Search Results

Search found 13341 results on 534 pages for '1 obiee performance tuning'.

Page 85/534 | < Previous Page | 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92  | Next Page >

• Need help trying to diagnose Symmetrix SAN performance issues

  - by arcain

  I am helping to benchmark hardware for a new SQL Server instance, and the volume presented to the OS for the data files is carved from a set of spindles on a Symmetrix SAN. The server has yet to have SQL Server installed, so the only activity on the box is our benchmarking. Now, our storage engineers say that this volume and it's resources are dedicated to our new server (I don't have access to see the actual SAN config) however the performance benchmarks are troubling. For example, the numbers look good until suddenly, and randomly, we see in our IO benchmarking tool wait times of 100 seconds, and disk queue lengths of 255 in perfmon. This SAN has an 8 GB cache, plus there are other applications besides ours that use the SAN. I'm wondering if (even though the spindles for our volumes should be dedicated to us) the cache may be getting hammered during the performance testing, or perhaps the spindles our volumes are on aren't really dedicated to us. We're not getting much traction from our storage engineers in helping us track down the problem, so if anybody has experience with diagnosing a problem like this and would like to share insights and troubleshooting methodologies, I'd appreciate it.

  Read the article

• python threading and performace?

  - by kumar

  I had to do heavy I/o bound operation, i.e Parsing large files and converting from one format to other format. Initially I used to do it serially, i.e parsing one after another..! Performance was very poor ( it used take 90+ seconds). So I decided to use threading to improve the performance. I created one thread for each file. ( 4 threads) for file in file_list: t=threading.Thread(target = self.convertfile,args = file) t.start() ts.append(t) for t in ts: t.join() But for my astonishment, there is no performance improvement whatsoever. Now also it takes around 90+ seconds to complete the task. As this is I/o bound operation , I had expected to improve the performance. What am I doing wrong?

  Read the article

• How does TopCoder evaluates code?

  - by Carlos

  If you are familiar with TopCoder you know that your source-code gets a final "grade/points" this depends on time, how many compiles, etc, one of the highest weighted being performance. But how can they test that, is there some sort of simple code (java or c++) to do it that you could share for me to evaluate and hopefully write my own to test the programs I write for University? This is sort of a follow up question to this one where I ask if shorter code results in best performance. P.S: Im interested in both of how topcoders knows performance and writing code to test performance.

  Read the article

• What is the correct stage to use for Google Guice in production in an application server?

  - by Yishai

  It seems like a strange question (the obvious answer would Production, duh), but if you read the java docs: /** * We want fast startup times at the expense of runtime performance and some up front error * checking. */ DEVELOPMENT, /** * We want to catch errors as early as possible and take performance hits up front. */ PRODUCTION Assuming a scenario where you have a stateless call to an application server, the initial receiving method (or there abouts) creates the injector new every call. If there all of the module bindings are not needed in a given call, then it would seem to have been better to use the Development stage (which is the default) and not take the performance hit upfront, because you may never take it at all, and here the distinction between "upfront" and "runtime performance" is kind of moot, as it is one call. Of course the downside of this would appear to be that you would lose the error checking, causing potential code paths to cause a problem by surprise. So the question boils down to are the assumptions in the above correct? Will you save performance on a large set of modules when the given lifetime of an injector is one call?

  Read the article

• My program is spending most of its time in objc_msgSend. Does that mean that Objective-C has bad per

  - by Paperflyer

  Hello Stackoverflow. I have written an application that has a number of custom views and generally draws a lot of lines and bitmaps. Since performance is somewhat critical for the application, I spent a good amount of time optimizing draw performance. Now, activity monitor tells me that my application is usually using about 12% CPU and Instrument (the profiler) says that a whopping 10% CPU is spent in objc_msgSend (mostly in drawing related system calls). On the one hand, I am glad about this since it means that my drawing is about as fast as it gets and my optimizations where a huge success. On the other hand, it seems to imply that the only thing that is still using my CPU is the Objective-C overhead for messages (objc_msgSend). Hence, that if I had written the application in, say, Carbon, its performance would be drastically better. Now I am tempted to conclude that Objective-C is a language with bad performance, even though Cocoa seems to be awfully efficient since it can apparently draw faster than Objective-C can send messages. So, is Objective-C really a language with bad performance? What do you think about that?

