Search Results

Search found 35507 results on 1421 pages for 'performance test'.

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 136/1421 | < Previous Page | 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143  | Next Page >

  • How to make a huge ram drive?

    - by Brandon Moore
    At my old job when a report was needed I could sit down with someone and pull up results and get immediate feedback, and then refine my queries and ultimately have the data we needed, in the format we needed within 30-90 minutes. I just started working for a new company with a database containing millions of records and I spent my whole 8 hours making a report that I feel I could have made in less than 2 hours if it were not for the massive amount of data the queries are working with, and the fact that I couldn't ask the person needing the data to sit down with me and give me feedback as I pulled up results as I am used to. So I am trying to think of how we can make the server faster... much faster, so that I can have the same level of productivity I'm used to. One thought that just came to mind is that memory is so cheap these days, and by my calculations I could buy 10 8gig ram sticks for 1000 bucks. What I have never heard of though is a device that would let me combine these into a huge ram drive. So I'd like to know if any such device exists, and if not what is the largest ram drive I could realistically make and how would I go about doing so? EDIT: To you guys who are saying the database shema needs to be analyzed... you can't make a query such as "Select f1, f2, f3, etc from SomeTable" run any faster by normalizing or indexing the table. What I'm talking about IS ABSOLUTELY a need for improved performance at the hardware level. I am used to having results come back to me in a few seconds, not a few minutes or much less a half an hour. Maybe that's what you guys are used to who have 100 billion record tables and you feel like that's fast, but I'm looking for results back from tables with about 10 million records to come back to me withing less than half a minute TOPS.

    Read the article

  • XMLReader in silverlight <test /> type tag problem

    - by Ummar
    Hi I am parsing XML in silverlight, in my XML I have one tag is like <test attribute1="123" /> <test1 attribute2="345">abc text</test1> I am using XMLReader to parse xml like using (XmlReader reader = XmlReader.Create(new StringReader(xmlString))) { // Parse the file and display each of the nodes. while (reader.Read()) { switch (reader.NodeType) { case XmlNodeType.Element: //process start tag here break; case XmlNodeType.Text: //process text here break; case XmlNodeType.XmlDeclaration: case XmlNodeType.ProcessingInstruction: break; case XmlNodeType.Comment: break; case XmlNodeType.EndElement: //process end tag here break; } } } but the problem is that for test tag no EndElement is received? which is making my whole program logic wrong. (for test1 tag all works fine). Please help me out.

    Read the article

  • Problem performance datawarehouse with lots of indexes

    - by Lieven Cardoen
    Our product takes tests of some 350 candidates at the same time. At the end of the test, results for each candidate are moved to a datawarehouse full of indexes on it. For each test there's some 400 records to be entered in datawarehouse. So 400 x 350 is a lot of records. If there are not much records in the datawarehouse, all goes well. But if there are already lots of records in the datawarehouse, then a lot of inserts fail... Is there a way to have indexes that are only rebuild at the end of the day or isn't that the real problem? Or how would you solve this?

    Read the article

  • How to test custom template tags in Django?

    - by Mark Lavin
    I'm adding a set of template tags to a Django application and I'm not sure how to test them. I've used them in my templates and they seem to be working but I was looking for something more formal. The main logic is done in the models/model managers and has been tested. The tags simply retrieve data and store it in a context variable such as {% views_for_object widget as views %} """ Retrieves the number of views and stores them in a context variable. """ # or {% most_viewed_for_model main.model_name as viewed_models %} """ Retrieves the ViewTrackers for the most viewed instances of the given model. """ So my question is do you typically test your template tags and if you do how do you do it?

    Read the article

  • Does AMD Cool n Quiet Slow Down Your System?

