changed two times already.

    Read the article

  • Benchmarking MySQL Replication with Multi-Threaded Slaves

    - by Mat Keep
    0 0 1 1145 6530 Homework 54 15 7660 14.0 Normal 0 false false false EN-US JA X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;} The objective of this benchmark is to measure the performance improvement achieved when enabling the Multi-Threaded Slave enhancement delivered as a part MySQL 5.6. As the results demonstrate, Multi-Threaded Slaves delivers 5x higher replication performance based on a configuration with 10 databases/schemas. For real-world deployments, higher replication performance directly translates to: · Improved consistency of reads from slaves (i.e. reduced risk of reading "stale" data) · Reduced risk of data loss should the master fail before replicating all events in its binary log (binlog) The multi-threaded slave splits processing between worker threads based on schema, allowing updates to be applied in parallel, rather than sequentially. This delivers benefits to those workloads that isolate application data using databases - e.g. multi-tenant systems deployed in cloud environments. Multi-Threaded Slaves are just one of many enhancements to replication previewed as part of the MySQL 5.6 Development Release, which include: · Global Transaction Identifiers coupled with MySQL utilities for automatic failover / switchover and slave promotion · Crash Safe Slaves and Binlog · Optimized Row Based Replication · Replication Event Checksums · Time Delayed Replication These and many more are discussed in the “MySQL 5.6 Replication: Enabling the Next Generation of Web & Cloud Services” Developer Zone article  Back to the benchmark - details are as follows. Environment The test environment consisted of two Linux servers: · one running the replication master · one running the replication slave. Only the slave was involved in the actual measurements, and was based on the following configuration: - Hardware: Oracle Sun Fire X4170 M2 Server - CPU: 2 sockets, 6 cores with hyper-threading, 2930 MHz. - OS: 64-bit Oracle Enterprise Linux 6.1 - Memory: 48 GB Test Procedure Initial Setup: Two MySQL servers were started on two different hosts, configured as replication master and slave. 10 sysbench schemas were created, each with a single table: CREATE TABLE `sbtest` (    `id` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT,    `k` int(10) unsigned NOT NULL DEFAULT '0',    `c` char(120) NOT NULL DEFAULT '',    `pad` char(60) NOT NULL DEFAULT '',    PRIMARY KEY (`id`),    KEY `k` (`k`) ) ENGINE=InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET=latin1 10,000 rows were inserted in each of the 10 tables, for a total of 100,000 rows. When the inserts had replicated to the slave, the slave threads were stopped. The slave data directory was copied to a backup location and the slave threads position in the master binlog noted. 10 sysbench clients, each configured with 10 threads, were spawned at the same time to generate a random schema load against each of the 10 schemas on the master. Each sysbench client executed 10,000 "update key" statements: UPDATE sbtest set k=k+1 WHERE id = <random row> In total, this generated 100,000 update statements to later replicate during the test itself. Test Methodology: The number of slave workers to test with was configured using: SET GLOBAL slave_parallel_workers=<workers> Then the slave IO thread was started and the test waited for all the update queries to be copied over to the relay log on the slave. The benchmark clock was started and then the slave SQL thread was started. The test waited for the slave SQL thread to finish executing the 100k update queries, doing "select