  Read the article

• Linux iptables / conntrack performance issue

  - by tim

  I have a test-setup in the lab with 4 machines: 2 old P4 machines (t1, t2) 1 Xeon 5420 DP 2.5 GHz 8 GB RAM (t3) Intel e1000 1 Xeon 5420 DP 2.5 GHz 8 GB RAM (t4) Intel e1000 to test linux firewall performance since we got bitten by a number of syn-flood attacks in the last months. All machines run Ubuntu 12.04 64bit. t1, t2, t3 are interconnected through an 1GB/s switch, t4 is connected to t3 via an extra interface. So t3 simulates the firewall, t4 is the target, t1,t2 play the attackers generating a packetstorm thorugh (192.168.4.199 is t4): hping3 -I eth1 --rand-source --syn --flood 192.168.4.199 -p 80 t4 drops all incoming packets to avoid confusion with gateways, performance issues of t4 etc. I watch the packet stats in iptraf. I have configured the firewall (t3) as follows: stock 3.2.0-31-generic #50-Ubuntu SMP kernel rhash_entries=33554432 as kernel parameter sysctl as follows: net.ipv4.ip_forward = 1 net.ipv4.route.gc_elasticity = 2 net.ipv4.route.gc_timeout = 1 net.ipv4.route.gc_interval = 5 net.ipv4.route.gc_min_interval_ms = 500 net.ipv4.route.gc_thresh = 2000000 net.ipv4.route.max_size = 20000000 (I have tweaked a lot to keep t3 running when t1+t2 are sending as many packets as possible). The result of this efforts are somewhat odd: t1+t2 manage to send each about 200k packets/s. t4 in the best case sees aroung 200k in total so half of the packets are lost. t3 is nearly unusable on console though packets are flowing through it (high numbers of soft-irqs) the route cache garbage collector is no way near to being predictable and in the default setting overwhelmed by very few packets/s (<50k packets/s) activating stateful iptables rules makes the packet rate arriving on t4 drop to around 100k packets/s, efectively losing more than 75% of the packets And this - here is my main concern - with two old P4 machines sending as many packets as they can - which means nearly everyone on the net should be capable of this. So here goes my question: Did I overlook some importand point in the config or in my test setup? Are there any alternatives for building firewall system especially on smp systems?

  Read the article

• nVidia performance with newer X and newer driver abysmal with Compiz

  - by Nakedible

  I recently upgraded Debian to Xorg 2.9.4 and installed nvidia-glx from experimental, version 260.19.21. This was somewhat of an uphill battle as the dependencies for the experimental nvidia-glx package are still somewhat broken. I got it to work without forcing the installation of any packages and without modifying the packages. However, after the upgrade compiz performance has been abysmal. I am using the desktop wall plugin and switching viewports is really slow - takes a few seconds for each switch. In addition to this, every effect that compiz does, such as zoom animations for icons when launching applications, takes seconds. The viewport switching speed changes relative to the amount of windows on that virtual screen - empty screens switch almost at normal speed, single browser windows work almost decently, but just 4 rxvt terminals slows the switches down to a crawl. My compiz configuration should be pretty basic. Xorg is likewise configured without anything special - the only "custom" configuration is forcing the driver name to be "nvidia". I've fiddled around with the nvidia-settings and compizconfig trying different VSync settings, but none of those helped. My graphics card is: NVIDIA GPU NVS 3100M (GT218) at PCI:1:0:0 (GPU-0). This is laptop GPU that is from the Geforce GTX 200 series. Graphics card performance should naturally be no problem. EDIT: In the end, nothing really worked, and I got really annoyed with the state of compiz and its support in Debian. Many nVidia driver revisions have passed and I am using Gnome 3 now, so I am accepting the best answers to this question even though the issue was not resolved.

  Read the article

• Developing high-performance and scalable zend framework website

  - by Daniel

  We are going to develop an ads website like http://www.gumtree.com/ (it will not be like this one but just to give you an ideea) and we are having some issues regarding performance and scalability. We are planning on using Zend Framework for this project but this is all that I'm sure off at this point. I don't think a classic approch like Zend Framework (PHP) + MySQL + Memcache + jQuery (and I would throw Doctrine 2 in there to) will fix result in a high-performance application. I was thinking on making this a RESTful application (with Zend Framework) + NGINX (or maybe MongoDB) + Memcache (or eAccelerator -- I understand this will create problems with scalability on multiple servers) + jQuery, a CDN for static content, a server for images and a scalable server for the requests and the rest. My questions are: - What do you think about my approch? - What solutions would you recommand in terms of servers approch (MySQL, NGINX, MongoDB or pgsql) for a scalable application expected to have a lot of traffic using PHP?...I would be interested in your approch. Note: I'm a Zend Framework developer and don't have to much experience with the servers part (to determin what would be best solution for my scalable application)

  Read the article

• Should I enable "Intel NIC DMA Channels"?