    - by Software Monkey
    I discovered today that having AMD Cool n Quiet enabled in my BIOS appears to be slowing down my Windows XP SP2 system by about 29% on memory & CPU intensive workloads. I was wondering if (a) anyone else had encountered this, (b) anyone can offer an explanation, (c) there are any negatives I need to be aware of if I keep AMD CnQ disabled. With some superficial testing so far, I don't immediately notice any difference with CnQ off (other than the performance being what I expected from this new hardware). It seems to ramp up the CPU fan a little bit as my program maxes out 1 core, but that's the same as with CnQ on. And when I let the system idle the CPU fan slows down and the systems as quiet as a mouse (after years of 6 small fans churning like they want to go into orbit it's nice to again have a system where I can hear the HDDs seeking). Bonus question: Does CnQ cause issues with system stability? I ask because the reason I disabled it was because I have had a few freezes and 1 spontaneous reboot with my new hardware.

    Read the article

  • Getting HTTP 406 when trying to test facebooker application with cucumber

    - by Waseem
    I am trying to test facebook api calls with cucumber. Here is the code. # app/controller/facebook_users_controller.rb class FacebookUsersController < ApplicationController def create fb_user = facebook_session.user user = User.new(:facebook_uid => fb_user.uid, :facebook_session_key => facebook_session.session_key respond_to do |format| if user.save format.json { render :json => { :status => 'ok' }.to_json } end end end end # features/steps/facebook_connect_step.rb Given /^I am a facebook connected user$/ do mock_session = Facebooker::MockSession.create post('/facebook_user.json') puts response.code end When I run the cucumber step for above step definition, I get a response code of 406 instead of 200. This happens in the cucumber test environment only and not in the browser(development/production).

    Read the article

  • What do you upgrade to make games load faster? [on hold]

    - by Superbest
    Let's say you have a relatively modern game like Shogun 2. The loading screens take several minutes. This bothers you and you'd like to improve it. What is actually going on when loading screens are up? I'm guessing assets are being loaded into memory from disk, and possibly being decompressed first. However, what is actually causing the slow down? The memory? Mainboard? CPU? HDD? If you had $100 to spend on upgrades and your only goal is to speed up loading screens without reducing other performance, what component of the computer does it make sense to upgrade for maximum benefit? If your answer is "it depends on the existing setup", what sort of benchmarks would you run to determine what is causing the bottleneck? What if you had $500 instead? I give the two budgets for context. I am not asking for actual recommendations about which component to buy (nor are the numbers supposed to be rigid limits), but what features are important when shopping for components with small and large budgets (a large budget could allow buying multiple components which are not so good on their own, but work particularly well together). I mention Shogun 2 as an example, but I'm asking about reducing overall loading times, across all games, not just one game. Therefore, "put it on a solid state disk" probably won't be good solution, because putting every game on your SDD will quickly fill it up.

    Read the article

  • Win 2008 R2 - copying TO disk is very slow, copying FROM is more or less okay

    - by avs099
    I have Windows 2008 R2 SP1 with 4 identical SATA disks (Seagate Barracude 7200) in RAID 5 array. It has 4Gb of memory; all recent updates are installed. Problem: when I copy large file from one folder to another, I get about 10MB/s average speed. When I read this file from network share via 1Gbps connection - I get about 25-30 MB/s. Both numbers seems to be low for me - but specifically I'm very frustrated with low write speed. there is no antivirus, no hyper-v, it's just a fileserver - i when i do my tests nobody else reads/write from it (we have only 4 people in a team, so I'm sure). Not sure if that matters, but there is only 1 logic disk "C" with all available space (1400 GB). I'm not an admin at all, so I have no idea where to look and what other information to provide. I did run performance monitor with "% idle time", "avg bytes read", "avg byte write" - here is the screenshot: I'm not sure why there are such obvious spikes. Any idea? Please let me know if you need me to provide more information - what counters should I check, etc. I'm very eager to get this solved. Thank you. UPDATE: we have another Windows 2008 R2 SP1 server with 2 RAID1 arrays - one is disk C (where windows is installed, another one is disk E). It is running Hyper-V and does not have antivirus. I noticed the following behavior when I copy large file (few GBs): C - C: about 50MB/sec C - E: about 55MB/sec E - E: 8MB/sec!!! E - C: 8MB/sec!!! what could cause this?? E drive is RAID1 array from same Seagate Barracuda 1TB drives..