master_pos_wait()". When master_pos_wait() returned, the benchmark clock was stopped and the duration calculated. The calculated duration from the benchmark clock should be close to the time it took for the SQL thread to execute the 100,000 update queries. The 100k queries divided by this duration gave the benchmark metric, reported as Queries Per Second (QPS). Test Reset: The test-reset cycle was implemented as follows: · the slave was stopped · the slave data directory replaced with the previous backup · the slave restarted with the slave threads replication pointer repositioned to the point before the update queries in the binlog. The test could then be repeated with identical set of queries but a different number of slave worker threads, enabling a fair comparison. The Test-Reset cycle was repeated 3 times for 0-24 number of workers and the QPS metric calculated and averaged for each worker count. MySQL Configuration The relevant configuration settings used for MySQL are as follows: binlog-format=STATEMENT relay-log-info-repository=TABLE master-info-repository=TABLE As described in the test procedure, the slave_parallel_workers setting was modified as part of the test logic. The consequence of changing this setting is: 0 worker threads:    - current (i.e. single threaded) sequential mode    - 1 x IO thread and 1 x SQL thread    - SQL thread both reads and executes the events 1 worker thread:    - sequential mode    - 1 x IO thread, 1 x Coordinator SQL thread and 1 x Worker thread    - coordinator reads the event and hands it to the worker who executes 2+ worker threads:    - parallel execution    - 1 x IO thread, 1 x Coordinator SQL thread and 2+ Worker threads    - coordinator reads events and hands them to the workers who execute them Results Figure 1 below shows that Multi-Threaded Slaves deliver ~5x higher replication performance when configured with 10 worker threads, with the load evenly distributed across our 10 x schemas. This result is compared to the current replication implementation which is based on a single SQL thread only (i.e. zero worker threads). Figure 1: 5x Higher Performance with Multi-Threaded Slaves The following figure shows more detailed results, with QPS sampled and reported as the worker threads are incremented. The raw numbers behind this graph are reported in the Appendix section of this post. Figure 2: Detailed Results As the results above show, the configuration does not scale noticably from 5 to 9 worker threads. When configured with 10 worker threads however, scalability increases significantly. The conclusion therefore is that it is desirable to configure the same number of worker threads as schemas. Other conclusions from the results: · Running with 1 worker compared to zero workers just introduces overhead without the benefit of parallel execution. · As expected, having more workers than schemas adds no visible benefit. Aside from what is shown in the results above, testing also demonstrated that the following settings had a very positive effect on slave performance: relay-log-info-repository=TABLE master-info-repository=TABLE For 5+ workers, it was up to 2.3 times as fast to run with TABLE compared to FILE. Conclusion As the results demonstrate, Multi-Threaded Slaves deliver significant performance increases to MySQL replication when handling multiple schemas. This, and the other replication enhancements introduced in MySQL 5.6 are fully available for you to download and evaluate now from the MySQL Developer site (select Development Release tab). You can learn more about MySQL 5.6 from the documentation  Please don’t hesitate to comment on this or other replication blogs with feedback and questions. Appendix – Detailed Results