  - by javapowered

  I have HP DL360p Gen8 646902-xx1 I'm trying to optimize my config for low latency trading. Should I enable "Intel NIC DMA Channels"? Will that help/affect my system? From HP doc: Added a new ROM Based Setup Utility (RBSU) Advanced Performance Option menu that allows the user to enable Intel NIC DMA Channels (IOAT). This option is disabled by default. When enabled, certain networking devices may see an improvement in performance by utilizing Intel's DMA engine to offload network activity. Please consult documentation from the network adapter to determine if this feature is supported.

  Read the article

• NSClient++ FAIL on Windows 2008 R2 -- PDHCollector.cpp(215) Failed to query performance counters

  - by John DaCosta

  I am attempting to monitor windows server 2008 r2 x64 Enterprise with Nagios. When I test/install the nsclientI get the following error: PDHCollector.cpp(215) Failed to query performance counters: \Processor(_total)\% Processor Time: PdhGetFormattedCounterValue failed: A counter with a negative denominator value was detected. (800007D6) Has anyone else encountered the same issue and / or resolved it, found a work around?

  Read the article

• Upgrading a PERC h310 to a PERC H710 mini RAID controller on a Dell R620

  - by Gregg Leventhal

  I have an ESXi 5.0 Free license host using an internal Datastore (RAID 5, 5 Disk) that was configured with a Dell PERC h310 RAID controller. The disk performance was very poor, so I upgraded to the PERC H710 Mini. The IT Tech installed the controller and powered the host back on. I had to rescan the controller and the datastore appeared. Should any settings be changed in the RAID BIOS, or should the default settings be sufficient? Is they anything to be aware of when performing this type of upgrade in order to achieve the maximum performance?

  Read the article

• How to preserve sysprep from changing Default User settings

  - by user33794

  I'm having diffculties configuring 20 new Dell Vostro minis here. I set up one of them with my preferred OS, applications and settings, especially the Visual Effects Settings of Windows XP. I set them to best performance and deactivated everything else in the box. I copied this profile to Default User Profile and did sysprep -mini -reseal. After capturing this image and deploying it again, the desktop settings are correct except the visual effects settings. fading and everything else is reenabled for each new user which is created on the system. How do I preserve my settings from being overwritten by sysprep? thanks!

  Read the article

• Unix sort keys cause performance problems

  - by KenFar

  My data: It's a 71 MB file with 1.5 million rows. It has 6 fields All six fields combine to form a unique key - so that's what I need to sort on. Sort statement: sort -t ',' -k1,1 -k2,2 -k3,3 -k4,4 -k5,5 -k6,6 -o output.csv input.csv The problem: If I sort without keys, it takes 30 seconds. If I sort with keys, it takes 660 seconds. I need to sort with keys to keep this generic and useful for other files that have non-key fields as well. The 30 second timing is fine, but the 660 is a killer. More details using unix time: sort input.csv -o output.csv = 28 seconds sort -t ',' -k1 input.csv -o output.csv = 28 seconds sort -t ',' -k1,1 input.csv -o output.csv = 64 seconds sort -t ',' -k1,1 -k2,2 input.csv -o output.csv = 194 seconds sort -t ',' -k1,1 -k2,2 -k3,3 input.csv -o output.csv = 328 seconds sort -t ',' -k1,1 -k2,2 -k3,3 -k4,4 input.csv -o output.csv = 483 seconds sort -t ',' -k1,1 -k2,2 -k3,3 -k4,4 -k5,5 input.csv -o output.csv = 561 seconds sort -t ',' -k1,1 -k2,2 -k3,3 -k4,4 -k5,5 -k6,6 input.csv -o output.csv = 660 seconds I could theoretically move the temp directory to SSD, and/or split the file into 4 parts, sort them separately (in parallel) then merge the results, etc. But I'm hoping for something simpler since looks like sort is just picking a bad algorithm. Any suggestions? Testing Improvements using buffer-size: With 2 keys I got a 5% improvement with 8, 20, 24 MB and best performance of 8% improvement with 16MB, but 6% worse with 128MB With 6 keys I got a 5% improvement with 8, 20, 24 MB and best performance of 9% improvement with 16MB. Testing improvements using dictionary order (just 1 run each): sort -d --buffer-size=8M -t ',' -k1,1 -k2,2 input.csv -o output.csv = 235 seconds (21% worse) sort -d --buffer-size=8M -t ',' -k1,1 -k2,2 input.csv -o ouput.csv = 232 seconds (21% worse) conclusion: it makes sense that this would slow the process down, not useful Testing with different file system on SSD - I can't do this on this server now. Testing with code to consolidate adjacent keys: def consolidate_keys(key_fields, key_types): """ Inputs: - key_fields - a list of numbers in quotes: ['1','2','3'] - key_types - a list of types of the key_fields: ['integer','string','integer'] Outputs: - key_fields - a consolidated list: ['1,2','3'] - key_types - a list of types of the consolidated list: ['string','integer'] """ assert(len(key_fields) == len(key_types)) def get_min(val): vals = val.split(',') assert(len(vals) <= 2) return vals[0] def get_max(val): vals = val.split(',') assert(len(vals) <= 2) return vals[len(vals)-1] i = 0 while True: try: if ( (int(get_max(key_fields[i])) + 1) == int(key_fields[i+1]) and key_types[i] == key_types[i+1]): key_fields[i] = '%s,%s' % (get_min(key_fields[i]), key_fields[i+1]) key_types[i] = key_types[i] key_fields.pop(i+1) key_types.pop(i+1) continue i = i+1 except IndexError: break # last entry return key_fields, key_types While this code is just a work-around that'll only apply to cases in which I've got a contiguous set of keys - it speeds up the code by 95% in my worst case scenario.