    Read the article

  • Implementing a Stack using Test-Driven Development

    - by devoured elysium
    I am doing my first steps with TDD. The problem is (as probably with everyone starting with TDD), I never know very well what kind of unit tests to do when I start working in my projects. Let's assume I want to write a Stack class with the following methods(I choose it as it's an easy example): Stack<T> - Push(element : T) - Pop() : T - Seek() : T - Count : int - IsEmpty : boolean How would you approch this? I never understood if the idea is to test a few corner cases for each method of the Stack class or start by doing a few "use cases" with the class, like adding 10 elements and removing them. What is the idea? To make code that uses the Stack as close as possible to what I'll use in my real code? Or just make simple "add one element" unit tests where I test if IsEmpty and Count were changed by adding that element? How am I supposed to start with this?

    Read the article

  • TFS Build Configuration Vs Test Manager

    - by Ben
    Hi, I have been tasked with setting up TFS 2010 for my company. After setting up TFS and configuring the basics (New collection, project, adding solution to souce control), i thought i would try out some unit testing with it. I configured the Build Controller and Agent for my solution and added in some basic unit tests. These ran ok and did exactly what i would expect (i broke the build then ran the Build Definition, and it showed me where the errors were). My question is, what advantages (apart from the "Black box call stack logger") does Test Manager have over the TFS builds? Is it worth the extra effort of setting that up and configuring it? Only knowing the basics of what Test Manager is, that may be a very naive question to ask, and i appoligise if it is. Thanks

    Read the article

  • virtual disk image - file or partition

    - by tylerl
    I'm looking at the differences between using a file versus a partition to store a virtual disk image in VM use. The common knowledge is that partition-based images are faster than file-based images because of a decreased overhead. It makes sense, but I've never seen any actual numbers. My own testing bears out a different result. When I benchmark a direct-to-partition virtual disk, then format that same partition with ext4, create a virtual disk image stored on that ext4 filesystem, and then benchmark that, I see no speedup at all for the direct-to-partition virtual disk. Instead on some systems the file-based image is even faster (possibly due to host OS caching or something like that). This test was repeated many times on many systems, with fairly consistent results. So perhaps throwing out the performance justification, is it still considered better to use a partition rather than a virtual disk image? Is there some other reason why direct partition access is better than image files? Or perhaps is there some reason to go the other way around? Perhaps an advantage in one of the virtual disk file formats that you don't get with raw partition images?

    Read the article

  • How to properly test Hibernate length restriction?

    - by Cesar
    I have a POJO mapped with Hibernate for persistence. In my mapping I specify the following: <class name="ExpertiseArea"> <id name="id" type="string"> <generator class="assigned" /> </id> <version name="version" column="VERSION" unsaved-value="null" /> <property name="name" type="string" unique="true" not-null="true" length="100" /> ... </class> And I want to test that if I set a name longer than 100 characters, the change won't be persisted. I have a DAO where I save the entity with the following code: public T makePersistent(T entity){ transaction = getSession().beginTransaction(); transaction.begin(); try{ getSession().saveOrUpdate(entity); transaction.commit(); }catch(HibernateException e){ logger.debug(e.getMessage()); transaction.rollback(); } return entity; } Actually the code above is from a GenericDAO which all my DAOs inherit from. Then I created the following test: public void testNameLengthMustBe100orLess(){ ExpertiseArea ea = new ExpertiseArea( "1234567890" + "1234567890" + "1234567890" + "1234567890" + "1234567890" + "1234567890" + "1234567890" + "1234567890" + "1234567890" + "1234567890"); assertTrue("Name should be 100 characters long", ea.getName().length() == 100); ead.makePersistent(ea); List<ExpertiseArea> result = ead.findAll(); assertEquals("Size must be 1", result.size(),1); ea.setName(ea.getName()+"1234567890"); ead.makePersistent(ea); ExpertiseArea retrieved = ead.findById(ea.getId(), false); assertTrue("Both objects should be equal", retrieved.equals(ea)); assertTrue("Name should be 100 characters long", (retrieved.getName().length() == 100)); } The object is persisted ok. Then I set a name longer than 100 characters and try to save the changes, which fails: 14:12:14,608 INFO StringType:162 - could not bind value '12345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890' to parameter: 2; data exception: string data, right truncation 14:12:14,611 WARN JDBCExceptionReporter:100 - SQL Error: -3401, SQLState: 22001 14:12:14,611 ERROR JDBCExceptionReporter:101 - data exception: string data, right truncation 14:12:14,614 ERROR AbstractFlushingEventListener:324 - Could not synchronize database state with session org.hibernate.exception.DataException: could not update: [com.exp.model.ExpertiseArea#33BA7E09-3A79-4C9D-888B-4263314076AF] //Stack trace 14:12:14,615 DEBUG GenericDAO:87 - could not update: [com.exp.model.ExpertiseArea#33BA7E09-3A79-4C9D-888B-4263314076AF] 14:12:14,616 DEBUG JDBCTransaction:186 - rollback 14:12:14,616 DEBUG JDBCTransaction:197 - rolled back JDBC Connection That's expected behavior. However when I retrieve the persisted object to check if its name is still 100 characters long, the test fails. The way I see it, the retrieved object should have a name that is 100 characters long, given that the attempted update failed. The last assertion fails because the name is 110 characters long now, as if the ea instance was indeed updated. What am I doing wrong here?

