Search Results

Search found 21107 results on 845 pages for 'size optimization'.

Page 7/845 | < Previous Page | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14  | Next Page >

  • The Lasting Future of Search Engine Optimization

    The search engine optimization has surely a long lasting future these days. The worth of organic SEO has been increased due to its exclusive techniques involving On Page Optimization and Off Page Optimization. That is why you could find most of the lucrative SEO jobs on the internet nowadays.

    Read the article

  • 5 Strategic Reasons For Website Optimization

    Website optimization, also known as search engine optimization (SEO) helps your loyal customers discover your other products and services online, quicker and with much less effort. Moreover, website optimization is a proven way to find new customers who are right now searching for your type of products or services.

    Read the article

  • How to Associate Web Design With Search Engine Optimization

    Permanent one way link building is an important means of search engine optimization as the basic idea behind optimization is to establish link popularity. Meta tag optimization has also given adequate boost to many companies although this technique cannot be adopted by novices and requires the guidance of an established SEO firm. SEO is a huge business and one of the most offered service packages on the World Wide Web.

    Read the article

  • How to get star query optimization in SQL Server 2005

    - by Jan
    I have a star schema but SQL Server 2005 always uses the clustered indexes to access a table. What parameters do I have to set to enable this optimization. According to http://blogs.msdn.com/sqlqueryprocessing/archive/2007/04/09/how-to-check-whether-the-final-query-plan-is-optimized-for-star-join.aspx and the DWH datasheet of SQL Server 2005 both claim, that SQL Server 2005 support this feature.

    Read the article

  • Free Optimization Library in C#

    - by Ngu Soon Hui
    Is there any optimization library in C#? I have to optimize a complicated equation in excel, for this equation there are a few coefficients. And I have to optimize them according to a fitness function that I define. So I wonder whether there is such a library that does what I need?

    Read the article

  • Performance Optimization for Matrix Rotation

    - by Summer_More_More_Tea
    Hello everyone: I'm now trapped by a performance optimization lab in the book "Computer System from a Programmer's Perspective" described as following: In a N*N matrix M, where N is multiple of 32, the rotate operation can be represented as: Transpose: interchange elements M(i,j) and M(j,i) Exchange rows: Row i is exchanged with row N-1-i A example for matrix rotation(N is 3 instead of 32 for simplicity): ------- ------- |1|2|3| |3|6|9| ------- ------- |4|5|6| after rotate is |2|5|8| ------- ------- |7|8|9| |1|4|7| ------- ------- A naive implementation is: #define RIDX(i,j,n) ((i)*(n)+(j)) void naive_rotate(int dim, pixel *src, pixel *dst) { int i, j; for (i = 0; i < dim; i++) for (j = 0; j < dim; j++) dst[RIDX(dim-1-j, i, dim)] = src[RIDX(i, j, dim)]; } I come up with an idea by inner-loop-unroll. The result is: Code Version Speed Up original 1x unrolled by 2 1.33x unrolled by 4 1.33x unrolled by 8 1.55x unrolled by 16 1.67x unrolled by 32 1.61x I also get a code snippet from pastebin.com that seems can solve this problem: void rotate(int dim, pixel *src, pixel *dst) { int stride = 32; int count = dim >> 5; src += dim - 1; int a1 = count; do { int a2 = dim; do { int a3 = stride; do { *dst++ = *src; src += dim; } while(--a3); src -= dim * stride + 1; dst += dim - stride; } while(--a2); src += dim * (stride + 1); dst -= dim * dim - stride; } while(--a1); } After carefully read the code, I think main idea of this solution is treat 32 rows as a data zone, and perform the rotating operation respectively. Speed up of this version is 1.85x, overwhelming all the loop-unroll version. Here are the questions: In the inner-loop-unroll version, why does increment slow down if the unrolling factor increase, especially change the unrolling factor from 8 to 16, which does not effect the same when switch from 4 to 8? Does the result have some relationship with depth of the CPU pipeline? If the answer is yes, could the degrade of increment reflect pipeline length? What is the probable reason for the optimization of data-zone version? It seems that there is no too much essential difference from the original naive version. EDIT: My test environment is Intel Centrino Duo processor and the verion of gcc is 4.4 Any advice will be highly appreciated! Kind regards!

    Read the article

  • Need help with basic optimization problem

    - by ??iu
    I know little of optimization problems, so hopefully this will be didactic for me: rotors = [1, 2, 3, 4...] widgets = ['a', 'b', 'c', 'd' ...] assert len(rotors) == len(widgets) part_values = [ (1, 'a', 34), (1, 'b', 26), (1, 'c', 11), (1, 'd', 8), (2, 'a', 5), (2, 'b', 17), .... ] Given a fixed number of widgets and a fixed number of rotors, how can you get a series of widget-rotor pairs that maximizes the total value where each widget and rotor can only be used once?

    Read the article

  • C++ Performance/memory optimization guidelines

    - by ML
    Hi All, Does anyone have a resource for C++ memory optimization guidelines? Best practices, tuning, etc? As an example: Class xxx { public: xxx(); virtual ~xxx(); protected: private: }; Would there be ANY benefit on the compiler or memory allocation to get rid of protected and private since there there are no items that are protected and private in this class?

    Read the article

  • Any Javascript optimization benchmarks?

    - by int3
    I watched Nicholas Zakas' talk, Speed up your Javascript, with some interest. I liked how he benchmarked the various performance improvements created by various optimization techniques, e.g. reducing calls to deeply nested objects, changing loops to count down instead of up, etc. I would like to run these benchmarks myself though, to see exactly how our current browsers are faring. I guess it wouldn't be too difficult to cook up some timed loops, but I'd like to know if there are any existing implementations out there.

    Read the article

  • Java code optimization leads to numerical inaccuracies and errors

    - by rano
    I'm trying to implement a version of the Fuzzy C-Means algorithm in Java and I'm trying to do some optimization by computing just once everything that can be computed just once. This is an iterative algorithm and regarding the updating of a matrix, the clusters x pixels membership matrix U, this is the update rule I want to optimize: where the x are the element of a matrix X (pixels x features) and v belongs to the matrix V (clusters x features). And m is a parameter that ranges from 1.1 to infinity. The distance used is the euclidean norm. If I had to implement this formula in a banal way I'd do: for(int i = 0; i < X.length; i++) { int count = 0; for(int j = 0; j < V.length; j++) { double num = D[i][j]; double sumTerms = 0; for(int k = 0; k < V.length; k++) { double thisDistance = D[i][k]; sumTerms += Math.pow(num / thisDistance, (1.0 / (m - 1.0))); } U[i][j] = (float) (1f / sumTerms); } } In this way some optimization is already done, I precomputed all the possible squared distances between X and V and stored them in a matrix D but that is not enough, since I'm cycling througn the elements of V two times resulting in two nested loops. Looking at the formula the numerator of the fraction is independent of the sum so I can compute numerator and denominator independently and the denominator can be computed just once for each pixel. So I came to a solution like this: int nClusters = V.length; double exp = (1.0 / (m - 1.0)); for(int i = 0; i < X.length; i++) { int count = 0; for(int j = 0; j < nClusters; j++) { double distance = D[i][j]; double denominator = D[i][nClusters]; double numerator = Math.pow(distance, exp); U[i][j] = (float) (1f / (numerator * denominator)); } } Where I precomputed the denominator into an additional column of the matrix D while I was computing the distances: for (int i = 0; i < X.length; i++) { for (int j = 0; j < V.length; j++) { double sum = 0; for (int k = 0; k < nDims; k++) { final double d = X[i][k] - V[j][k]; sum += d * d; } D[i][j] = sum; D[i][B.length] += Math.pow(1 / D[i][j], exp); } } By doing so I encounter numerical differences between the 'banal' computation and the second one that leads to different numerical value in U (not in the first iterates but soon enough). I guess that the problem is that exponentiate very small numbers to high values (the elements of U can range from 0.0 to 1.0 and exp , for m = 1.1, is 10) leads to ver y small values, whereas by dividing the numerator and the denominator and THEN exponentiating the result seems to be better numerically. The problem is it involves much more operations. Am I doing something wrong? Is there a possible solution to get both the code optimized and numerically stable? Any suggestion or criticism will be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • A problem with conky in Gnome 3.4 [closed]

    - by Pranit Bauva
    Possible Duplicate: Conky not working in Gnome 3.4 My conky in Gnome 3.4 is not working. When I run a conky script nothing appears but the process is running. Please also see the debug code : pungi-man@pungi-man:~$ sh conky_startup.sh Conky: forked to background, pid is 3157 Conky: desktop window (c00023) is subwindow of root window (aa) Conky: window type - override Conky: drawing to created window (0x2200001) Conky: drawing to double buffer My conky script is : background yes update_interval 1 cpu_avg_samples 2 net_avg_samples 2 temperature_unit celsius double_buffer yes no_buffers yes text_buffer_size 2048 gap_x 10 gap_y 30 minimum_size 190 450 maximum_width 190 own_window yes own_window_type override own_window_transparent yes own_window_hints undecorate,sticky,skip_taskbar,skip_pager,below border_inner_margin 0 border_outer_margin 0 alignment tr draw_shades no draw_outline no draw_borders no draw_graph_borders no override_utf8_locale yes use_xft yes xftfont caviar dreams:size=8 xftalpha 0.5 uppercase no default_color FFFFFF color1 DDDDDD color2 AAAAAA color3 888888 color4 666666 lua_load /home/pungi-man/.conky/conky_grey.lua lua_draw_hook_post main TEXT ${voffset 35} ${goto 95}${color4}${font ubuntu:size=22}${time %e}${color1}${offset -50}${font ubuntu:size=10}${time %A} ${goto 85}${color2}${voffset -2}${font ubuntu:size=9}${time %b}${voffset -2} ${color3}${font ubuntu:size=12}${time %Y}${font} ${voffset 80} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:bold}${color}CPU ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${top name 1}${alignr}${top cpu 1}% ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color2}${top name 2}${alignr}${top cpu 2}% ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color3}${top name 3}${alignr}${top cpu 3}% ${goto 90}${cpugraph 10,100 666666 666666} ${goto 90}${voffset -10}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color}${threads} process ${voffset 20} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:bold}${color}MEM ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${top_mem name 1} ${alignr}${top_mem mem 1}% ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color2}${top_mem name 2} ${alignr}${top_mem mem 2}% ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color3}${top_mem name 3} ${alignr}${top_mem mem 3}% ${voffset 15} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:bold}${color}DISKS ${goto 90}${diskiograph 30,100 666666 666666}${voffset -30} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color}used: ${fs_used /home} /home ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color}used: ${fs_used /} / ${voffset 10} ${goto 70}${font Ubuntu:size=18,weight:bold}${color3}NET${alignr}${color2}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:bold}${color1}${if_up eth0}eth ${addr eth0} ${endif}${if_up wlan0}wifi ${addr wlan0}${endif} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:bold}${color}open ports: ${alignr}${color2}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 count} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:bold}${color}${offset 10}IP${alignr}DPORT ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 0}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 0} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 1}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 1} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 2}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 2} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 3}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 3} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 4}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 4} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 5}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 5} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 6}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 6} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 7}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 7} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 8}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 8} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 9}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 9} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 10}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 10} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 11}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 11} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 12}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 12} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 13}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 13} ${goto 90}${font Ubuntu:size=7,weight:normal}${color1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rip 14}${alignr 1}${tcp_portmon 1 65535 rport 14} This script works fine with unity but faces problems in gnome 3.4 Can anyone please sort it out?

    Read the article

  • Java code optimization on matrix windowing computes in more time

    - by rano
    I have a matrix which represents an image and I need to cycle over each pixel and for each one of those I have to compute the sum of all its neighbors, ie the pixels that belong to a window of radius rad centered on the pixel. I came up with three alternatives: The simplest way, the one that recomputes the window for each pixel The more optimized way that uses a queue to store the sums of the window columns and cycling through the columns of the matrix updates this queue by adding a new element and removing the oldes The even more optimized way that does not need to recompute the queue for each row but incrementally adjusts a previously saved one I implemented them in c++ using a queue for the second method and a combination of deques for the third (I need to iterate through their elements without destructing them) and scored their times to see if there was an actual improvement. it appears that the third method is indeed faster. Then I tried to port the code to Java (and I must admit that I'm not very comfortable with it). I used ArrayDeque for the second method and LinkedLists for the third resulting in the third being inefficient in time. Here is the simplest method in C++ (I'm not posting the java version since it is almost identical): void normalWindowing(int mat[][MAX], int cols, int rows, int rad){ int i, j; int h = 0; for (i = 0; i < rows; ++i) { for (j = 0; j < cols; j++) { h = 0; for (int ry =- rad; ry <= rad; ry++) { int y = i + ry; if (y >= 0 && y < rows) { for (int rx =- rad; rx <= rad; rx++) { int x = j + rx; if (x >= 0 && x < cols) { h += mat[y][x]; } } } } } } } Here is the second method (the one optimized through columns) in C++: void opt1Windowing(int mat[][MAX], int cols, int rows, int rad){ int i, j, h, y, col; queue<int>* q = NULL; for (i = 0; i < rows; ++i) { if (q != NULL) delete(q); q = new queue<int>(); h = 0; for (int rx = 0; rx <= rad; rx++) { if (rx < cols) { int mem = 0; for (int ry =- rad; ry <= rad; ry++) { y = i + ry; if (y >= 0 && y < rows) { mem += mat[y][rx]; } } q->push(mem); h += mem; } } for (j = 1; j < cols; j++) { col = j + rad; if (j - rad > 0) { h -= q->front(); q->pop(); } if (j + rad < cols) { int mem = 0; for (int ry =- rad; ry <= rad; ry++) { y = i + ry; if (y >= 0 && y < rows) { mem += mat[y][col]; } } q->push(mem); h += mem; } } } } And here is the Java version: public static void opt1Windowing(int [][] mat, int rad){ int i, j = 0, h, y, col; int cols = mat[0].length; int rows = mat.length; ArrayDeque<Integer> q = null; for (i = 0; i < rows; ++i) { q = new ArrayDeque<Integer>(); h = 0; for (int rx = 0; rx <= rad; rx++) { if (rx < cols) { int mem = 0; for (int ry =- rad; ry <= rad; ry++) { y = i + ry; if (y >= 0 && y < rows) { mem += mat[y][rx]; } } q.addLast(mem); h += mem; } } j = 0; for (j = 1; j < cols; j++) { col = j + rad; if (j - rad > 0) { h -= q.peekFirst(); q.pop(); } if (j + rad < cols) { int mem = 0; for (int ry =- rad; ry <= rad; ry++) { y = i + ry; if (y >= 0 && y < rows) { mem += mat[y][col]; } } q.addLast(mem); h += mem; } } } } I recognize this post will be a wall of text. Here is the third method in C++: void opt2Windowing(int mat[][MAX], int cols, int rows, int rad){ int i = 0; int j = 0; int h = 0; int hh = 0; deque< deque<int> *> * M = new deque< deque<int> *>(); for (int ry = 0; ry <= rad; ry++) { if (ry < rows) { deque<int> * q = new deque<int>(); M->push_back(q); for (int rx = 0; rx <= rad; rx++) { if (rx < cols) { int val = mat[ry][rx]; q->push_back(val); h += val; } } } } deque<int> * C = new deque<int>(M->front()->size()); deque<int> * Q = new deque<int>(M->front()->size()); deque<int> * R = new deque<int>(M->size()); deque< deque<int> *>::iterator mit; deque< deque<int> *>::iterator mstart = M->begin(); deque< deque<int> *>::iterator mend = M->end(); deque<int>::iterator rit; deque<int>::iterator rstart = R->begin(); deque<int>::iterator rend = R->end(); deque<int>::iterator cit; deque<int>::iterator cstart = C->begin(); deque<int>::iterator cend = C->end(); for (mit = mstart, rit = rstart; mit != mend, rit != rend; ++mit, ++rit) { deque<int>::iterator pit; deque<int>::iterator pstart = (* mit)->begin(); deque<int>::iterator pend = (* mit)->end(); for(cit = cstart, pit = pstart; cit != cend && pit != pend; ++cit, ++pit) { (* cit) += (* pit); (* rit) += (* pit); } } for (i = 0; i < rows; ++i) { j = 0; if (i - rad > 0) { deque<int>::iterator cit; deque<int>::iterator cstart = C->begin(); deque<int>::iterator cend = C->end(); deque<int>::iterator pit; deque<int>::iterator pstart = (M->front())->begin(); deque<int>::iterator pend = (M->front())->end(); for(cit = cstart, pit = pstart; cit != cend; ++cit, ++pit) { (* cit) -= (* pit); } deque<int> * k = M->front(); M->pop_front(); delete k; h -= R->front(); R->pop_front(); } int row = i + rad; if (row < rows && i > 0) { deque<int> * newQ = new deque<int>(); M->push_back(newQ); deque<int>::iterator cit; deque<int>::iterator cstart = C->begin(); deque<int>::iterator cend = C->end(); int rx; int tot = 0; for (rx = 0, cit = cstart; rx <= rad; rx++, ++cit) { if (rx < cols) { int val = mat[row][rx]; newQ->push_back(val); (* cit) += val; tot += val; } } R->push_back(tot); h += tot; } hh = h; copy(C->begin(), C->end(), Q->begin()); for (j = 1; j < cols; j++) { int col = j + rad; if (j - rad > 0) { hh -= Q->front(); Q->pop_front(); } if (j + rad < cols) { int val = 0; for (int ry =- rad; ry <= rad; ry++) { int y = i + ry; if (y >= 0 && y < rows) { val += mat[y][col]; } } hh += val; Q->push_back(val); } } } } And finally its Java version: public static void opt2Windowing(int [][] mat, int rad){ int cols = mat[0].length; int rows = mat.length; int i = 0; int j = 0; int h = 0; int hh = 0; LinkedList<LinkedList<Integer>> M = new LinkedList<LinkedList<Integer>>(); for (int ry = 0; ry <= rad; ry++) { if (ry < rows) { LinkedList<Integer> q = new LinkedList<Integer>(); M.addLast(q); for (int rx = 0; rx <= rad; rx++) { if (rx < cols) { int val = mat[ry][rx]; q.addLast(val); h += val; } } } } int firstSize = M.getFirst().size(); int mSize = M.size(); LinkedList<Integer> C = new LinkedList<Integer>(); LinkedList<Integer> Q = null; LinkedList<Integer> R = new LinkedList<Integer>(); for (int k = 0; k < firstSize; k++) { C.add(0); } for (int k = 0; k < mSize; k++) { R.add(0); } ListIterator<LinkedList<Integer>> mit; ListIterator<Integer> rit; ListIterator<Integer> cit; ListIterator<Integer> pit; for (mit = M.listIterator(), rit = R.listIterator(); mit.hasNext();) { Integer r = rit.next(); int rsum = 0; for (cit = C.listIterator(), pit = (mit.next()).listIterator(); cit.hasNext();) { Integer c = cit.next(); Integer p = pit.next(); rsum += p; cit.set(c + p); } rit.set(r + rsum); } for (i = 0; i < rows; ++i) { j = 0; if (i - rad > 0) { for(cit = C.listIterator(), pit = M.getFirst().listIterator(); cit.hasNext();) { Integer c = cit.next(); Integer p = pit.next(); cit.set(c - p); } M.removeFirst(); h -= R.getFirst(); R.removeFirst(); } int row = i + rad; if (row < rows && i > 0) { LinkedList<Integer> newQ = new LinkedList<Integer>(); M.addLast(newQ); int rx; int tot = 0; for (rx = 0, cit = C.listIterator(); rx <= rad; rx++) { if (rx < cols) { Integer c = cit.next(); int val = mat[row][rx]; newQ.addLast(val); cit.set(c + val); tot += val; } } R.addLast(tot); h += tot; } hh = h; Q = new LinkedList<Integer>(); Q.addAll(C); for (j = 1; j < cols; j++) { int col = j + rad; if (j - rad > 0) { hh -= Q.getFirst(); Q.pop(); } if (j + rad < cols) { int val = 0; for (int ry =- rad; ry <= rad; ry++) { int y = i + ry; if (y >= 0 && y < rows) { val += mat[y][col]; } } hh += val; Q.addLast(val); } } } } I guess that most is due to the poor choice of the LinkedList in Java and to the lack of an efficient (not shallow) copy method between two LinkedList. How can I improve the third Java method? Am I doing some conceptual error? As always, any criticisms is welcome. UPDATE Even if it does not solve the issue, using ArrayLists, as being suggested, instead of LinkedList improves the third method. The second one performs still better (but when the number of rows and columns of the matrix is lower than 300 and the window radius is small the first unoptimized method is the fastest in Java)

    Read the article

  • NPTL Default Stack Size Problem

    - by eyazici
    Hello, I am developing a multithread modular application using C programming language and NPTL 2.6. For each plugin, a POSIX thread is created. The problem is each thread has its own stack area, since default stack size depends on user's choice, this may results in huge memory consumption in some cases. To prevent unnecessary memory usage I used something similar to this to change stack size before creating each thread: pthread_attr_t attr; pthread_attr_init (&attr); pthread_attr_getstacksize(&attr, &st1); if(pthread_attr_setstacksize (&attr, MODULE_THREAD_SIZE) != 0) perror("Stack ERR"); pthread_attr_getstacksize(&attr, &st2); printf("OLD:%d, NEW:%d - MIN: %d\n", st1, st2, PTHREAD_STACK_MIN); pthread_attr_setdetachstate(&attr, PTHREAD_CREATE_DETACHED); /* "this" is static data structure that stores plugin related data */ pthread_create(&this->runner, &attr, (void *)(void *)this->run, NULL); EDIT I: pthread_create() section added. This did not work work as I expected, the stack size reported by pthread_attr_getstacksize() is changed but total memory usage of the application (from ps/top/pmap output) did not changed: OLD:10485760, NEW:65536 - MIN: 16384 When I use ulimit -s MY_STACK_SIZE_LIMIT before starting application I achieve the expected result. My questions are: 1-) Is there any portable(between UNIX variants) way to change (default)thread stack size after starting application(before creating thread of course)? 2-) Is it possible to use same stack area for every thread? 3-) Is it possible completely disable stack for threads without much pain?

    Read the article

  • Project Euler: Programmatic Optimization for Problem 7?

    - by bmucklow
    So I would call myself a fairly novice programmer as I focused mostly on hardware in my schooling and not a lot of Computer Science courses. So I solved Problem 7 of Project Euler: By listing the first six prime numbers: 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, and 13, we can see that the 6th prime is 13. What is the 10001st prime number? I managed to solve this without problem in Java, but when I ran my solution it took 8 and change seconds to run. I was wondering how this could be optimized from a programming standpoint, not a mathematical standpoint. Is the array looping and while statements the main things eating up processing time? And how could this be optimized? Again not looking for a fancy mathematical equation..there are plenty of those in the solution thread. SPOILER My solution is listed below. public class PrimeNumberList { private ArrayList<BigInteger> primesList = new ArrayList<BigInteger>(); public void fillList(int numberOfPrimes) { primesList.add(new BigInteger("2")); primesList.add(new BigInteger("3")); while (primesList.size() < numberOfPrimes){ getNextPrime(); } } private void getNextPrime() { BigInteger lastPrime = primesList.get(primesList.size()-1); BigInteger currentTestNumber = lastPrime; BigInteger modulusResult; boolean prime = false; while(!prime){ prime = true; currentTestNumber = currentTestNumber.add(new BigInteger("2")); for (BigInteger bi : primesList){ modulusResult = currentTestNumber.mod(bi); if (modulusResult.equals(BigInteger.ZERO)){ prime = false; break; } } if(prime){ primesList.add(currentTestNumber); } } } public BigInteger get(int primeTerm) { return primesList.get(primeTerm - 1); } }

    Read the article

  • PHP website Optimization

    - by ana
    I have a high traffic website and I need make sure my site is fast enough to display my pages to everyone rapidly. I searched on Google many articles about speed and optimization and here's what I found: Cache the page Save it to the disk Caching the page in memory: This is very fast but if I need to change the content of my page I have to remove it from cache and then re-save the file on the disk. Save it to disk This is very easy to maintain but every time the page is accessed I have to read on the disk. Which method should I go with? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Performance optimization strategies of last resort?

    - by jerryjvl
    There are plenty of performance questions on this site already, but it occurs to me that almost all are very problem-specific and fairly narrow. And almost all repeat the advice to avoid premature optimization. Let's assume: the code already is working correctly the algorithms chosen are already optimal for the circumstances of the problem the code has been measured, and the offending routines have been isolated all attempts to optimize will also be measured to ensure they do not make matters worse What I am looking for here is strategies and tricks to squeeze out up to the last few percent in a critical algorithm when there is nothing else left to do but whatever it takes. Ideally, try to make answers language agnostic, and indicate any down-sides to the suggested strategies where applicable. I'll add a reply with my own initial suggestions, and look forward to whatever else the SO community can think of.

    Read the article

  • Does MATLAB perform tail call optimization?

    - by Shea Levy
    I've recently learned Haskell, and am trying to carry the pure functional style over to my other code when possible. An important aspect of this is treating all variables as immutable, i.e. constants. In order to do so, many computations that would be implemented using loops in an imperative style have to be performed using recursion, which typically incurs a memory penalty due to the allocation a new stack frame for each function call. In the special case of a tail call (where the return value of a called function is immediately returned to the callee's caller), however, this penalty can be bypassed by a process called tail call optimization (in one method, this can be done by essentially replacing a call with a jmp after setting up the stack properly). Does MATLAB perform TCO by default, or is there a way to tell it to?

    Read the article

  • Including associations optimization in Rails

    - by Vitaly
    Hey, I'm looking for help with Ruby optimization regarding loading of associations on demand. This is simplified example. I have 3 models: Post, Comment, User. References are: Post has many comments and Comment has reference to User (:author). Now when I go to the post page, I expect to see post body + all comments (and their respective authors names). This requires following 2 queries: select * from Post -- to get post data (1 row) select * from Comment inner join User -- to get comment + usernames (N rows) In the code I have: Post.find(params[:id], :include => { :comments => [:author] } But it doesn't work as expected: as I see in the back end, there're still N+1 hits (some of them are cached though). How can I optimize that?

    Read the article

  • why optimization does not happen?

    - by aaa
    hi. I have C/C++ code, that looks like this: static int function(double *I) { int n = 0; // more instructions, loops, for (int i; ...; ++i) n += fabs(I[i] > tolerance); return n; } function(I); // return value is not used. compiler inlines function, however it does not optimize out n manipulations. I would expect compiler is able to recognize that value is never used as rhs only. Is there some side effect, which prevents optimization? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Static variable for optimization

    - by keithjgrant
    I'm wondering if I can use a static variable for optimization: public function Bar() { static $i = moderatelyExpensiveFunctionCall(); if ($i) { return something(); } else { return somethingElse(); } } I know that once $i is initialized, it won't be changed by by that line of code on successive calls to Bar(). I assume this means that moderatelyExpensiveFunctionCall() won't be evaluated every time I call, but I'd like to know for certain. Once PHP sees a static variable that has been initialized, does it skip over that line of code? In other words, is this going to optimize my execution time if I make a lot of calls to Bar(), or am I wasting my time?

    Read the article

  • Copy method optimization in compilers

    - by Dženan
    Hi All! I have the following code: void Stack::operator =(Stack &rhs) { //do the actual copying } Stack::Stack(Stack &rhs) //copy-constructor { top=NULL; //initialize this as an empty stack (which it is) *this=rhs; //invoke assignment operator } Stack& Stack::CopyStack() { return *this; //this statement will invoke copy contructor } It is being used like this: unsigned Stack::count() { unsigned c=0; Stack copy=CopyStack(); while (!copy.empty()) { copy.pop(); c++; } return c; } Removing reference symbol from declaration of CopyStack (returning a copy instead of reference) makes no difference in visual studio 2008 (with respect to number of times copying is invoked). I guess it gets optimized away - normally it should first make a copy for the return value, then call assignment operator once more to assign it to variable sc. What is your experience with this sort of optimization in different compilers? Regards, Dženan

    Read the article

  • Optimization of a c++ matrix/bitmap class

    - by Andrew
    I am searching a 2D matrix (or bitmap) class which is flexible but also fast element access. The contents A flexible class should allow you to choose dimensions during runtime, and would look something like this (simplified): class Matrix { public: Matrix(int w, int h) : data(new int[x*y]), width(w) {} void SetElement(int x, int y, int val) { data[x+y*width] = val; } // ... private: // symbols int width; int* data; }; A faster often proposed solution using templates is (simplified): template <int W, int H> class TMatrix { TMatrix() data(new int[W*H]) {} void SetElement(int x, int y, int val) { data[x+y*W] = val; } private: int* data; }; This is faster as the width can be "inlined" in the code. The first solution does not do this. However this is not very flexible anymore, as you can't change the size anymore at runtime. So my question is: Is there a possibility to tell the compiler to generate faster code (like when using the template solution), when the size in the code is fixed and generate flexible code when its runtime dependend? I tried to achieve this by writing "const" where ever possible. I tried it with gcc and VS2005, but no success. This kind of optimization would be useful for many other similar cases.

    Read the article

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