  Read the article

• What would be the optimal disk config for SQL Server 2008 R2?

  - by Kev

  We have a new Dell R710 server that came with the following storage configuration: 8 x 146GB SAS 10k 6Gbps disks 1 x Perc H700 Integrated Controller (2 x 4 disks - 2 ports each supporting 4 disks) What would be the optimal configuration if we were just after performance? What would be the optimal configuration if we were after performance but wanted data resilience. As per 2 above but with a hot standby disk? We plan to run Windows 2008 R2 and SQL Server 2008 R2. Maximising storage capacity isn't a prime concern.

  Read the article

• Dell OpenManage Causing Periodic Slowness

  - by Zorlack

  Today we diagnosed the cause of a Periodic slowness issue: see here. Dell OpenManage Server Administrator seems to have been causing hourly slowness. It would occasionally peg one of the CPUs for upwards of two minutes. Disabling it drastically improved the performance of the SQL Server. The server hardware: Dell R710 Dual Quad Core 2.9GHz Processors 96GB Memory 2 Disk RAID 1 SAS System Disk (Internal) 4 Disk RAID 10 SAS Log Disk (Internal) 14 Disk RAID 10 SAS Data Disk (External DAS MD1000) Windows 2008 Enterprise R2 x64 We installed the OS using Dell OpenManage Server Assistant, so I assume that it was correctly configured. For now we have disabled OMSA to alleviate the performance issues it was causing, but I'd like to be able to re-enable it. Has anyone had a similar experience that can shed a little light on the nature of this problem?

  Read the article

• Justifying a memory upgrade

  - by AngryHacker

  My employer has over a thousand servers (running SQL Server 2005 x64 and a couple of other apps) all across the country. And in my opinion they are all massively underpowered for what they need to do. Specifically, I feel that the servers simply do not have enough RAM for the amount of volume the machines are asked to do. All the servers currently have 6GB of RAM. The users are pretty much always complaining about performance (mostly because, immo, the server dips into the paging file quite often). I finally convinced the powers that be to at least try out a memory upgrade on one box and see the results. However, they want before and after metrics, so that they can see that the expense will be justified. My question is what metrics should I collect to see whether the performance truly improves on the box? I am a dev, so I am not sure how and what to collect (i have a passing knowledge of Perfmon).

  Read the article

• what is acceptable datastore latency on VMware ESXi host?

  - by BeowulfNode42

  Looking at our performance figures on our existing VMware ESXi 4.1 host at the Datastore/Real-time performance data Write Latency Avg 14 ms Max 41 ms Read Latency Avg 4.5 ms Max 12 ms People don't seem to be complaining too much about it being slow with those numbers. But how much higher could they get before people found it to be a problem? We are reviewing our head office systems due to running low on storage space, and are tossing up between buying a 2nd VM host with DAS or buying some sort of NAS for SMB file shares in the near term and maybe running VMs from it in the longer term. Currently we have just under 40 staff at head office with 9 smaller branches spread across the country. Head office is runnning in an MS RDS session based environment with linux ERP and mail systems. In total 22 VMs on a single host with DAS made from a RAID 10 made of 6x 15k SAS disks.