    Read the article

  • “Query cost (relative to the batch)” <> Query cost relative to batch

    - by Dave Ballantyne
    OK, so that is quite a contradictory title, but unfortunately it is true that a common misconception is that the query with the highest percentage relative to batch is the worst performing.  Simply put, it is a lie, or more accurately we dont understand what these figures mean. Consider the two below simple queries: SELECT * FROM Person.BusinessEntity JOIN Person.BusinessEntityAddress ON Person.BusinessEntity.BusinessEntityID = Person.BusinessEntityAddress.BusinessEntityID go SELECT * FROM Sales.SalesOrderDetail JOIN Sales.SalesOrderHeader ON Sales.SalesOrderDetail.SalesOrderID = Sales.SalesOrderHeader.SalesOrderID After executing these and looking at the plans, I see this : So, a 13% / 87% split ,  but 13% / 87% of WHAT ? CPU ? Duration ? Reads ? Writes ? or some magical weighted algorithm ?  In a Profiler trace of the two we can find the metrics we are interested in. CPU and duration are well out but what about reads (210 and 1935)? To save you doing the maths, though you are more than welcome to, that’s a 90.2% / 9.8% split.  Close, but no cigar. Lets try a different tact.  Looking at the execution plan the “Estimated Subtree cost” of query 1 is 0.29449 and query 2 its 1.96596.  Again to save you the maths that works out to 13.03% and 86.97%, round those and thats the figures we are after.  But, what is the worrying word there ? “Estimated”.  So these are not “actual”  execution costs,  but what’s the problem in comparing the estimated costs to derive a meaning of “Most Costly”.  Well, in the case of simple queries such as the above , probably not a lot.  In more complicated queries , a fair bit. By modifying the second query to also show the total number of lines on each order SELECT *,COUNT(*) OVER (PARTITION BY Sales.SalesOrderDetail.SalesOrderID) FROM Sales.SalesOrderDetail JOIN Sales.SalesOrderHeader ON Sales.SalesOrderDetail.SalesOrderID = Sales.SalesOrderHeader.SalesOrderID The split in percentages is now 6% / 94% and the profiler metrics are : Even more of a discrepancy. Estimates can be out with actuals for a whole host of reasons,  scalar UDF’s are a particular bug bear of mine and in-fact the cost of a udf call is entirely hidden inside the execution plan.  It always estimates to 0 (well, a very small number). Take for instance the following udf Create Function dbo.udfSumSalesForCustomer(@CustomerId integer) returns money as begin Declare @Sum money Select @Sum= SUM(SalesOrderHeader.TotalDue) from Sales.SalesOrderHeader where CustomerID = @CustomerId return @Sum end If we have two statements , one that fires the udf and another that doesn't: Select CustomerID from Sales.Customer order by CustomerID go Select CustomerID,dbo.udfSumSalesForCustomer(Customer.CustomerID) from Sales.Customer order by CustomerID The costs relative to batch is a 50/50 split, but the has to be an actual cost of firing the udf. Indeed profiler shows us : No where even remotely near 50/50!!!! Moving forward to window framing functionality in SQL Server 2012 the optimizer sees ROWS and RANGE ( see here for their functional differences) as the same ‘cost’ too SELECT SalesOrderDetailID,SalesOrderId, SUM(LineTotal) OVER(PARTITION BY salesorderid ORDER BY Salesorderdetailid RANGE unbounded preceding) from Sales.SalesOrderdetail go SELECT SalesOrderDetailID,SalesOrderId, SUM(LineTotal) OVER(PARTITION BY salesorderid ORDER BY Salesorderdetailid Rows unbounded preceding) from Sales.SalesOrderdetail By now it wont be a great display to show you the Profiler trace reads a *tiny* bit different. So moral of the story, Percentage relative to batch can give a rough ‘finger in the air’ measurement, but dont rely on it as fact.

    Read the article

  • Columnstore Case Study #1: MSIT SONAR Aggregations

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

    Read the article

  • Columnstore Case Study #1: MSIT SONAR Aggregations

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

    Read the article

  • Python: How to execute a SQL file or command

    - by Mestika
    Hi, I have this Python script: import sys import getopt import timeit import random import os import re import ibm_db import time from string import maketrans runs=5 queries=50 file = open("results.txt", "a") for r in range(5): print "Run %s\n" % r os.system("python reads.py -r1 -pquery1.sql -q50 -sespec") file.write('END QUERY READ 01') file.close() os.system("python query_read_02.py") Everything here is working, it is creating the results.txt file, it run the os.system("python reads.py...") file and that file is doing everything it's suppose to, but the problem comes when go and run the query_read_02.py file. In this file, it should execute a SQL command or a SQL file on my database, so I can create an index and see what the performance of that input is, but how do i do it? I create the connection to the database in the reads.py file, but it's hard to create the queries in there because I doesn't keep track of which file it has reached, it just execute commands from what the parameters are. I hope I've explained myself clear enough, otherwise please let me know. I just want to execute a SQL command or file which each query_read_0x.py file. Sincerely Mestika

