Search Results

Search found 6207 results on 249 pages for 'slow'.

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 4/249 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Slow File Copy observed copying 40GB files across network to iSCSI device

    - by Rick
    Here's a curious ones for the gurus: Setup: Source Machine: Windows Server 2003 R2 machine with local hard drive. VHD file of 40GB. 1 x 1Gbps network card, Cat6 cable, switch. Target Machine: Windows Server 2008 R2 machine with iSCSI connection to iSCSI target on separate machine (1TB, RAID5). 1 x 1Gbps network card, Cat6 cable, connected to same switch as for Source Machine. Second 1Gbps network card, Cat6 cable, connected via isolated switch to the iSCSI target. Switches are Netgear JGS524 model (web managed). If I copy from the Win2003R2 machine to Win2008R2 machine local drive I get 40GB in 45 minutes, 36 seconds. If I copy from the Win2008R2 machine to the iSCSI target (local drive to iSCSI target) I get 40GB in 37 minutes 56 seconds. If I copy from the Win2003R2 machine to the iSCSI target via the Win2008R2 machine I get 40GB in 3 hours, 50 minutes, 24 seconds. All copies were done via the following command issued on the Win2008R2 box: XCOPY <source> <target> /J XCOPY /J - Copies using unbuffered I/O. Recommended for very large files. So, what's the bit I'm missing here? Why does a back-to-back copy take in total 1 hour, 23 minutes, 32 seconds when a "straight through" copy take almost 3 times as long? Switches show no errors, network hovers around the 3% utilisation mark for the duration of the copy (whereas the "back-to-back" copies are around the 25% utilisation mark). What have I missed?

    Read the article

  • Painfully slow login to AD bound Mac OS X Leopard machine when off home network

    - by GeeBee
    Dear all Just looking for a little help with this problem that seems to trip a lot of people up and is causing me no end of grief. I have a number of fully patched OS X Leopard machines that are bound to my AD (Server 2003). When on the home network, logging in seems swift and works as expected. When users take the machines off site, login can take 5 minutes or more. The user adds correct credentials but the desktop does not appear for a very long time. Outside the office, I have tried logging in using a local Admin account, switching off Airport and then logging in using an AD account. In this situation login is immediate again. It all seems as if Leopard is finding a suitable wireless network, spending far too long looking for the Domain before eventually giving up and using the cached credentials instead. I have read that disabling Bonjour on the machine will stop this problem (i have not yet tested) http://www.macwindows.com/leopardAD.html#111607z ...but I am reluctant to use this "Solution" as I would like to be able to use Bonjour on the local network as well as having AD-bound machines. However, is disabling Bonjour really the only answer? Is there not some time-out setting somewhere that could be amended to stop Leopard spending forever looking for home? Any help would be very gratefully received Thanks Gordon

