Search Results

Search found 267 results on 11 pages for 'benchmarking'.

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

  • How I use PowerShell to collect Performance Counter data

    - by AaronBertrand
    In a current project, I need to collect performance counters from a set of virtual machines that are performing different tasks and running a variety of workloads. In a similar project last year, I used LogMan to collect performance data. This time I decided to try PowerShell because, well, all the kids are doing it, I felt a little passé, and a lot of the other tasks in this project (such as building out VMs and running workloads) were already being accomplished via PowerShell. And after all, I...(read more)

    Read the article

  • How I use PowerShell to collect Performance Counter data

    - by AaronBertrand
    In a current project, I need to collect performance counters from a set of virtual machines that are performing different tasks and running a variety of workloads. In a similar project last year, I used LogMan to collect performance data. This time I decided to try PowerShell because, well, all the kids are doing it, I felt a little passé, and a lot of the other tasks in this project (such as building out VMs and running workloads) were already being accomplished via PowerShell. And after all, I...(read more)

    Read the article

  • European Interoperability Framework - a new beginning?

    - by trond-arne.undheim
    The most controversial document in the history of the European Commission's IT policy is out. EIF is here, wrapped in the Communication "Towards interoperability for European public services", and including the new feature European Interoperability Strategy (EIS), arguably a higher strategic take on the same topic. Leaving EIS aside for a moment, the EIF controversy has been around IPR, defining open standards and about the proper terminology around standardization deliverables. Today, as the document finally emerges, what is the verdict? First of all, to be fair to those among you who do not spend your lives in the intricate labyrinths of Commission IT policy documents on interoperability, let's define what we are talking about. According to the Communication: "An interoperability framework is an agreed approach to interoperability for organisations that want to collaborate to provide joint delivery of public services. Within its scope of applicability, it specifies common elements such as vocabulary, concepts, principles, policies, guidelines, recommendations, standards, specifications and practices." The Good - EIF reconfirms that "The Digital Agenda can only take off if interoperability based on standards and open platforms is ensured" and also confirms that "The positive effect of open specifications is also demonstrated by the Internet ecosystem." - EIF takes a productive and pragmatic stance on openness: "In the context of the EIF, openness is the willingness of persons, organisations or other members of a community of interest to share knowledge and stimulate debate within that community, the ultimate goal being to advance knowledge and the use of this knowledge to solve problems" (p.11). "If the openness principle is applied in full: - All stakeholders have the same possibility of contributing to the development of the specification and public review is part of the decision-making process; - The specification is available for everybody to study; - Intellectual property rights related to the specification are licensed on FRAND terms or on a royalty-free basis in a way that allows implementation in both proprietary and open source software" (p. 26). - EIF is a formal Commission document. The former EIF 1.0 was a semi-formal deliverable from the PEGSCO, a working group of Member State representatives. - EIF tackles interoperability head-on and takes a clear stance: "Recommendation 22. When establishing European public services, public administrations should prefer open specifications, taking due account of the coverage of functional needs, maturity and market support." - The Commission will continue to support the National Interoperability Framework Observatory (NIFO), reconfirming the importance of coordinating such approaches across borders. - The Commission will align its internal interoperability strategy with the EIS through the eCommission initiative. - One cannot stress the importance of using open standards enough, whether in the context of open source or non-open source software. The EIF seems to have picked up on this fact: What does the EIF says about the relation between open specifications and open source software? The EIF introduces, as one of the characteristics of an open specification, the requirement that IPRs related to the specification have to be licensed on FRAND terms or on a royalty-free basis in a way that allows implementation in both proprietary and open source software. In this way, companies working under various business models can compete on an equal footing when providing solutions to public administrations while administrations that implement the standard in their own software (software that they own) can share such software with others under an open source licence if they so decide. - EIF is now among the center pieces of the Digital Agenda (even though this demands extensive inter-agency coordination in the Commission): "The EIS and the EIF will be maintained under the ISA Programme and kept in line with the results of other relevant Digital Agenda actions on interoperability and standards such as the ones on the reform of rules on implementation of ICT standards in Europe to allow use of certain ICT fora and consortia standards, on issuing guidelines on essential intellectual property rights and licensing conditions in standard-setting, including for ex-ante disclosure, and on providing guidance on the link between ICT standardisation and public procurement to help public authorities to use standards to promote efficiency and reduce lock-in.(Communication, p.7)" All in all, quite a few good things have happened to the document in the two years it has been on the shelf or was being re-written, depending on your perspective, in any case, awaiting the storms to calm. The Bad - While a certain pragmatism is required, and governments cannot migrate to full openness overnight, EIF gives a bit too much room for governments not to apply the openness principle in full. Plenty of reasons are given, which should maybe have been put as challenges to be overcome: "However, public administrations may decide to use less open specifications, if open specifications do not exist or do not meet functional interoperability needs. In all cases, specifications should be mature and sufficiently supported by the market, except if used in the context of creating innovative solutions". - EIF does not use the internationally established terminology: open standards. Rather, the EIF introduces the notion of "formalised specification". How do "formalised specifications" relate to "standards"? According to the FAQ provided: The word "standard" has a specific meaning in Europe as defined by Directive 98/34/EC. Only technical specifications approved by a recognised standardisation body can be called a standard. Many ICT systems rely on the use of specifications developed by other organisations such as a forum or consortium. The EIF introduces the notion of "formalised specification", which is either a standard pursuant to Directive 98/34/EC or a specification established by ICT fora and consortia. The term "open specification" used in the EIF, on the one hand, avoids terminological confusion with the Directive and, on the other, states the main features that comply with the basic principle of openness laid down in the EIF for European Public Services. Well, this may be somewhat true, but in reality, Europe is 30 year behind in terminology. Unless the European Standardization Reform gets completed in the next few months, most Member States will likely conclude that they will go on referencing and using standards beyond those created by the three European endorsed monopolists of standardization, CEN, CENELEC and ETSI. Who can afford to begin following the strict Brussels rules for what they can call open standards when, in reality, standards stemming from global standardization organizations, so-called fora/consortia, dominate in the IT industry. What exactly is EIF saying? Does it encourage Member States to go on using non-ESO standards as long as they call it something else? I guess I am all for it, although it is a bit cumbersome, no? Why was there so much interest around the EIF? The FAQ attempts to explain: Some Member States have begun to adopt policies to achieve interoperability for their public services. These actions have had a significant impact on the ecosystem built around the provision of such services, e.g. providers of ICT goods and services, standardisation bodies, industry fora and consortia, etc... The Commission identified a clear need for action at European level to ensure that actions by individual Member States would not create new electronic barriers that would hinder the development of interoperable European public services. As a result, all stakeholders involved in the delivery of electronic public services in Europe have expressed their opinions on how to increase interoperability for public services provided by the different public administrations in Europe. Well, it does not take two years to read 50 consultation documents, and the EU Standardization Reform is not yet completed, so, more pragmatically, you finally had to release the document. Ok, let's leave some of that aside because the document is out and some people are happy (and others definitely not). The Verdict Considering the controversy, the delays, the lobbying, and the interests at stake both in the EU, in Member States and among vendors large and small, this document is pretty impressive. As with a good wine that has not yet come to full maturity, let's say that it seems to be coming in in the 85-88/100 range, but only a more fine-grained analysis, enjoyment in good company, and ultimately, implementation, will tell. The European Commission has today adopted a significant interoperability initiative to encourage public administrations across the EU to maximise the social and economic potential of information and communication technologies. Today, we should rally around this achievement. Tomorrow, let's sit down and figure out what it means for the future.

    Read the article

  • Fastest Functional Language

    - by Farouk
    I've recently been delving into functional programming especially Haskell and F#, the prior more so. After some googling around I could not find a benchmark comparison of the more prominent functional languages (Scala,F# etc). I know it's not necessarily fair to some of the languages (Scala comes to mind) given that they are hybrids, but I just wanna know which outperforms which on what operations and overall.

    Read the article

  • Is running "milli"-benchmarks a good idea?