    Read the article

  • Using Flash comboboxes with Jaws

    - by Zoe Gagnon
    I'm working on a project for a government agency which requires 508 compliance. Our product is written for Flash 10 in ActionScript 3 using Flash CS4. We are doing this 100% programatically. We have almost all of the elements working properly, but when accessing combobox components, we have a problem. The combobox can be tabbed to directly with no problem, and the drop-down can be navigated directly with the arrow keys. However, when navigating, it reads the last item in the dropdown, not the current. For example, consider a combobox with the list of selections: first, second. Jaws reads the prompt fine, but when we press the down arrow to select the first item, it reads nothing. Pressing the down arrow again (so "second" is selected) causes it to read "first". Pressing down a final time causes it to read "second". I am completely baffled by this, and it is probably as likely that we don't know how to use Jaws, or that Flash simply can't support this function properly. If you have any suggestions for how we can resolve this, I would really appreciate it.

    Read the article

  • How good is the memory mapped Circular Buffer on Wikipedia?

    - by abroun
    I'm trying to implement a circular buffer in C, and have come across this example on Wikipedia. It looks as if it would provide a really nice interface for anyone reading from the buffer, as reads which wrap around from the end to the beginning of the buffer are handled automatically. So all reads are contiguous. However, I'm a bit unsure about using it straight away as I don't really have much experience with memory mapping or virtual memory and I'm not sure that I fully understand what it's doing. What I think I understand is that it's mapping a shared memory file the size of the buffer into memory twice. Then, whenever data is written into the buffer it appears in memory in 2 places at once. This allows all reads to be contiguous. What would be really great is if someone with more experience of POSIX memory mapping could have a quick look at the code and tell me if the underlying mechanism used is really that efficient. Am I right in thinking for example that the file in /dev/shm used for the shared memory always stays in RAM or could it get written to the hard drive (performance hit) at some point? Are there any gotchas I should be aware of? As it stands, I'm probably going to use a simpler method for my current project, but it'd be good to understand this to have it in my toolbox for the future. Thanks in advance for your time.

    Read the article

  • How the reading from and writing to sockets are synchronized?

    - by Roman
    We create a socket. On one side of the socket we have a "server" and on another side there is a "client". Both, the server and client, can write to and read from the socket. It is what i understand. I do not understand the following things: If a server reads from the socket, does it see in the socket only those stuff which was written to the socket by the client? I mean if server writes something to the socket and than reads from the socket, will it (server) see in the socket the stuff it (server) wrote there? I hope not. Let's consider the following situation. A client write something to the socket and then it writes something new to the socket and then server reads from the socket. What will the server see there? Only the "new" stuff written by the client or both "new" and "old" one? If a client (or server) writes to the socket, can it see if the written information was received by other side? For example out.println("Hello, Server!") will return true it server received this message.

    Read the article

  • ActionScript 3.0 Color Output Error?

    - by TheDarkIn1978
    I'm employing color in a current AS3 project, and have come across what appears to be an error in the Flash Player (version 10). it might also be an error with Apple's DigitalColor Meter (version 3.7.2), which is what i'm using to sample the displayed colors on Mac OS X Snow Leopard (version 10.6.3). //Primary, secondary, and tertiary colors of the RGB color wheel var red:Number = 0xFF0000; var orange:Number = 0xFF7D00; var yellow:Number = 0xFFFF00; var chartreuse:Number = 0x7DFF00; var green:Number = 0x00FF00; var spring:Number = 0x00FF7D; var cyan:Number = 0x00FFFF; var azure:Number = 0x007DFF; //reads 0x0077FF var blue:Number = 0x0000FF; var violet:Number = 0x7D00FF; var magenta:Number = 0xFF00FF; //reads 0xFF00F8 var rose:Number = 0xFF007D; //reads 0xFF0077 all of these colors display normally except for 3: Azure, Magenta and Rose. they are coded with the appropriate number, but when i use the color meter to sample the displayed colors, those 3 return inaccurate results. anyone have any insight about this issue? what is causing the error, the Flash runtime or the color sampler? if it's the Flash player, could this problem be much deeper? *sampling this image will return inaccurate results due to .jpg compression. it's simply for illustration