  Read the article

• Speedup vmware esx guest hdd access

  - by Uwe

  Hello, we run several windows servers and windows clients on our vmware esx. One of the Windows 2003 Servers is a build-server with major HDD-reads/writes. as it is our build server. This machine was a hardware before and was virtualized to the ESX. Is there any way to increase the HDD-Performance? Perhaps there are special windows (guest) drivers? The files are stored on a Raid6 base. Performance graph of vmware infrastructure client shows reads up to 650 KBps and writes up to 4000 KBps. Thank you. Regards, Uwe

  Read the article

• Where can I find performance benchmarks of ALIX.1D system (AMD Geode LX800)

  - by Casey

  The AMD Geode LX800 processor was popular a few years ago, but now I can't find any information related to performance. If anyone has some good links on this, I would love to have them. This processor was also used in the OLPC project.

  Read the article

• Overhead of Perfmon -> direct to SQL Database

  - by StuartC

  HI All, First up, I'm a total newb at Performance Monitoring. I'm looking to set up central performance monitoring of some boxes. 2K3 TS ( Monitor General OS Perf & Session Specific Counters ) 2K8 R2 ( XenApp 6 = Monitor General OS Perf & Session Specific Counters ) File Server ( Standard File I/O ) My ultimate aim is to get as many counters/information, without impacting the clients session experience at all. Including counters specific to their sessions. I was thinking it logging directly to a SQL on another server, instead of a two part process of blg file then relog to sql. Would that work ok? Does anyone know the overhead of going straight to SQL from the client? I've searched around a bit, but havent found so much information it can be overwhelming. thanks

  Read the article

• Performance stats for ESXi VMs on Openfiler NFS

  - by chrisling106

  Hi there, AFAIK VMWare utilise it's own filesystem vmfs for performance and efficiency reasons. What will that be if I host my VMs on an Openfiler server which setup as NAS using ext3 filesystem? Thanks

  Read the article

• Using hdparm for better performance on Web Servers

  - by Rishav

  I just heard about using hdparams to optimize the Hard Disk Performance of a server ? Is this common practice ? What file systems do you use ? I generally deploy on the second last release of Ubuntu for stability reasons, do you some other filesystems or use distributed file systems from the get go ? Do the hdparam settings change for different File systems ? I haven't tried this yet, so how much difference do changes like this make ?

  Read the article

• Can someone explain RAID-0 in plain English?

  - by Edward Tanguay

  I've heard about and read about RAID throughout the years and understand it theoretically as a way to help e.g. server PCs reduce the chance of data loss, but now I am buying a new PC which I want to be as fast as possible and have learned that having two drives can considerably increase the perceived performance of your machine. In the question Recommendations for hard drive performance boost, the author says he is going to RAID-0 two 7200 RPM drives together. What does this mean in practical terms for me with Windows 7 installed, e.g. can I buy two drives, go into the device manager and "raid-0 them together"? I am not a network administrator or a hardware guy, I'm just a developer who is going to have a computer store build me a super fast machine next week. I can read the wikipedia page on RAID but it is just way too many trees and not enough forest to help me build a faster PC: RAID-0: "Striped set without parity" or "Striping". Provides improved performance and additional storage but no redundancy or fault tolerance. Because there is no redundancy, this level is not actually a Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks, i.e. not true RAID. However, because of the similarities to RAID (especially the need for a controller to distribute data across multiple disks), simple strip sets are normally referred to as RAID 0. Any disk failure destroys the array, which has greater consequences with more disks in the array (at a minimum, catastrophic data loss is twice as severe compared to single drives without RAID). A single disk failure destroys the entire array because when data is written to a RAID 0 drive, the data is broken into fragments. The number of fragments is dictated by the number of disks in the array. The fragments are written to their respective disks simultaneously on the same sector. This allows smaller sections of the entire chunk of data to be read off the drive in parallel, increasing bandwidth. RAID 0 does not implement error checking so any error is unrecoverable. More disks in the array means higher bandwidth, but greater risk of data loss. So in plain English, how can "RAID-0" help me build a faster Windows-7 PC that I am going to order next week?

  Read the article

• Python Django sites on Apache+mod_wsgi with nginx proxy: highly fluctuating performance

  - by Halfgaar

  I have an Ubuntu 10.04 box running several dozen Python Django sites using mod_wsgi (embedded mode; the faster mode, if properly configured). Performance highly fluctuates. Sometimes fast, sometimes several seconds delay. The smokeping graphs are al over the place. Recently, I also added an nginx proxy for the static content, in the hopes it would cure the highly fluctuating performance. But, even though it reduced the number of requests Apache has to process significantly, it didn't help with the main problem. When clicking around on websites while running htop, it can be seen that sometimes requests are almost instant, whereas sometimes it causes Apache to consume 100% CPU for a few seconds. I really don't understand where this fluctuation comes from. I have configured the mpm_worker for Apache like this: StartServers 1 MinSpareThreads 50 MaxSpareThreads 50 ThreadLimit 64 ThreadsPerChild 50 MaxClients 50 ServerLimit 1 MaxRequestsPerChild 0 MaxMemFree 2048 1 server with 50 threads, max 50 clients. Munin and apache2ctl -t both show a consistent presence of workers; they are not destroyed and created all the time. Yet, it behaves as such. This tells me that once a sub interpreter is created, it should remain in memory, yet it seems sites have to reload all the time. I also have a nginx+gunicorn box, which performs quite well. I would really like to know why Apache is so random. This is a virtual host config: <VirtualHost *:81> ServerAdmin [email protected] ServerName example.com DocumentRoot /srv/http/site/bla Alias /static/ /srv/http/site/static Alias /media/ /srv/http/site/media WSGIScriptAlias / /srv/http/site/passenger_wsgi.py <Directory /> AllowOverride None </Directory> <Directory /srv/http/site> Options -Indexes FollowSymLinks MultiViews AllowOverride None Order allow,deny allow from all </Directory> Ubuntu 10.04 Apache 2.2.14 mod_wsgi 2.8 nginx 0.7.65 Edit: I've put some code in the settings.py file of a site that writes the date to a tmp file whenever it's loaded. I can now see that the site is not randomly reloaded all the time, so Apache must be keeping it in memory. So, that's good, except it doesn't bring me closer to an answer... Edit: I just found an error that might also be related to this: File "/usr/lib/python2.6/subprocess.py", line 633, in __init__ errread, errwrite) File "/usr/lib/python2.6/subprocess.py", line 1049, in _execute_child self.pid = os.fork() OSError: [Errno 12] Cannot allocate memory The server has 600 of 2000 MB free, which should be plenty. Is there a limit that is set on Apache or WSGI somewhere?

  Read the article

• My server is slower than the average user's computer, should I still offload Access queries to SQL Server? [closed]

  - by andrewb

  Possible Duplicate: How do you do Load Testing and Capacity Planning for Databases I have a database set up with MS Access 2007 front ends and an SQL Server 2005 back end. At the moment, all the queries are saved in the front end as I've only recently moved to an SQL Server backend. I'm wondering how much of those queries I should save as stored procedures/views on SQL Server. About the system The number of concurrent users is only a handful, though it could be as high as 25 at one time (very unlikely). The average computer has an Intel i3-2120 CPU running at 3.3 GHz, which gets a PassMark score of 3,987, whilst the server has an Intel Xeon E5335 running at 2.0 GHz, which gets a PassMark score of 2,637. Always an awkward situation when an i3 outperforms a Xeon... though the i3 is from Q1 2011 and the Xeon is Q2 2009. There is potential for a server upgrade in the future, though it wouldn't come easy. I'm inclined to move the queries to the back end, as they are beginning to take noticeable time and I figure that is a better way of doing things. I like the idea of throwing everything at the server, then pushing for a server upgrade. It makes more sense in my mind to be upgrading one server rather than 30 PCs. Or am I being overzealous? Why my question isn't a duplicate It seems that my question has been misinterpreted and labelled a duplicate of quite a different question, one about testing and capacity planning. I'll try explain how my question is very different from the linked question. The crux of my question is something like "Even though my server is technically slower, is it better to have it doing more of the queries?" There's two ways that people could have answered this: I agree the server is going to be slower, but the extra benefits of such and such (like the less Access the better) means you should move most to the server anyway. (OR no it doesn't outweigh the benefit, keep them in Access) Actually the server will be faster because of such and such. I'm hoping that people out there could provide some answers like this, and the question in the dupe link doesn't really provide either of these answers. Ok sure, I suppose I could do extensive performance testing to compare Access queries running on a local machine to SQL Server queries running on the server, but that sounds like a very hard task (particularly performance testing of access) compared to someone giving some quick general guidance, and again, my question is looking for a lot more than immediate performance benefit.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92  | Next Page >