    Read the article

  • Server nearly unusable when doing disk writes

    - by Wikser
    My question closely relates to my last question here on serverfault. I was copying about 5GB from a 10 year old desktop computer to the server. The copy was done in Windows Explorer. In this situation I would assume the server to be bored by the dataflow. But as usual with this server, it really slowed down. At least I could work with the remote session, even there was some serious latency. The copy took its time (20min?). In this time I went to a colleague and he tried to log in in the same server via remote desktop (for some other reason). It took about a minute to get to the login screen, a minute to open the control panel, a minute to open the performance monitor, ... Icons were loading maybe one per second. We saw the following (from memory): CPU: 2% Avg. Queue Length: 50 Pages/sec: 115 (?) There was no other considerable activity on the server. The server seldom serves some ASP.NET pages, which became also very slow in this time. The relevant configuration is as follows: Windows 2003 SEAGATE ST3500631NS (7200 rpm, 500 GB) LSI MegaRAID based RAID 5 4 disks, 1 hot spare Write Through No read-ahead Direct Cache Mode Harddisk-Cache-Mode: off Is this normal behaviour for such a configuration? What measurements could give further clues? Is it reasonable to reduce the priority of such copy I/O and favour other processes like the remote desktop? How would you do that? Many thanks!

    Read the article

  • preformance wise htaccess

    - by purpler
    hese's the my htaccess template, i wonder if anything could be added to increase website performance.. # Defaults AddDefaultCharset UTF-8 DefaultLanguage en-US ServerSignature Off FileETag None Header unset ETag Options -MultiViews #Options All -Indexes # Force the latest IE version or ChromeFrame <IfModule mod_setenvif.c> <IfModule mod_headers.c> BrowserMatch MSIE ie Header set X-UA-Compatible "IE=Edge,chrome=1" env=ie </IfModule> </IfModule> # Proxy X-UA Setup <IfModule mod_headers.c> Header append Vary User-Agent </IfModule> #Rewrites Options +FollowSymlinks RewriteEngine On RewriteBase / # Redirect to non-WWW RewriteCond %{HTTPS} !=on RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^www\.(.+)$ [NC] RewriteRule ^(.*)$ http://%1/$1 [R=301,L] # Redirect to WWW RewriteCond %{HTTP_HOST} ^domain.com RewriteRule (.*) http://www.domain.com/$1 [R=301,L] # Redirect index to root RewriteRule ^(.*)index\.(php|html)$ /$1 [R=301,L] # Caching ExpiresActive On ExpiresDefault A0 Header set Cache-Control "public" # 1 Year Long Cache <FilesMatch "\.(flv|fla|ico|pdf|avi|mov|ppt|doc|mp3|wmv|wav|png|jpg|jpeg|gif|swf|js|css|ttf|eot|woff|svg|svgz)$"> ExpiresDefault A31622400 </FilesMatch> # Proxy Caching <FilesMatch "\.(css|js|png)$"> ExpiresDefault A31622400 Header set Cache-Control "private" </FilesMatch> # Protect against DOS attacks by limiting file upload size LimitRequestBody 10240000 # Proper SVG serving AddType image/svg+xml svg svgz AddEncoding gzip svgz # GZip Compression <IfModule mod_deflate.c> <FilesMatch "\.(php|html|css|js|xml|txt|ttf|otf|eot|svg)$" > SetOutputFilter DEFLATE </FilesMatch> </IfModule> # Error page ErrorDocument 404 /404.html # Deny access to sensitive files <FilesMatch "\.(htaccess|ini|log|psd)$"> Order Allow,Deny Deny from all </FilesMatch>

    Read the article

  • Fast distributed filesystem for a large amounts of data with metadata in database

    - by undefined hero
    My project uses several processing machines and one storage machine. Currently storage organized with a MSSQL filetable shared folder. Every file in storage have some metadata in database. Processing machines executes tasks for which they needed files from storage and their metadata. After completing task, processing machine puts resulting data back in storage. From there its taken by another processing machine, which also generates some file and put it back in storage. And etc. Everything was fine, but as number of processing machines increases, I found myself bottlenecked myself with storage machines hard drive performance. So I want processing machines to put files in distributed FS. to lift load from storage machines, from which they can take data from each other, not only storage machine. Can You suggest a particular distributed FS which meets my needs? Or there is another way to solve this problem, without it? Amounts of data in FS in one time are like several terabytes. (storage can handle this, but processors cannot). Data consistence is critical. Read write policy is: once file is written - its constant and may be only removed, but not modified. My current platform is Windows, but I'm ready to switch it, if there is a substantially more convenient solution on another one.

    Read the article

  • Should I partition a 1TB Hard Disk whose primary use is media storage?

    - by Senthil
    I am going to get a 1TB hard disk. I will be storing 1080p or 720p movies, high-bitrate music and pictures in it. I use my PC 90% of the time only to play/listen/see those. I am running out of space in my current HD so I am getting another one. My specs are 2.7GHz Dual Core, 512MB GeForce 9400GT, 2GB DDR2 RAM and all the proper matroska codecs/players. I guess that is enough to play 1080p movies withough a glitch, given an ideal hard disk. I've read about proper partitioning giving performance improvement etc.. I don't want my hard disk to be the bottleneck. Can someone tell me whether I should partition my 1TB hard disk into many drives? If I should, what is the ideal size of each partition? Smooth playing of movies is very important to me. Once I start filling up the disk, there is no turning back. So I want to get it right before I start. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • My processor is running slower than usually it has to run

    - by Soham
    I've Core2Duo E7400 2.80GHz processor on my Intel D945gcnl mobo. From CPU-Z, I've get to know that my processor speed is 1596MHz with X6 multiplier and 266MHz Bus Speed on each core. Why my processor is being operated at 1596 MHz rather than 2.80GHz...!!???? From my side I've tried to disable SpeedStep from my bios by setting EIST to 'Disable' and also tried to change Power Option to 'High Performance' in Windows 7. And also done like suggested in this question:http://superuser.com/questions/119176/processor-not-running-at-max-speed But it gains me nothing. I've also tried to run few massive applications together to check whether it was increasing at that time or not, but it remains same. Should I have to increase my multiplier or overclock to gain that lost speed...??? Should I have to check my power supply for any problem..??? or anything else...??? Please help me on this.... And yeah I've desktop computer so no problem causing by battery. Here's my CPU-Z Screenshot: http://i56.tinypic.com/2lk4mqc.jpg

    Read the article

  • Can a pool of memcache daemons be used to share sessions more efficiently?