    Read the article

  • centos TCP/IP connection very slow

    - by yuli chika
    I have a VSP (centos6.1 64bit) with 4gb ram. It always runs well, but in recent few days, the server become slowly. open a small css file need 22 seconds(2kb). tested in home/office/phone with (IE,chrome,safari,firefox). see in firebug networking DNS Lookup ?4?ms Connecting ?21.18?s Sending 1?ms Waiting ?115?ms Receiving ?9?ms The connection cost 21.18 seconds I have checked all the log file, there have no error. top commond, still have free memory. top - 00:23:15 up 8 days, 3:57, 1 user, load average: 3.60, 3.42, 3.83 Tasks: 221 total, 4 running, 217 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 19.3%us, 3.2%sy, 0.0%ni, 76.1%id, 1.4%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Mem: 4194304k total, 3247724k used, 946580k free, 0k buffers Swap: 0k total, 0k used, 0k free, 0k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 32357 mysql 15 0 3710m 835m 6268 S 34.5 20.4 39:14.40 mysqld 9780 apache 15 0 442m 59m 12m S 33.2 1.4 0:05.69 httpd 9842 apache 15 0 403m 26m 10m S 16.9 0.7 0:01.23 httpd 9847 apache 15 0 412m 45m 22m R 15.3 1.1 0:01.00 httpd 9834 apache 15 0 426m 46m 11m R 13.0 1.1 0:02.22 httpd 9891 apache 15 0 407m 43m 19m S 8.0 1.1 0:00.33 httpd 9845 apache 15 0 414m 51m 24m S 6.0 1.3 0:01.53 httpd 9827 apache 15 0 402m 28m 11m S 3.3 0.7 0:02.69 httpd 9768 apache 16 0 414m 51m 24m S 3.0 1.3 0:06.51 httpd 9889 root 15 0 211m 12m 8160 S 2.7 0.3 0:00.32 php 9702 apache 15 0 415m 55m 26m S 1.7 1.4 0:10.67 httpd 9844 apache 15 0 413m 47m 21m S 1.7 1.2 0:01.21 httpd 9697 apache 15 0 414m 51m 24m S 1.3 1.3 0:11.05 httpd 9778 apache 15 0 414m 53m 25m S 1.3 1.3 0:05.38 httpd 9772 apache 15 0 414m 51m 23m R 0.7 1.3 0:05.04 httpd 9823 apache 15 0 415m 50m 23m S 0.7 1.2 0:03.97 httpd 9837 apache 15 0 402m 27m 11m S 0.3 0.7 0:01.04 httpd Then, how to check where is the problem and fixed it? I haven't change and config files in these days. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • mysql connection is slow (5seconds)

    - by acidzombie24
    After building my webapp on a first boot i create 2 connections to mysql on debian then 1-2 (r/w) for every page after that. The connection consistently take 5.2 seconds to connect. Debian is in a VM running in my OS. Why is the connection taking this long? At times it will take < 0.1 seconds which is great but 5.2 x2-3 on every run is to much. Has anyone experience this problem? how do i solve it? note: I am using .NET to connect. Not that it matters. and its mysql v5

    Read the article

  • Fedora12 Slow USB 2.0 Write Speed, ehci_hcd module is missing

    - by MA1
    I am using Fedora 12, the problem I am facing is USB 2.0 write speed. I have a dual boot system with Windows XP and Fedora 12. USB 2.0 write speed in Windows XP is much faster then what I am getting in Fedora 12. After searching Google I came to know that ehci_hcd module is missing/not present in my system. ehci_hcd module is neither loaded nor it is present in the available list of modules. Can someone guide me how to fix this issue? Does ehci_hcd have something to do with USB 2.0 write speed? Do I have to recompile the kernel and add/enable the ehci_hcd module?

    Read the article

  • Internet connection very slow after Linksys configuration

    - by NLV
    Hello We have this network setup Server1 - DHCP server, Domain Controller, AD Lease line for Internet connection From lease line to Linksys router (we dont use wireless though) From linksys to Netgear (24 port Switch) and vonage (VoIP) Netgear to all our machines We configured Linsys with the static IP and DNS server addresses our ISP gave and we have routed it correctly. All our work machines are configured with Get IP automatically DNS server addresses our ISP gave The problem is that none of the sites are getting opened promptly. It is taking around 5 minutes to load google.com. But we are able to ping all the sites. What could be the problem?

    Read the article

  • Slow ASP.NET site using IIS6

    - by lars
    Hi, I have two servers, one virtual and one physical, running the exact same site on both machines. Both machines are running on ~ 2% CPU load and very much RAM available for usage. Somehow the site, with cache turned off ofcourse, loads in ~ 500ms on the virtual machine (which is a dev-server by the way) but almost 3 full seconds on the physical machine. They're both running Server 2003, IIS6 aswell as asp.net version 2.0 Any ideas where I can start troubleshoot this? Best Regards LP

    Read the article

  • Apache - slow response

    - by SJN
    Hi, I have a Ubuntu 64-bit 10.04 LTS box running Virtualmin and Apache2, fully updated. It's an ESX VM with 2GB RAM. There are currently two sites (one CMS and one Wordpress 3) running on the server and both have the same issue. The request takes about 5s and then the page loads. This behaving seems to be the case with all page loads. I'm looking for advice on where to start troubleshooting. Thanks, Sean

    Read the article

  • Creating/renaming folder in Windows 7x64 extremely slow

    - by Newtopian
    Hi I have this very annoying problem : Whenever I want to create or edit a folder on my system it takes a very long time to complete. Right click-new folder... wait... wait... wait a good 30-60 seconds then type name and enter... wait again 30-60 seconds and then you can enter it. Browsing is normal and I have no problem creating folders through applications like eclipse but through explorer it is a real pain. Renaming folders has similar effect. otherwise the computer is (almost) normal, any ideas ?

    Read the article

  • Slow Local Network, Windows 7, Snow Leopard, WiFi/Wired

    - by WerkkreW
    Hello - I am experiencing really poor local network performance in my home. I was recently using a Linksys WRT54G Router with DD-WRT on it, and a couple comparable Linksys-G PCI cards for connectivity but decided to upgrade hoping it would help with my performance issues. The computers in my house are connected as follows: Comcast Business Class Commercial 25mbps/10mbps (Verified with SpeakEasy and Speedtest.net) D-Link DGL-4500 Wireless N Router Windows 7x64 - D-Link DWA-552 Wireless-N Windows 7x64 - D-Link DWA-552 Wireless-N Mac Mini 10.6.2 - AirPort Extreme N Playstation 3, Hard Wired Xbox 360, Hard Wired Essentially the problem is very specific. Web browsing and uploading/downloading files from the internet is fine, more than fine. But if I want to say, Stream a video from one of my Windows 7 computers to my PS3, or copy a large video file between either of the PC's or the Mac, I get a consistent 500-900Kbps throughput at the high end. If I open my network browser, or try to browse my homegroup the response time is horrible. Both of my Windows computers are showing Strong wireless signals with a connection speed of 300Mbps. I know I can never expect to achieve anything near those speeds, but 500Kbps? Here is what I have tried so far: Enabled Single mode N-only and N/G Only on router WPA2 with AES Encrpytion Disabled "Remote Differential Compression" in Windows 7 Disabled TCP "Auto-Tuning" Used other software for file copies such as "Teracopy" I am at the end of my rope. Unfortunately I live in a 75 year old home with plaster walls, so hard-wiring my entire house isn't really an option I can handle right now. Any ideas to help me get decent speed when transferring files across my network would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Does overheating cause a computer to slow down?

    - by anonymous coward
    It's a pet peeve of mine that people leave the tower of their desktop computers in the small enclosed cabinet part of computer desks. I've heard that heat issues can cause problems with PCs, but is this realistic? Is leaving the desktop in a cabinet area, or above-average-room-temp, a realistic potential cause of slowdowns? (I'm completely aware that there are other contributing factors to computer 'slowness', just wondering if this is a realistic problem, or mostly mental).

    Read the article

  • Slow Local Network, Windows 7, Snow Leopard, WiFi/Wired

    - by WerkkreW
    I am experiencing really poor local network performance in my home. I was recently using a Linksys WRT54G Router with DD-WRT on it, and a couple comparable Linksys-G PCI cards for connectivity but decided to upgrade hoping it would help with my performance issues. The computers in my house are connected as follows: Comcast Business Class Commercial 25mbps/10mbps (Verified) D-Link DGL-4500 Wireless N Router Windows 7x64 - D-Link DWA-552 Wireless-N Windows 7x64 - D-Link DWA-552 Wireless-N Mac Mini 10.6.2 - AirPort Extreme N Playstation 3, Hard Wired Xbox 360, Hard Wired Essentially the problem is very specific. Web browsing and uploading/downloading files from the internet is fine, more than fine. But if I want to say, Stream a video from one of my Windows 7 computers to my PS3, or copy a large video file between either of the PC's or the Mac, I get a consistent 500-900Kbps throughput at the high end. If I open my network browser, or try to browse my homegroup the response time is horrible. Both of my Windows computers are showing Strong wireless signals with a connection speed of 300Mbps. I know I can never expect to achieve anything near those speeds, but 500Kbps? Here is what I have tried so far: Enabled Single mode N-only and N/G Only on router WPA2 with AES Encrpytion Disabled "Remote Differential Compression" in Windows 7 Disabled TCP "Auto-Tuning" Used other software for file copies such as "Teracopy" I am at the end of my rope. Unfortunately I live in a 75 year old home with plaster walls, so hard-wiring my entire house isn't really an option I can handle right now. Any ideas to help me get decent speed when transferring files across my network would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Super slow opening my downloads folder

    - by Mark
    I have an exe file in my download folder that I half downloaded through utorrent (it's not piracy, a legit file from people who use bittorrent to distribute large files). I think I tried to open it while it was still sharing, that is, did not stop the upload. That actually froze my computer. When I restart in utorrent I set the file to be deleted. Unfortunately even though utorrent doesn't see that file anymore, it's still visible in my download folder. Whenever I try to open my download folder it literally takes 10 minutes or more. It opens, but is empty and the blue progress bar needs a long time to complete. After completion I can use the download folder normally, but opening and closing things in that folder takes a long time. I see the exe that I tried to download. I tried to delete it. But it was taking so long 30+ minutes that I eventually just hit cancel. That doesn't even work, and it was slowing down the computer. Couldn't figure out how to stop the delete so I just pulled the plug. Should I just forget about that dl folder and set a new one? Is there something I can do? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • One workstation gets slow access to the server, but others are fast

    - by Mike Hanson
    I've just setup a machine with Windows Server 2008. It hosts various services, like IIS, POP3, SMTP, Music for Squeezeboxes, VNC. All was working well for the first week or so. One day I needed to create a mapped drive on the server, so it could access files on my workstation. Windows indicated that Network Discovery was needed, so I turned it on with the "Home / Office" option (rather than "Public"). This may be coincidence, but since that time I've been having troubles accessing various services from my main workstation (running Windows 7/64): POP3 continued working correctly, but SMTP was delayed or failed entirely. (Telnet took 20 seconds to connect, but Outlook would never send messages.) VNC failed entirely. I reinstalled it on the server, and now it works but feels sluggish. The music web server was extremely delayed and usually failed. I tried reinstalling, and now it takes about 30 seconds to show the page name on the browser tab, and another 30 seconds to display any page contents. Other machines on the local network seem fine, as do machines connected via the Internet. I don't believe I changed anything on my own machine that would cause this. I considered the possibility that my anti-virus was involved, so I uninstalled AVG (commercial version), but that didn't help. I installed Norton 360 after that, and it didn't complain of viruses on my machine, and the delays remained. Because only my machine is affect, I'm tempted to blame it, except that reinstalling software on the server improved the situation, so there is almost certainly something going on with the server too. The firewall has all the necessary ports open, and it works fine for the other workstations (including external machines connected via the Internet), which indicates that it should be OK. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Server 2003 slow share.

    - by G V
    I am running an 03 box with shares active. When uploading to the share, the speed is average. About 15-20 mbps.. But when you think about it, it is bad because it is a direct connection to a couple machines. When uploading to another server the connection speed is twice that of the direct storage. When uploading s massive folder, 250 GB, the upload will start as normal, but as it progresses it drops in speed. Now it is sitting at around 2-7 Mbps. Any ideas on how i can boost the transfer rate? On a side note, the download speed is great. It is a speed that you would expect from this setup, the main problem is uploading and what is causing the extreme slowness in speeds. Any help would be great.

    Read the article

  • Computer slow after installing 32GB RAM

    - by John Gilmore
    I'm currently running very large network simulations for my PhD research, for which I need lots of RAM. I have a Core i7 2600K processor with a Gigabyte GA-Z68AP-D3 motherboard, running Windows 7 professional 64bit. I bought the system with 8GB (2x4GB) DDR3 1600 MHz Corsair Vengeance RAM and the system ran like a dream. I'm planning to upscale my simulations so I removed the 2x4GB RAM and installed 4x8GB DDR 1600 MHz Corsair Vengeance RAM. When I rebooted the system, boot time was much longer than usual (10 mins just to get to login screen). After logging in, the whole system was unresponsive. I tried playing some games (Bioshock 2), but it was unplayable. I've not had this problem before and I have an ATI Radeon HD 5850 graphics card, so that's not the problem. The only thing that's changed is the RAM. I've looked through the specifications of Windows, my motherboard and my CPU and they all state that 32GB of RAM is supported. Does anyone have an idea of what's going on? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Solaris 10 very slow ssh file transfers

    - by user133080
    Trying to copy a few TBs betweek Solaris 10 u9 systems A single scp only seems to be able to transfer around 120MB/min, over a 1GB network. If I run multiple scp copies, each one will do 120MB/min, so it is not the network as far as I can see. Any hints on how to tweak the Solaris settings to open a bigger pipe. Have the same problem with another piece of software that unfortunately does not seem to be able to be split into separate processes.

    Read the article

  • php mail() function painfully slow on local development machine

    - by Michael B
    Background: If you have set up a local apache server for development purposes you may have run into the problem where sendmail takes a long time (at least one minute) to send emails. This is extremely frustrating if you are trying to debug a problem with an email you have generated. There are several forum posts on the internet that discuss this problem. However, none of theme described what to do in enough detail for my limited knowledge. Here are the steps that worked for me: 1) find your hostname (in case you've forgotten it) using this command: :~$ cat /hosts/hostname myhostname 2) edit the file /etc/hosts and make sure the first line is the following: 127.0.0.1 localhost.localdomain localhost myhostname 3) edit the sendmail configuration file ( /etc/mail/sendmail.cf in Ubuntu) and Uncomment the line #O HostsFile=/etc/hosts 4) Restart the computer. The computer should boot up much faster now and the mail() function should return almost immediately. HOWEVER, the emails won't actually be sent unless you follow step 5. 5) You must new use the sendmail '-f' option whenever using the mail function. For example: mail('[email protected]', 'the subject', 'the message', null, '[email protected]'); My question for my fellow serverfaulters is: What further changes can be made so that I don't have to use the sendmail -f option? Although it's not very hard to add the -f option, it is a problem when your CMS (such as Drupal) does not use the -f option when sending mail. You would need to hack a core module to add this option.

    Read the article

  • SSH very slow when connecting from external [closed]

    - by wnstnsmth
    Possible Duplicate: ssh delay when connecting We have a CentOS server that we use for internal testing purposes, which has sshd enabled. When I (as a developer) am at the company, I use ssh [email protected] to connect to it - and it works flawlessly. Now, in order to work from home, accessing the server via the company's static IP, we set up another port for ssh, 2020. So I execute ssh -p 2020 [email protected] and am immediately granted for a password. After entering the password, it takes up to 30 seconds until I can access the server. Same is with SFTP (i.e. uploading files takes about 30 seconds until it begins to transfer). As you can imagine, if you have to regularly upload files to a webserver via SFTP, this is very tedious. So I looked at similar questions and thus edited the sshd_config file on the server, setting UseDNS to "no" and GSSAPIAuthentication to "no" (this one also in ssh_config on the client) - it did not work.. Please have a look at the -vvv output when externally accessing the server: ssh -p 2020 -vvv [email protected] PasteBin: ssh What could it be? Do you need more info?

    Read the article

  • Why is IE developer tools so slow?

    - by Raisen
    I've used the developer tools on Chrome, FF and IE, and on IE, it's extremely slow. I was trying to debug iGoogle and it took about 3 minutes to even open the tools page. Can anyone confirm that it's that slow? It works fine on small websites though.

    Read the article

  • appengine log console extremely slow

    - by Joey
    I am using the python app engine and finding that the log console on the local development server is terribly slow. Output to this window seems to show in chunks of about 5-15 lines every second. Is that typical? I find that it's so slow that it hinders my debugging time waiting for log data to appear.

    Read the article

  • Mysql 100% CPU + Slow query

    - by felipeclopes
    I'm using the RDS database from amazon with a some very big tables, and yesterday I started to face 100% CPU utilisation on the server and a bunch of slow query logs that were not happening before. I tried to check the queries that were running and faced this result from the explain command +----+-------------+-------------------------------+--------+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+---------------------------------------+---------+-----------------------------------------------------------------+------+----------------------------------------------+ | id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra | +----+-------------+-------------------------------+--------+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+---------------------------------------+---------+-----------------------------------------------------------------+------+----------------------------------------------+ | 1 | SIMPLE | businesses | const | PRIMARY | PRIMARY | 4 | const | 1 | Using index; Using temporary; Using filesort | | 1 | SIMPLE | activities_businesses | ref | PRIMARY,index_activities_users_on_business_id,index_tweets_users_on_tweet_id_and_business_id | index_activities_users_on_business_id | 9 | const | 2252 | Using index condition; Using where | | 1 | SIMPLE | activities_b_taggings_975e9c4 | ref | taggings_idx | taggings_idx | 782 | const,myapp_production.activities_businesses.id,const | 1 | Using index condition; Using where | | 1 | SIMPLE | activities | eq_ref | PRIMARY,index_activities_on_created_at | PRIMARY | 8 | myapp_production.activities_businesses.activity_id | 1 | Using where | +----+-------------+-------------------------------+--------+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+---------------------------------------+---------+-----------------------------------------------------------------+------+----------------------------------------------+ Also checkin in the process list, I got something like this: +----+-----------------+-------------------------------------+----------------------------+---------+------+--------------+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Id | User | Host | db | Command | Time | State | Info | +----+-----------------+-------------------------------------+----------------------------+---------+------+--------------+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+ | 1 | my_app | my_ip:57152 | my_app_production | Sleep | 0 | | NULL | | 2 | my_app | my_ip:57153 | my_app_production | Sleep | 2 | | NULL | | 3 | rdsadmin | localhost:49441 | NULL | Sleep | 9 | | NULL | | 6 | my_app | my_other_ip:47802 | my_app_production | Sleep | 242 | | NULL | | 7 | my_app | my_other_ip:47807 | my_app_production | Query | 231 | Sending data | SELECT my_fields... | | 8 | my_app | my_other_ip:47809 | my_app_production | Query | 231 | Sending data | SELECT my_fields... | | 9 | my_app | my_other_ip:47810 | my_app_production | Query | 231 | Sending data | SELECT my_fields... | | 10 | my_app | my_other_ip:47811 | my_app_production | Query | 231 | Sending data | SELECT my_fields... | | 11 | my_app | my_other_ip:47813 | my_app_production | Query | 231 | Sending data | SELECT my_fields... | ... So based on the numbers, it looks like there is no reason to have a slow query, since the worst execution plan is the one that goes through 2k rows which is not much. Edit 1 Another information that might be useful is the slow query_log SET timestamp=1401457485; SELECT my_query... # User@Host: myapp[myapp] @ ip-10-195-55-233.ec2.internal [IP] Id: 435 # Query_time: 95.830497 Lock_time: 0.000178 Rows_sent: 0 Rows_examined: 1129387 Edit 2 After profiling, I got this result. The result have approximately 250 rows with two columns each. +----------------------+----------+ | state | duration | +----------------------+----------+ | Sending data | 272 | | removing tmp table | 0 | | optimizing | 0 | | Creating sort index | 0 | | init | 0 | | cleaning up | 0 | | executing | 0 | | checking permissions | 0 | | freeing items | 0 | | Creating tmp table | 0 | | query end | 0 | | statistics | 0 | | end | 0 | | System lock | 0 | | Opening tables | 0 | | logging slow query | 0 | | Sorting result | 0 | | starting | 0 | | closing tables | 0 | | preparing | 0 | +----------------------+----------+ Edit 3 Adding query as requested SELECT activities.share_count, activities.created_at FROM `activities_businesses` INNER JOIN `businesses` ON `businesses`.`id` = `activities_businesses`.`business_id` INNER JOIN `activities` ON `activities`.`id` = `activities_businesses`.`activity_id` JOIN taggings activities_b_taggings_975e9c4 ON activities_b_taggings_975e9c4.taggable_id = activities_businesses.id AND activities_b_taggings_975e9c4.taggable_type = 'ActivitiesBusiness' AND activities_b_taggings_975e9c4.tag_id = 104 AND activities_b_taggings_975e9c4.created_at >= '2014-04-30 13:36:44' WHERE ( businesses.id = 1 ) AND ( activities.created_at > '2014-04-30 13:36:44' ) AND ( activities.created_at < '2014-05-30 12:27:03' ) ORDER BY activities.created_at; Edit 4 There may be a chance that the indexes are not being applied due to difference in column type between the taggings and the activities_businesses, on the taggable_id column. mysql> SHOW COLUMNS FROM activities_businesses; +-------------+------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ | Field | Type | Null | Key | Default | Extra | +-------------+------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ | id | int(11) | NO | PRI | NULL | auto_increment | | activity_id | bigint(20) | YES | MUL | NULL | | | business_id | bigint(20) | YES | MUL | NULL | | +-------------+------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ 3 rows in set (0.01 sec) mysql> SHOW COLUMNS FROM taggings; +---------------+--------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ | Field | Type | Null | Key | Default | Extra | +---------------+--------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ | id | int(11) | NO | PRI | NULL | auto_increment | | tag_id | int(11) | YES | MUL | NULL | | | taggable_id | bigint(20) | YES | | NULL | | | taggable_type | varchar(255) | YES | | NULL | | | tagger_id | int(11) | YES | | NULL | | | tagger_type | varchar(255) | YES | | NULL | | | context | varchar(128) | YES | | NULL | | | created_at | datetime | YES | | NULL | | +---------------+--------------+------+-----+---------+----------------+ So it is examining way more rows than it shows in the explain query, probably because some indexes are not being applied. Do you guys can help m with that?

    Read the article

  • MS Windows Server 2008R2 slow file copy, slow network connection

    - by MattrixHax
    i just setup a windows 2008R2 standard server, with the only installed app being Hyper-V, and only 1 windows XP VM is running. Whenever i try to copy a file from my windows 7 laptop over to the 2008R2 server machine's admin shares ( \\servername\c$ ) the files start transferring around 60mb/s and then drop to around 5mb/s. My windows 7 machine and the server 2008 machine are both in WORKGROUP (no domain here). when i try the same transfer to our server 2003 box the transfer speeds are fine. tried disabling autotuning (netsh interface tcp set global autotuninglevel=disabled) as well as turning off the checksum offload to the adapter (tx and rx) - i still see strange packet errors (bad header checksum) using wireshark and just cannot seem to track down what the issue is - over 1 hour to transfer 4gb of files from 1 server to another that are on the same GB switch is just crazy.... any ideas would be greatly appreciated!

    Read the article

  • script running very slow in IE with Jquery quickflip plug-in

    - by Aaron Carlino
    I have a jQuery plugin running on my site that is executing very, very slowly in IE7/8 to the point that it throws a slow script warning to the user. It doesn't happen in any other browser, and I can't figure out what might be going on. If you go to this page: http://dev.xeetic.org/projects You'll see that there are 16 results on each page, and each one has a "flip" behavior attached, using the jQuery plugin "quickflip." Attaching this behavior is very slow in IE. If I reduce the result set to 8 or 4 per page, it's faster, but still very bogged down. I have contacted the author of the script with no success. I am willing to pay for a solution, if I'm allowed to offer such a thing on this site.

    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 12  | Next Page >