    Read the article

  • Improving File Read Performance (single file, C++, Windows)

    - by david
    I have large (hundreds of MB or more) files that I need to read blocks from using C++ on Windows. Currently the relevant functions are: errorType LargeFile::read( void* data_out, __int64 start_position, __int64 size_bytes ) const { if( !m_open ) { // return error } else { seekPosition( start_position ); DWORD bytes_read; BOOL result = ReadFile( m_file, data_out, DWORD( size_bytes ), &bytes_read, NULL ); if( size_bytes != bytes_read || result != TRUE ) { // return error } } // return no error } void LargeFile::seekPosition( __int64 position ) const { LARGE_INTEGER target; target.QuadPart = LONGLONG( position ); SetFilePointerEx( m_file, target, NULL, FILE_BEGIN ); } The performance of the above does not seem to be very good. Reads are on 4K blocks of the file. Some reads are coherent, most are not. A couple questions: Is there a good way to profile the reads? What things might improve the performance? For example, would sector-aligning the data be useful? I'm relatively new to file i/o optimization, so suggestions or pointers to articles/tutorials would be helpful.

    Read the article

  • Changes in Access DB are not saved since updating to Windows 7

    - by ytoledano
    Hi I'm working with a program that accesses an MS-Access DB. The problem is that if I open the db file with Access, the values I see aren't the values I see when I'm using the program. For example, There is a table PARAMS with various program variables, one of them is the date I last loaded a certain file. In access it reads April 12th 2010, while in the program it reads May 7th 2010 (this is correct). April 12th is about the time I upgraded the computer to Windows 7. Also, the mdb file sits next to the program executable in C:\Program Files (x86); and I know that Win7 doesn't allow programs to write to the program files dir. So where are the changes saved? What I've tried: I've tried opening the mdb file on another computer - still reads the wrong (old) values I've tried copying the entire program dir to a different folder - now both the program and ms-access read the wrong values. Can someone tell me how to get a version of the DB with all the values up to date with the program? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Increment the number of times an article has been read

    - by r.sendecky
    I have a situation where I need to increase the number of time article has been read. Once someone opens an article it should be reflected in the database by incrementing number of reads by one. Simple. Sending POST request to the server increments the number of reads by one. The article in question is supplied via URL parameter. Doing it manually by typing the URL in a browser works as expected. So server side is not at fault. My problems start with the javascript side of it or rather jquery. I hook the event to the article link. So every time a user clicks on the article link it increments the number of reads like so: $('#list-articles .article-link').click(function(e){ var oid = $(this).parent().parent().attr('data-oid').toString(); //Get the article id $.post( "/articles/viewed/" + oid ); }); Now this does not work! Number is not increased. I don't prevent default action since I need the link to actually open and display the article. Now if I put an alert right after the post like this: $('#list-articles .article-link').click(function(e){ var oid = $(this).parent().parent().attr('data-oid').toString(); //Get the article id $.post( "/articles/viewed/" + oid ); alert(oid); }); This variant works. After I dismiss the alert window, the number is incremented. Why is this so?? How can I fix this to actually work without the alert event present?

    Read the article

  • Why doesn't `stdin.read()` read entire buffer?