    - by Tom
    We are moving from a 1 webserver setup to a two webserver setup and I need to start sharing PHP sessions between the two load balanced machines. We already have memcached installed (and started) and so I was pleasantly surprized that I could accomplish sharing sessions between the new servers by changing only 3 lines in the php.ini file (the session.save_handler and session.save_path): I replaced: session.save_handler = files with: session.save_handler = memcache Then on the master webserver I set the session.save_path to point to localhost: session.save_path="tcp://localhost:11211" and on the slave webserver I set the session.save_path to point to the master: session.save_path="tcp://192.168.0.1:11211" Job done, I tested it and it works. But... Obviously using memcache means the sessions are in RAM and will be lost if a machine is rebooted or the memcache daemon crashes - I'm a little concerned by this but I am a bit more worried about the network traffic between the two webservers (especially as we scale up) because whenever someone is load balanced to the slave webserver their sessions will be fetched across the network from the master webserver. I was wondering if I could define two save_paths so the machines look in their own session storage before using the network. For example: Master: session.save_path="tcp://localhost:11211, tcp://192.168.0.2:11211" Slave: session.save_path="tcp://localhost:11211, tcp://192.168.0.1:11211" Would this successfully share sessions across the servers AND help performance? i.e save network traffic 50% of the time. Or is this technique only for failovers (e.g. when one memcache daemon is unreachable)? Note: I'm not really asking specifically about memcache replication - more about whether the PHP memcache client can peak inside each memcache daemon in a pool, return a session if it finds one and only create a new session if it doesn't find one in all the stores. As I'm writing this I'm thinking I'm asking a bit much from PHP, lol... Assume: no sticky-sessions, round-robin load balancing, LAMP servers.

    Read the article

  • Should a Unit-test replicate functionality or Test output?

    - by Daniel Beardsley
    I've run into this dilemma several times. Should my unit-tests duplicate the functionality of the method they are testing to verify it's integrity? OR Should unit tests strive to test the method with numerous manually created instances of inputs and expected outputs? I'm mainly asking the question for situations where the method you are testing is reasonably simple and it's proper operation can be verified by glancing at the code for a minute. Simplified example (in ruby): def concat_strings(str1, str2) return str1 + " AND " + str2 end Simplified functionality-replicating test for the above method: def test_concat_strings 10.times do str1 = random_string_generator str2 = random_string_generator assert_equal (str1 + " AND " + str2), concat_strings(str1, str2) end end I understand that most times the method you are testing won't be simple enough to justify doing it this way. But my question remains; is this a valid methodology in some circumstances (why or why not)?

    Read the article

  • Books or Articles on Using NUnit to Test Entire Features

    - by INTPnerd
    Are there any books or articles that show you how to use NUnit to test entire features of a program? Is there a name for this type of testing? This is different from the typical use of NUnit for unit testing where you test individual classes. This is similar to acceptance testing except that it is written by the developer to discern that the program does what they interpreted as being what the customer wants the program to do. I don't need it to be readable by non-programmers or to produce a readable specification for non-programmers. The problem I am having is keeping this feature testing code maintainable. I need help in organizing my feature testing code. I also need help organizing the program code to be drivable in this way. I am having a hard time being able to issue commands to the program while still having good code design.

    Read the article

  • Integrate test process with Rspec and Cucumber in a plugin using Desert

    - by Romain Endelin
    Hello, I'm developing some rails plugins with desert, and I would like to use tests with RSpec and Cucumber in the development. RSpec is integrated by default in Desert plugins, but it gives me some bugs. Finally I have created a minimal application which use my plugin, and I try to test it like a normal application without plugin. But I dislike that solution, the plugin lost its modularity, and RSpec still returns me some bugs (he can't find the models/views/controllers located in the plugin...). So am I the only one who try to test a Desert plugin (or even in a classic plugin) ? May anyone know those matters and get a solution ?

    Read the article

  • javascript simple object creation test: opera leaks?

    - by joe
    Hi, I am trying to figure out certain memory leak conditions in javascript on a few browsers. Currently I'm only testing FF 3.6, Opera 10.10, and Safari 4.0.3. I've started with a fairly simple test, and can confirm no memory leaks in Firefox and Safari. But Opera just takes memory and never gives it back. What gives? Here's the test: <html> <head> <script type="text/javascript"> window.onload = init; //window.onunload = cleanup; var a=[]; function init() { var d = document.createElement('div'); d.innerHTML = "page loading..."; document.body.appendChild(d); for (var i=0; i<400000; i++) { a[i] = new Obj("xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"); } d.innerHTML = "PAGE LOADED"; } function cleanup() { for (var i=0; i<400000; i++) { a[i] = null; } } function Obj(msg) { this.msg=msg; } </script> </head> <body> </body> </html> I shouldn't need the cleanup() call on window.unload, but tried that also. No luck. As you can see this is simple JS, no circular DOM links, no closures. I monitor the memory usage using 'top' on Mac 10.4.11. Memory usage spikes up on page load, as expected. In FF and Safari reloading the page does not use any further memory, and all memory is returned when the window (tab) is closed. In Opera, memory spikes on load, and seems to also spike further on each reload (but not always...). But regardless of reload, memory never goes back down below the initial load spike. I had hoped this was a no-brainer test that all browsers would pass, so I could move on to more "interesting" conditions. Am I doing something wrong here? Or is this a known Opera issue? Thanks! -joe

    Read the article

  • How important is dual-gigabit lan for a super user's home NAS?

    - by Andrew
    Long story short: I'm building my own home server based on Ubuntu with 4 drives in RAID 10. Its primary purpose will be NAS and backup. Would I be making a terrible mistake by building a NAS Server with a single Gigabit NIC? Long story long: I know the absolute max I can get out of a single Gigabit port is 125MB/s, and I want this NAS to be able to handle up to 6 computers accessing files simultaneously, with up to two of them streaming video. With Ubuntu NIC-bonding and the performance of RAID 10, I can theoretically double my throughput and achieve 250MB/s (ok, not really, but it would be faster). The drives have an average read throughput of 83.87MB/s according to Tom's Hardware. The unit itself will be based on the Chenbro ES34069-BK-180 case. With my current hardware choices, it'll have this motherboard with a Core i3 CPU and 8GB of RAM. Overkill, I know, but this server will be doing other things as well (like transcoding video). Unfortunately, the only Mini-ITX boards I can find with dual-gigabit and 6 SATA ports are Intel Atom-based, and I need more processing power than an Atom has to offer. I would love to find a board with 6 SATA ports and two Gigabit LAN ports that supports a Core i3 CPU. So far, my search has come up empty. Thus, my dilemma. Should I hold out for such a board, go with an Atom-based solution, or stick with my current single-gigabit configuration? I know there are consumer NAS units with just one gigabit interface (probably most of them), but I think I will demand a lot more from my server than the average home user. Any advice is appreciated. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • mkfs Operation Takes Very Long on Linux Software Raid 5

    - by Elmar Weber
    I've set-up a Linux software raid level 5 consisting of 4 * 2 TB disks. The disk array was created with a 64k stripe size and no other configuration parameters. After the initial rebuild I tried to create a filesystem and this step takes very long (about half an hour or more). I tried to create an xfs and ext3 filesystem, both took a long time, with mkfs.ext3 I observed the following behaviour, which might be helpful: writing inode tables runs fast until it reaches 1053 (~ 1 second), then it writes about 50, waits for two seconds, then the next 50 are written (according to the console display) when I try to cancel the operation with Control+C it hangs for half a minute before it is really canceled The performance of the disks individually is very good, I've run bonnie++ on each one separately with write / read values of around 95 / 110MB/s. Even when I run bonnie++ on every drive in parallel the values are only reduced by about 10 MB. So I'm excluding hardware / I/O scheduling in general as a problem source. I tried different configuration parameters for stripe_cache_size and readahead size without success, but I don't think they are that relevant for the file system creation operation. The server details: Linux server 2.6.35-27-generic #48-Ubuntu SMP x86_64 GNU/Linux mdadm - v2.6.7.1 Does anyone has a suggestion on how to further debug this?

    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 | 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143  | Next Page >