Search Results

Search found 1091 results on 44 pages for 'efficiency'.

Page 1/44 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Increasing your efficiency during programming

    - by Tom
    Yeah, yeah, I know, it is a little bit of offtopic, but let's try. So, I want to increase my efficiency during my programming as much as possible to programme as fast and sensibly as possiblle. What do you do before starting coding? Drink a lot of coffee, energy drinks? Do you listen to music during programming or you keep quite? Share your ideas.

    Read the article

  • Java anonymous class efficiency implications

    - by Po
    Is there any difference in efficiency (e.g. execution time, code size, etc.) between these two ways of doing things? Below are contrived examples that create objects and do nothing, but my actual scenarios may be creating new Threads, Listeners, etc. Assume the following pieces of code happen in a loop so that it might make a difference. Using anonymous objects: void doSomething() { for (/* Assume some loop */) { final Object obj1, obj2; // some free variables IWorker anonymousWorker = new IWorker() { doWork() { // do things that refer to obj1 and obj2 } }; } } Defining a class first: void doSomething() { for (/* Assume some loop */) { Object obj1, obj2; IWorker worker = new Worker(obj1, obj2); } } static class Worker implements IWorker { private Object obj1, obj2; public CustomObject(Object obj1, Object obj2) {/* blah blah */} @Override public void doWork() {} }; Thank you :)

    Read the article

  • Efficiency concerning thread granularity

    - by MaelmDev
    Lately, I've been thinking of ways to use multithreading to improve the speed of different parts of a game engine. What confuses me is the appropriate granularity of threads, especially when dealing with single-instruction-multiple-data (SIMD) tasks. Let's use line-of-sight detection as an example. Each AI actor must be able to detect objects of interest around them and mark them. There are three basic ways to go about this with multithreading: Don't use threading at all. Create a thread for each actor. Create a thread for each actor-object combination. Option 1 is obviously going to be the least efficient method. However, choosing between the next two options is more difficult. Only using one thread per actor is still running through every object in series instead of in parallel. However, are CPU's able to create and join threads in the granularity posed in Option 3 efficiently? It seems like that many calls to the OS could be really slow, and varying enormously between different hardware.

    Read the article

  • Serverside memory efficiency and threading for a turn based game

    - by SkeletorFromEterenia
    Im programming on a turn based war-game for some years now (along with the engine) and Im having quite a hard time at figuring out what the games server architecture should look like, since most game server architecture articles I found focus either on FPS oder MMOGs, which doesn't really fit since I want many matches with 1- 16 players on my server, with each match being played in turn based mode. My chief concern is memory usage, since the most basic approach of loading every game that is being played completely into RAM should be quite inefficient, so is there a suitable strategy for selecting only the needed bits and loading them? Another question I got is how to design the threading on the server, since I think using only a single thread could be a problem due to the fact that the game or part of it might have to be loaded from the database. I would be very happy if you could share your knowledge or point me to material on this topic.

    Read the article

  • Simplicity-efficiency tradeoff

    - by sarepta
    The CTO called to inform me of a new project and in the process told me that my code is weird. He explained that my colleagues find it difficult to understand due to the overly complex, often new concepts and technologies used, which they are not familiar with. He asked me to maintain a simple code base and to think of the others that will inherit my changes. I've put considerable time into mastering LINQ and thread-safe coding. However, others don't seem to care nor are impressed by anything other than their paycheck. Do I have to keep it simple (stupid), just because others are not familiar with best practices and efficient coding? Or should I continue to do what I find best and write code my way?