    - by Shookie
    I've got the following code: def get_input(self): """ Reads command from stdin, returns its JSON form """ json_string = sys.stdin.read() print("json string is: "+json_string) json_data =json.loads(json_string) return json_data It reads a json string that was sent to it from another process. The json is read from stdin. For some reason I get the following output: json string is: <Some json here> json string is: Traceback (most recent call last): File "/Users/Matan/Documents/workspace/ProjectSH/addonmanager/addon_manager.py", line 63, in <module> manager.accept_commands() File "/Users/Matan/Documents/workspace/ProjectSH/addonmanager/addon_manager.py", line 49, in accept_commands json_data = self.get_input() File "/Users/Matan/Documents/workspace/ProjectSH/addonmanager/addon_manager.py", line 42, in get_input json_data =json.loads(json_string) File "/System/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.7/lib/python2.7/json/__init__.py", line 338, in loads return _default_decoder.decode(s) File "/System/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.7/lib/python2.7/json/decoder.py", line 365, in decode obj, end = self.raw_decode(s, idx=_w(s, 0).end()) File "/System/Library/Frameworks/Python.framework/Versions/2.7/lib/python2.7/json/decoder.py", line 383, in raw_decode raise ValueError("No JSON object could be decoded") So for some reason it reads an empty string from stdin instead of reading only the json. I've checked, and the code that writes to this process's stdin writes to it only once. What's wrong here?

    Read the article

  • iPhone tethering via USB not working

    - by arneevertsson
    I can't get USB tethering to work. My setup: iMac with Mac OS 10.6.2 iPhone 3G, Sofware version 3.1.2 (Build 7D11) The phone shows up in iTunes and syncing works as it should. I went to System Preferences / Network and added the iPhone as a Network Service. To the right there is a status message for the selected service. With the iPhone not plugged in, the status message reads: Either the cable for iPhone is not plugged in or the device is not responding. With the iPhone plugged in, the status message reads: Either the cable for iPhone USB is not plugged in or the device is not responding. Almost identical messages, the only difference is "USB". Any clues?

    Read the article

  • Apache2 Startup warning: NameVirtualHost *:80 has no VirtualHosts

    - by Kit Roed
    When my Ubuntu Apache server (apache2) starts up I get a warning message that reads: [warn] NameVirtualHost *:80 has no VirtualHosts however, the web server is working fine... could anyone explain what I might have wrong in my site's configuration to make it give me this warning? the config file in question (located in /etc/apache2/sites-available) reads like this (details removed for brevity) <VirtualHost *> <Location /mysite> # config details here... </Location> # use the following for authorization <LocationMatch "/mysite/login"> AuthType Basic AuthName "My Site" AuthUserFile /etc/sitepasswords/passwd Require valid-user </LocationMatch> </VirtualHost> Could the fact that I'm using <Location> be a part of the problem?

    Read the article

  • Microsoft Word 2007 opening all docs with field codes toggled off

    - by WilliamKF
    Recently, something changed with my Microsoft Word 2007 installation/preferences on Windows XP, such that whenever I open a word document, all the field codes are displayed raw instead of as their expanded value. For example, my header reads: My Name { TITLE \* MERGEFORMAT } Version { REVNUM \* MERGEFORMAT } But, if I copy and paste it here, it reads expanded: My Name My Doc Title Version 42 I expect to see the copy and paste version directly inside Word, I can work around this by right clicking on each such field and choosing toggle field codes, however, I never had to do that before, as previously, the document opened with all such field codes expanded. Another example is the Table of Contents which shows as: { TOC \o "1-3" \h \z \u } Instead of the full table of contents. I searched the word options dialog, but could not find anything that appeared relevant. Please suggest how to restore the old behavior.

    Read the article

  • Bypass RDP Client Warning

    - by Butcher
    How do I bypass the security warning in the RDP Client everytime you launch it from a RDP shortcut? The message title reads: "The publisher of this remote connection cannot be identified. Do you want to connect anyway?" There's a checkbox that reads: "Don't ask me again for connections to this computer" If we check that, it rights the following registry key: [HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Terminal Server Client\LocalDevices] "MachineIP or Name"=dword:00000004 I'm trying to bypass this warning by writing this registry values before I run the RDP. The problem is that the dword value varies. I found that in one machine (Win7), it was 4, but in another machine (XP), the value was 72 decimal. Does it vary depending on your OS, or is it by the RDP client version? Other info: Signing all my RDP files is NOT an option. Checking the checkbox is NOT an option as we are trying to automate some stuff with a C# tool. Thank you

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >