Search Results

Search found 13654 results on 547 pages for 'ssis performance'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 98/547 | < Previous Page | 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105  | Next Page >

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • 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

  • Oracle tuning optimizer index cost adj and optimizer index caching

    - by Darryl Braaten
    What is the correct way to set the optimizer index cost adj parameter for Oracle. As a developer I have observed huge performance improvements as this parameter is lowered. Common queries are reduced from 2 seconds to 200ms. There are lots of warnings on the net that lowering this value will cause dire issues with the database, but no detail is given on what will start going wrong. I am currently only seeing only an upside, much improved application performance and no downside. I need to better understand the possible negative repercussions of adjusting these parameters.

    Read the article

  • SQL Server Agent 2005 job runs but provides no output

    - by alimack
    Essentially I have a job which runs in BIDS and as as a stand lone package and while it runs under the SQL Server Agent it doesn't complete properly (no error messages though). The job steps are: 1) Delete all rows from table; 2) Use For each loop to fill up table from Excel spreasheets; 3) Clean up table. I've tried this MS page (steps 1 & 2), didn't see any need to start changing from Server side security. Also SQLServerCentral.com for this page, no resolution. How can I get error logging or a fix?

    Read the article

  • Recommendations for USB flash drive fast at writing small files

    - by Andrew Bainbridge
    I want a drive that I can be used as my work drive, storing a Subversion repo and sandbox for a small project. I'd also like it to be able to store a DVD rip. At the moment I've got a Super Talent pico-C 8gb. It's fast at reading and writing DVD rips, but the performance on small files (ie less than 4k) is utterly terrible (we're talking floppy disk speeds here). This Ars review measured a similar Super Talent drive and pretty much confirmed my measurements (take a look at the random write speeds on page 5). So, I'm looking for a 8gb or bigger drive that doesn't suck at read and write of small files and still has acceptable performance for very large files.

    Read the article

  • subst performance

    - by pihentagy
    Does substing a directory affects the performance creating/reading/updating many small files in the substed volume? (will use svn there) If yes, how serious is the "penalty"?

    Read the article

  • Shopping for Fast USB Flash Drives

    - by Jim McKeeth
    I would like to pick up some really fast USB flash drives in the 16 - 64 GB range. When looking at drives they just list their size, their form factor (key chain hook, slider, etc.) and the fact that they are all Hi-Speed USB 2.0. It seems like I have heard that different drives have different performance and life expectancy. The sales guy tells me that they are all the same performance any more, but it wouldn't be the first time a sales guy had the wrong technical details. Our objective is to run Virtual PC images off of them, so good speed and resilience to rewrites it important.

    Read the article

  • Is there a "rigorous" method for choosing a database?

    - by Andrew Martin
    I'm not experienced with NoSQL, but one person on my team is calling for its use. I believe our data and its usage isn't optimal for a NoSQL implementation. However, my understanding is based off reading various threads on various websties. I'd like to get some stronger evidence as to who's correct. My question is therefore, "Is there a technique for estimating the performance and requirements of a certain database, that I could use to confirm or modify my intuitions?". Is there, for example, a good book for calculating the performance of equivalent MongoDB/MySQL schema? Is the only really reliable option to build the whole thing and take metrics?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105  | Next Page >