    Read the article

  • iOS Efficiency File Saving Efficiency

    - by Guvvy Aba
    I was working on my iOS app and my goal is to save a file that I am receiving from the internet bit by bit. My current setup is that I have a NSMutableData object and I add a bit of data to it as I receive my file. After the last "packet" is received, I write the NSData to a file and the process is complete. I'm kind of worried that this isn't the ideal way to do it because of the limitations of RAM in a mobile device and it would be problematic to receive large files. My next thought was to implement a NSFileHandle so that as the file arrives, it would be saved to the disk, rather than the virtual memory. In terms of speed and efficiency, which method do you think will work decently on an iOS device. I am currently using the first, NSMutableData approach. Is it worth changing my app to use the NSFileHandle? Thanks in advance, Guvvy

    Read the article

  • How to analyze the efficiency of this algorithm Part 2

    - by Leonardo Lopez
    I found an error in the way I explained this question before, so here it goes again: FUNCTION SEEK(A,X) 1. FOUND = FALSE 2. K = 1 3. WHILE (NOT FOUND) AND (K < N) a. IF (A[K] = X THEN 1. FOUND = TRUE b. ELSE 1. K = K + 1 4. RETURN Analyzing this algorithm (pseudocode), I can count the number of steps it takes to finish, and analyze its efficiency in theta notation, T(n), a linear algorithm. OK. This following code depends on the inner formulas inside the loop in order to finish, the deal is that there is no variable N in the code, therefore the efficiency of this algorithm will always be the same since we're assigning the value of 1 to both A & B variables: 1. A = 1 2. B = 1 3. UNTIL (B > 100) a. B = 2A - 2 b. A = A + 3 Now I believe this algorithm performs in constant time, always. But how can I use Algebra in order to find out how many steps it takes to finish?

    Read the article

  • What PHP configuration and extensions are recommended for speed, efficiency and security?

    - by Sanoj
    I am setting up an Ubuntu server with nginx and PHP. I have read about many different configurations and extensions that could be added and it is pretty hard to know about all of them. I would like to hear from you, sysadmins, what PHP configuration and extensions do you recommend? I have read about: Suhosin for security Alternative PHP Cache for speed and efficiency Memcache for speed and efficiency PHP FastCGI Process Manager for speed and efficiency But I have no idea if they are good or not, and if I should use them together.

    Read the article

  • MySQL index cardinality - performance vs storage efficiency

    - by Sean
    Say you have a MySQL 5.0 MyISAM table with 100 million rows, with one index (other than primary key) on two integer columns. From my admittedly poor understanding of B-tree structure, I believe that a lower cardinality means the storage efficiency of the index is better, because there are less parent nodes. Whereas a higher cardinality means less efficient storage, but faster read performance, because it has to navigate through less branches to get to whatever data it is looking for to narrow down the rows for the query. (Note - by "low" vs "high", I don't mean e.g. 1 million vs 99 million for a 100 million row table. I mean more like 90 million vs 95 million) Is my understanding correct? Related question - How does cardinality affect write performance?

    Read the article

  • Efficiency of PHP arrays cast as objects?

    - by keithjgrant
    From what I understand, PHP objects are generally much faster than arrays. How is that efficiency affected if I'm typecasting to define stdClass objects on the fly: $var = (object)array('one' => 1, 'two' => 2); If the code doing this is deeply-nested, will I be better off explicitly defining $var as an objects instead: $var = new stdClass(); $var->one = 1; $var->two = 2; Is the difference negligible since I'll then be accessing $var as an object from there on, either way?

    Read the article

  • MySQL efficiency as it relates to the database/table size

    - by mlissner
    I'm building a system using django, Sphinx and MySQL that's very quickly becoming quite large. The database currently has about 2000 rows, and I've written a program that's going to populate it with another 40,000 rows in a couple days. Since the database is live right now, and since I've never had a database with this much information in it, I'm worried about some things: Is adding all these rows going to seriously degrade the efficiency of my django app? Will I need to go back through it and optimize all my database calls so they're doing things more cleverly? Or will this make the database slow all around to the extent that I can't do anything about it at all? If you scoff at my 40k rows, then, my next question is, at what point SHOULD I be concerned? I will likely be adding another couple hundred thousand soon, so I worry, and I fret. How is sphinx going to feel about all this? Is it going to freak out when it realizes it has to index all this data? Or will it be fine? Is this normal for it? If it is, at what point should I be concerned that it's too much data for Sphinx? Thanks for any thoughts.

    Read the article

  • Efficiency Question for an Ajax App

    - by Kubi
    Hi, Currently I am dealing with a web application which uses a txt file as a database for testing for now. But we will connect it to a server later on. My question is, if there is a more efficient way to get my objects than the way I am using now. During the page_init I am getting all my objects into a Collection as List, then I am populating the ajax toolkit accordion objects in the page with that. I have some client side buttons which fires callbacks for getting some other objects to populate the accordions in an update panel. And I am using .net Collections too much like dictionary and list, I am wondering if using arrays is more efficient. Could you advise me about how to make this site better and faster ? Is it better or possible to initialize those TravelP objects in javascript at the beginning and use it like that ? Any comments would be greatly appreciated, Thanks

    Read the article

  • Python if statement efficiency

    - by Dennis
    A friend (fellow low skill level recreational python scripter) asked me to look over some code. I noticed that he had 7 separate statements that basically said. if ( a and b and c): do something the statements a,b,c all tested their equality or lack of to set values. As I looked at it I found that because of the nature of the tests, I could re-write the whole logic block into 2 branches that never went more than 3 deep and rarely got past the first level (making the most rare occurrence test out first). if a: if b: if c: else: if c: else: if b: if c: else: if c: To me, logically it seems like it should be faster if you are making less, simpler tests that fail faster and move on. My real questions are 1) When I say if and else, should the if be true, does the else get completely ignored? 2) In theory would if (a and b and c) take as much time as the three separate if statements would?

    Read the article

  • Two strange efficiency problems in Mathematica

    - by Jess Riedel
    FIRST PROBLEM I have timed how long it takes to compute the following statements (where V[x] is a time-intensive function call): Alice = Table[V[i],{i,1,300},{1000}]; Bob = Table[Table[V[i],{i,1,300}],{1000}]^tr; Chris_pre = Table[V[i],{i,1,300}]; Chris = Table[Chris_pre,{1000}]^tr; Alice, Bob, and Chris are identical matricies computed 3 slightly different ways. I find that Chris is computed 1000 times faster than Alice and Bob. It is not surprising that Alice is computed 1000 times slower because, naively, the function V must be called 1000 more times than when Chris is computed. But it is very surprising that Bob is so slow, since he is computed identically to Chris except that Chris stores the intermediate step Chris_pre. Why does Bob evaluate so slowly? SECOND PROBLEM Suppose I want to compile a function in Mathematica of the form f(x)=x+y where "y" is a constant fixed at compile time (but which I prefer not to directly replace in the code with its numerical because I want to be able to easily change it). If y's actual value is y=7.3, and I define f1=Compile[{x},x+y] f2=Compile[{x},x+7.3] then f1 runs 50% slower than f2. How do I make Mathematica replace "y" with "7.3" when f1 is compiled, so that f1 runs as fast as f2? Many thanks!

    Read the article

  • MVC and repository pattern data efficiency

    - by Shawn Mclean
    My project is structured as follows: DAL public IQueryable<Post> GetPosts() { var posts = from p in context.Post select p; return posts; } Service public IList<Post> GetPosts() { var posts = repository.GetPosts().ToList(); return posts; } //Returns a list of the latest feeds, restricted by the count. public IList<PostFeed> GetPostFeeds(int latestCount) { List<Post> post - GetPosts(); //CODE TO CREATE FEEDS HERE return feeds; } Lets say the GetPostFeeds(5) is supposed to return the 5 latest feeds. By going up the list, doesn't it pull down every single post from the database from GetPosts(), just to extract 5 from it? If each post is say 5kb from the database, and there is 1 million records. Wont that be 5GB of ram being used per call to GetPostFeeds()? Is this the way it happens? Should I go back to my DAL and write queries that return only what I need?

    Read the article

  • Efficiency of purely functional programming

    - by Sid
    Does anyone know what is the worst possible asymptotic slowdown that can happen when programming purely functionally as opposed to imperatively (i.e. allowing side-effects)? Clarification from comment by itowlson: is there any problem for which the best known non-destructive algorithm is asymptotically worse than the best known destructive algorithm, and if so by how much?

    Read the article

  • [java] Efficiency of while(true) ServerSocket Listen

    - by Submerged
    I am wondering if a typical while(true) ServerSocket listen loop takes an entire core to wait and accept a client connection (Even when implementing runnable and using Thread .start()) I am implementing a type of distributed computing cluster and each computer needs every core it has for computation. A Master node needs to communicate with these computers (invoking static methods that modify the algorithm's functioning). The reason I need to use sockets is due to the cross platform / cross language capabilities. In some cases, PHP will be invoking these java static methods. I used a java profiler (YourKit) and I can see my running ServerSocket listen thread and it never sleeps and it's always running. Is there a better approach to do what I want? Or, will the performance hit be negligible? Please, feel free to offer any suggestion if you can think of a better way (I've tried RMI, but it isn't supported cross-language. Thanks everyone

    Read the article

  • Efficiency of data structures in C99 (possibly affected by endianness)

    - by Ninefingers
    Hi All, I have a couple of questions that are all inter-related. Basically, in the algorithm I am implementing a word w is defined as four bytes, so it can be contained whole in a uint32_t. However, during the operation of the algorithm I often need to access the various parts of the word. Now, I can do this in two ways: uint32_t w = 0x11223344; uint8_t a = (w & 0xff000000) >> 24; uint8_t b = (w & 0x00ff0000) >> 16; uint8_t b = (w & 0x0000ff00) >> 8; uint8_t d = (w & 0x000000ff); However, part of me thinks that isn't particularly efficient. I thought a better way would be to use union representation like so: typedef union { struct { uint8_t d; uint8_t c; uint8_t b; uint8_t a; }; uint32_t n; } word32; Using this method I can assign word32 w = 0x11223344; then I can access the various parts as I require (w.a=11 in little endian). However, at this stage I come up against endianness issues, namely, in big endian systems my struct is defined incorrectly so I need to re-order the word prior to it being passed in. This I can do without too much difficulty. My question is, then, is the first part (various bitwise ands and shifts) efficient compared to the implementation using a union? Is there any difference between the two generally? Which way should I go on a modern, x86_64 processor? Is endianness just a red herring here? I could inspect the assembly output of course, but my knowledge of compilers is not brilliant. I would have thought a union would be more efficient as it would essentially convert to memory offsets, like so: mov eax, [r9+8] Would a compiler realise that is what happening in the bit-shift case above? If it matters, I'm using C99, specifically my compiler is clang (llvm). Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Efficiency of Java code with primitive types

    - by super89
    Hello! I want to ask which piece of code is more efficient in Java? Code 1: void f() { for(int i = 0 ; i < 99999;i++) { for(int j = 0 ; j < 99999;j++) { //Some operations } } } Code 2: void f() { int i,j; for(i = 0 ; i < 99999;i++) { for(j = 0 ; j < 99999;j++) { //Some operations } } } My teacher said that second is better, but I can't agree that opinion.

    Read the article

  • Efficiency of while(true) ServerSocket Listen

    - by Submerged
    I am wondering if a typical while(true) ServerSocket listen loop takes an entire core to wait and accept a client connection (Even when implementing runnable and using Thread .start()) I am implementing a type of distributed computing cluster and each computer needs every core it has for computation. A Master node needs to communicate with these computers (invoking static methods that modify the algorithm's functioning). The reason I need to use sockets is due to the cross platform / cross language capabilities. In some cases, PHP will be invoking these java static methods. I used a java profiler (YourKit) and I can see my running ServerSocket listen thread and it never sleeps and it's always running. Is there a better approach to do what I want? Or, will the performance hit be negligible? Please, feel free to offer any suggestion if you can think of a better way (I've tried RMI, but it isn't supported cross-language. Thanks everyone

    Read the article

  • Efficiency of manually written loops vs operator overloads (C++)

    - by Sagekilla
    Hi all, in the program I'm working on I have 3-element arrays, which I use as mathematical vectors for all intents and purposes. Through the course of writing my code, I was tempted to just roll my own Vector class with simple +, -, *, /, etc overloads so I can simplify statements like: for (int i = 0; i < 3; i++) r[i] = r1[i] - r2[i]; // becomes: r = r1 - r2; Which should be more or less identical in generated code. But when it comes to more complicated things, could this really impact my performance heavily? One example that I have in my code is this: Manually written version: for (int j = 0; j < 3; j++) { p.vel[j] = p.oldVel[j] + (p.oldAcc[j] + p.acc[j]) * dt2 + (p.oldJerk[j] - p.jerk[j]) * dt12; p.pos[j] = p.oldPos[j] + (p.oldVel[j] + p.vel[j]) * dt2 + (p.oldAcc[j] - p.acc[j]) * dt12; } Using a Vector class with operator overloads: p.vel = p.oldVel + (p.oldAcc + p.acc) * dt2 + (p.oldJerk - p.jerk) * dt12; p.pos = p.oldPos + (p.oldVel + p.vel) * dt2 + (p.oldAcc - p.acc) * dt12; I am compiling my code for maximum possible speed, as it's extremely important that this code runs quickly and calculates accurately. So will me relying on my Vector's for these sorts of things really affect me? For those curious, this is part of some numerical integration code which is not trivial to run in my program. Any insight would be appreciated, as would any idioms or tricks I'm unaware of.

    Read the article

  • What PHP configuration and extensions are recommended for efficiency and security?

    - by Sanoj
    I am setting up an Ubuntu VPS server with nginx and PHP. I have read about many different configurations and extensions that could be added and it is pretty hard to know about all of them. I would like to hear from you, sysadmins, what PHP configuration and extensions do you recommend? I have read about: Suhosin for security Alternative PHP Cache for efficiency PHP FastCGI Process Manager for efficiency But I have no idea if they are good or not, and if I should use them together.