    - by Konstantin Weitz
    I just came across the Caliper project and it looks very nice. Reading the introduction to microbenchmarks, one gets the feeling that the developers would not suggest to use the framework if the benchmark takes longer than a second or so. I looked at the code and it looks like a RuntimeOutOfRangeException is actually thrown if a scenario takes longer than 10s to execute. Could you explain to me what the problems are with running larger benchmarks? My motivation for using Caliper was to compare two join-algorithm implementations. Those will definitely run for quite some time and will do some disk IO, yet running the entire database would make it hard to do the comparison, because the configuration of the algorithms and the visualization of the results would be a pain.

    Read the article

  • How to test the render speed of my solution in a web browser?

    - by Cuartico
    Ok, I need to test the speed of my solution in a web browser, but I have some problems, there are 2 versions of the web solution, the original one that is on server A and the "fixed" version that is on server B. I have VS2010 Ultimate, so I can make a web and load test on solution B, but I can't load the A solution on my IDE. I was trying to use fiddle2 and jmeter, but they only gave me the times of the request and response of the browsers with the server, I also want the time it takes to the browser to render the whole page. Maybe I'm misusing some of this tools... I don't know if this could be usefull but: Solution A is on VB 6.0 Solution B is on VB.Net Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • What will be a good python script (or your favorite language goes here) to test a system's performance and capabilities?

    - by dassouki
    Let's say you're in a computer store looking at 10 laptops, you want to really compare the system's capabilities. What will be an efficient "your fav language goes here" script that will allow you to do this? As an example, when I go to the store I usually open a macbook and a pro's terminal and write an equation in python, iterate it a million or so times, and time them. I like to compare the difference in time. What would be an ideal and simple script that can efficiently compare systems?

    Read the article

  • Which PHP frameworks use in testing?

    - by EasyHB
    I am going to do a test/benchmark of some PHP frameworks. The main factor of comaparation will be a comunication with MySQL databases and CRUD operations with them. I'll also compare their documentation, comunity support, etc. So I made a list of some known frameworks and I'll be glad if someone can tell me which I should not use or which I forgot to include. Zend Framework CodeIgniter Symphony Yii Kohana Prado CakePHP Nette PhpBURN Akelos Recess Jelix DooPHP Qcodo Seagull Thx for every help.

    Read the article

  • Does anyone do hardware benchmarks on compiling code?

    - by Colen
    I've seen a bunch of sites that benchmark new hardware on gaming performance, zipping some files, encoding a movie, or whatever. Are there any that test the impact of new hardware (like SSDs, new CPUs, RAM speeds, or whatever) on compile and link speeds, either linux or windows? It'd be really good to find out what mattered the most for compile speed and be able to focus on that, instead of just extrapolating from other benchmarks.

    Read the article

  • Benchmarking a file server

    - by Joel Coel
    I'm working on building a new file server... a simple Windows Server box with a few terabytes of disk space to share on the LAN. Pain for current hard drive prices aside :( -- I would like to get some benchmarks for this device under load compared to our old server. The old server was installed in 2005 and had 5 136GB 10K disks in RAID 5. The new server has 8 1TB disks in two RAID 10 volumes (plus a hot spare for each volume), but they're only 7.2K rpm, and of course with a much larger cache size. I'd like to get an idea of the performance expectations of the new server relative to the old. Where do I get started? I'd like to know both raw potential under different kinds of load for each server, as well an idea of what our real-world load looks like and how it will translate. Will disk load even matter, or will performance be more driven by the network connection? I could probably fumble through some disk i/o and wait counters in performance monitor, but I don't really know what to look for, which counters to watch, or for how long and when. FWIW, I'm expecting a nice improvement because of the benefits of having two different volumes and the better RAID 10 performance vs RAID 5, in spite of using slower disks... but I'd like to get an idea of how much.

    Read the article

  • ZFS - zpool ARC cache plus L2ARC benchmarking

    - by jemmille
    I have been doing lots of I/O testing on a ZFS system I will eventually use to serve virtual machines. I thought I would try adding SSD's for use as cache to see how much faster I can get the read speed. I also have 24GB of RAM in the machine that acts as ARC. vol0 is 6.4TB and the cache disks are 60GB SSD's. The zvol is as follows: pool: vol0 state: ONLINE scrub: none requested config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM vol0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c1t8d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 cache c3t5001517958D80533d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c3t5001517959092566d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 The issue is I'm not seeing any difference with the SSD's installed. I've tried bonnie++ benchmarks and some simple dd commands to write a file then read the file. I have run benchmarks before and after adding the SSD's. I've ensured the file sizes are at least double my RAM so there is no way it can all get cached locally. Am I missing something here? When am I going to see benefits of having all that cache? Am I simply not under these circumstances? Are the benchmark programs not good for testing the effect of cache because of the the way (and what) it writes and reads?

    Read the article

  • Apachebench on node.js server returning "apr_poll: The timeout specified has expired (70007)" after ~30 requests

    - by Scott
    I just started working with node.js and doing some experimental load testing with ab is returning an error at around 30 requests or so. I've found other pages showing a lot better concurrency numbers than I am such as: http://zgadzaj.com/benchmarking-nodejs-basic-performance-tests-against-apache-php Are there some critical server configuration settings that need done to achieve those numbers? I've watched memory on top and I still see a decent amount of free memory while running ab, watched mongostat as well and not seeing anything that looks suspicious. The command I'm running, and the error is: ab -k -n 100 -c 10 postrockandbeyond.com/ This is ApacheBench, Version 2.0.41-dev <$Revision: 1.121.2.12 $> apache-2.0 Copyright (c) 1996 Adam Twiss, Zeus Technology Ltd, http://www.zeustech.net/ Copyright (c) 2006 The Apache Software Foundation, http://www.apache.org/ Benchmarking postrockandbeyond.com (be patient)...apr_poll: The timeout specified has expired (70007) Total of 32 requests completed Does anyone have any suggestions on things I should look in to that may be causing this? I'm running it on osx lion, but have also run the same command on the server with the same results. EDIT: I eventually solved this issue. I was using a TTAPI, which was connecting to turntable.fm through websockets. On the homepage, I was connecting on every request. So what was happening was that after a certain number of connections, everything would fall apart. If you're running into the same issue, check out whether you are hitting external services each request.

    Read the article

  • 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

  • is there anyway to know if your supposedly fully dedicated server is really a virtually resource-sha

    - by siran
    Hi, sometimes I feel my server not responding as smoothly as I would expect (i have a Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 2.80GHz Quad Core), given that for example, the 'top' commands reports a low load < 0.5, CPU are almost completely idle ... I maybe have internet connectivity issues, so I don't really know if it's me or if it's the server itself. Is there anykind of benchmarking script (or something analogous) I could run and see the actual performance of the server ?

    Read the article

  • why is iometer performance slower after first run?

    - by Dan
    I'm doing some benchmarking with IOMeter, and I'm seeing a consistent and susbtantial drop-off in performance after running the first test. These drop-offs are about the same on the three systems I've tested on, which makes me think it's a configuration setting, or just a fact of life about using IOMeter. For example, one system (local RAID 10) went from 388 I/Os per second the first run, to about 211 I/Os per second on every run after that. Everything else about the test was identical, and I also bounced the machine in between runs. So, is this expected behavior, or am I missing something?

    Read the article

  • Suggested benchmark for testing CPU footprint of antivirus software

    - by Alex Chernavsky
    Our organization is currently running Symantec Corporate Antivirus, which is rumored to be a big resource hog. I know that we do have a lot of older machines that are running slow. Our PCs are all running Windows XP Pro and are used only for business applications (mostly Microsoft Office), e-mail, and web surfing. They're not used for gaming (one would hope not, anyway). I'd like to take one of the old PCs and do a speed benchmark test while it's running Symantec AV, then another test with no antivirus, and a third test with ESET NOD32. As I said, I don't care much about graphics performance. What would be an appropriate benchmarking program program to use? Freeware is best, of course. Thank you for considering my question.

    Read the article

  • How do I Benchmark RESTful Service with Variable Parameters?

    - by Eli
    I'm currently working on benchmarking a RESTful service I've made, and part of that is making sure it runs in a reasonable amount of times for a large array of parameters. For example, let's say I have RESTful API of the form some_site.com/item?item_id=y. In that case to be sure my service is working as fast as I'd like it to work, I'd want to try out many values for y one by one, preferably coming from some text file. I can't figure out any way of doing this in ab or httperf. I'm open to using a different benchmarking program if I have, but would prefer something simple and light. What I want to do seems like something pretty standard, so I'm guessing there must already be a program that let's me do it, but an hour or so of googling hasn't gotten me an answer. Ideas?

    Read the article

  • WPF animation/UI features performance and benchmarking

    - by Rich
    I'm working on a relatively small proof-of-concept for some line of business stuff with some fancy WPF UI work. Without even going too crazy, I'm already seeing some really poor performance when using a lot of the features that I thought were the main reason to consider WPF for UI building in the first place. I asked a question on here about why my animation was being stalled the first time it was run, and at the end what I found was that a very simple UserControl was taking almost half a second just to build its visual tree. I was able to get a work around to the symptom, but the fact that it takes that long to initialize a simple control really bothers me. Now, I'm testing my animation with and without the DropShadowEffect, and the result is night and day. A subtle drop shadow makes my control look so much nicer, but it completely ruins the smoothness of the animation. Let me not even start with the font rendering either. The calculation of my animations when the control has a bunch of gradient brushes and a drop shadow make the text blurry for about a full second and then slowly come into focus. So, I guess my question is if there are known studies, blog posts, or articles detailing which features are a hazard in the current version of WPF for business critical applications. Are things like Effects (ie. DropShadowEffect), gradient brushes, key frame animations, etc going to have too much of a negative effect on render quality (or maybe the combinations of these things)? Is the final version of WPF 4.0 going to correct some of these issues? I've read that VS2010 beta has some of these same issues and that they are supposed to be resolved by final release. Is that because of improvements to WPF itself or because half of the application will be rebuilt with the previous technology?

    Read the article

  • MySQL Single Query Benchmarking Strategies

    - by Pepper
    Hello, I have a slow mySQL query in my application that I need to re-write. The problem is, it's only slow on my production server and only when it's not cached. The first time I run it, it will take 12 seconds, then anytime after that it'll be 500 milliseconds. Is there an easy way to test this query without it hitting the query cache so I can see the results of my refactoring? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How fast is Berkeley DB SQL compared to SQLite?

    - by dan04
    Oracle recently released a Berkeley DB back-end to SQLite. I happen to have a hundreds-of-megabytes SQLite database that could very well benefit from "improved performance, concurrency, scalability, and reliability", but Oracle's site appears to lack any measurements of the improvements. Has anyone here done some benchmarking?

    Read the article

  • How does one calculate CPU utilization programmatically ?

    - by Scott Davies
    Hi, I have a benchmarking program that calculates the time (in milliseconds and ticks), for a persistance to Entity Framework 4.0. Is there a way to calculate CPU load ? I am guessing that I would need to query Windows to find out my CPU frequency, how many cores, etc. Does this sound right ? If so, what part of the .NET framework relates to querying the system ? I am guessing System.Diagnostics ? Thanks, Scott

    Read the article

  • Large public datasets?

    - by Jason
    I am looking for some large public datasets, in particular: Large sample web server logs that have been anonymized. Datasets used for database performance benchmarking. Any other links to large public datasets would be appreciated. I already know about Amazon's public datasets at: http://aws.amazon.com/publicdatasets/

    Read the article

  • is there anyway to know if your supposedly fully dedicated server is really a virtually resource-sha

    - by siran
    Hi, sometimes I feel my server not responding as smoothly as I would expect (i have a Intel(R) Xeon(TM) CPU 2.80GHz Quad Core), given that for example, the 'top' commands reports a low load < 0.5, CPU are almost completely idle ... I maybe have internet connectivity issues, so I don't really know if it's me or if it's the server itself. Is there anykind of benchmarking script (or something analogous) I could run and see the actual performance of the server ?

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