    Read the article

  • Effectiveness and Efficiency

    - by Daniel Moth
    In the professional environment, i.e. at work, I am always seeking personal growth and to be challenged. The result is that my assignments, my work list, my tasks, my goals, my commitments, my [insert whatever word resonates with you] keep growing (in scope and desired impact). Which in turn means I have to keep finding new ways to deliver more value, while not falling into the trap of working more hours. To do that I continuously evaluate both my effectiveness and my efficiency. EFFECTIVENESS The first thing I check is my effectiveness: Am I doing the right things? Am I focusing too much on unimportant things? Am I spending more time doing stuff that is important to my team/org/division/business/company, or am I spending it on stuff that is important to me and that I enjoy doing? Am I valuing activities that maybe I have outgrown and should be delegated to others who are at a stage I have surpassed (in Microsoft speak: is the work I am doing level appropriate or am I still operating at the previous level)? Notice how the answers to those questions change over time and due to certain events, so I have to remind myself to revisit them frequently. Events that force me to re-examine them are: change of role, change of team/org/etc, change of direction of team/org/etc, re-org, new hires on the team that take on some of the work I did, personal promotion, change of manager... and if none of those events has occurred since the last annual review, I ask myself those at each annual review anyway. If you think you are not being effective at work, make a list of the stuff that you do and start tracking where your time goes. In parallel, have a discussion with your manager about where they think your time should go. Ultimately your time is finite and hence it is your most precious investment, don't waste it. If your management doesn't value as highly what you spend your time on, then either convince your management, or stop spending your time on it, or find different management: Lead, Follow, or get out of the way! That's my view on effectiveness. You have to fix that before moving to being efficient, or you may end up being very efficient at stuff that nobody wants you to be doing in the first place. For example, you may be spending your time writing blog posts and becoming better and faster at it all the time. If your manager thinks that is not even part of your job description, you are wasting your time to satisfy your inner desires. Nobody can help you with your effectiveness other than your management chain and your management peers - they are the judges of it. EFFICIENCY The second thing I check is my efficiency: Am I doing things right? For me, doing things right means that I deliver the same quality of work faster [than what I used to, and than my peers, and than expected of me]. The result is that I can achieve more [than what I used to, and than my peers, and than expected of me]. Notice how the efficiency goal is a more portable one. If, by whatever criteria, you think you are the best at [insert your own skill here], this can change at two events: because you have new colleagues (who are potentially better than your older ones), and it can change with a change of manager (who has potentially higher expectations). That's about it. Once you are efficient at something, you carry that with you... All you need to really be doing here is, when taking on new kinds of work that you haven't done before, try a few approaches and devise a system so that you can become efficient at this new activity too... Just keep "collecting" stuff that you are efficient at. If you think you are not being efficient at something, break it down: What are the steps you take to complete that task? How long do you spend on each step? Talk to others about what steps they take, to see if you can optimize some steps away or trade them for better steps, or just learn how to complete a step faster. Have a system for every task you take so that you can have repeatable success. That's my view on efficiency. You have to fix it so that you can free up time to do more. When you plan a route from A to B - all else being equal - you try to get there as fast as possible so why would you not want to do that with your everyday work? For example, imagine you are inefficient at processing email: You spend more time than necessary dealing with email, and you still end up with dropped email threads and with slower response times than others. How can you improve? Talk to someone that you think is good at this, understand their system (e.g. here is my email processing system) and come up with one that works for you. Parting Thoughts Are you considered, by your colleagues and manager, an effective and efficient person at your workplace? If you are, what would you change if you were asked by your management to do the job of two people? Seriously, think about that! Your immediate reaction may be "that is not possible", but it actually is. You just have to re-assess what things that were previously important will now stop being important, by discussing them with your management and reaching agreement on relative priorities. For example, stuff that was previously on your plate may now have to be delegated or dropped. Where you thought you were efficient, maybe now you have to find an even faster path to completion, perhaps keeping in mind that Perfect is the Enemy of “Good Enough”. My personal experience (from both observing others and from my own reflection) is that when folks are struggling to keep up at work it is because of two reasons: They are investing energy in stuff that they enjoy doing which the business regards as having a lower priority than a lot of other things on their plate. They are completing tasks to a level of higher quality than what is required (due to personal pride) missing the big picture which almost always mandates completing three tasks at good enough quality than knocking only one of them out of the park while the other two come in late or not at all. There is a lot of content on the web, so I strongly encourage you to use your favorite search engine to read other views on effectiveness and efficiency (Bing, Google). Comments about this post by Daniel Moth welcome at the original blog.

    Read the article

  • Self-Service Testing Cloud Enables Improved Efficiency and Productivity for Development and Quality Assurance Organizations

    - by Sandra Cheevers
    With organizations spending as much as 50 percent of their QA time with non-test related activities like setting up hardware and deploying applications and test tools, the cloud will bring obvious benefits. Oracle announced today self-service testing capabilities to enable you to deploy private or public testing clouds. These capabilities help software development and QA organizations deliver higher quality applications, while enhancing testing efficiency and reducing duration of testing projects. This kind of cloud based self-service testing provides better efficiency and agility. The Testing-as-a-Service solution offers test lab management, automatic deployment of complex multi-tier applications, rich application performance monitoring, test data management and chargeback, all in a unified workflow. For more details, read the press release Oracle Announces Oracle Enterprise Manager 12c Testing-as-a-Service Solution here.

    Read the article

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >