Search Results

Search found 1657 results on 67 pages for 'writes on'.

Page 5/67 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • How to prevent duplicate data access methods that retrieve similar data?

    - by Ronald Wildenberg
    In almost every project I work on with a team, the same problem seems to creep in. Someone writes UI code that needs data and writes a data access method: AssetDto GetAssetById(int assetId) A week later someone else is working on another part of the application and also needs an AssetDto but now including 'approvers' and writes the following: AssetDto GetAssetWithApproversById(int assetId) A month later someone needs an asset but now including the 'questions' (or the 'owners' or the 'running requests', etc): AssetDto GetAssetWithQuestionsById(int assetId) AssetDto GetAssetWithOwnersById(int assetId) AssetDto GetAssetWithRunningRequestsById(int assetId) And it gets even worse when methods like GetAssetWithOwnerAndQuestionsById start to appear. You see the pattern that emerges: an object is attached to a large object graph and you need different parts of this graph in different locations. Of course, I'd like to prevent having a large number of methods that do almost the same. Is it simply a matter of team discipline or is there some pattern I can use to prevent this? In some cases it might make sense to have separate methods, i.e. getting an asset with running requests may be expensive so I do not want to include these all the time. How to handle such cases?

    Read the article

  • SSMS Tools Pack 2.7 is released. New website, improved licensing and features.

    - by Mladen Prajdic
    New website Nice, isn't it? Cleaner, simpler, better looking and more modern. If you have any suggestions for further improvements I'd be glad to hear them. Simpler licensing With SSMS tools Pack 2.7 the licensing is finally where it should be. It is now based on the activate/deactivate model. This way you can move a license from machine to machine with simple deactivation on one and reactivation on another machine. Much better, no? Because of very good feedback I have added an option for 6 machines and lowered the 4 machines option to 3 machines. This should make it much simpler for you to choose the right option for yourself. Improved features Version 2.5.3 was already extremely stable and 2.7 continues with that tradition. Because of that I could fully focus on features and why 3.0 will rock even more that 2.7! ;) In version 2.7 I have addressed quite a few improvements you were requesting for a while now. SQL History This is probably the biggest time saver out there, therefore it's only fair it gets a few important updates. If you have an existing .sql file opened, the Window Content History now saves your code to that existing file and also makes a backup in the SQL History log default location. Search is still done through the SQL History log but the Tab Sessions Restore opens your existing .sql file. This way you don't have to remember to save your existing files by yourself anymore. A bug when you couldn't search properly if you copied the log files to a new location was fixed. Unfortunately this removed the option to filter a search with the time component. The smallest search interval is now one day. The SSMS Tools Pack now remembers the visibility of the Current Window History window when you exit SSMS. SQL Snippets You can now set the position of the cursor in your snippets by placing {C} somewhere in your snippet. It's a small improvement but can be a huge time saver since you don't have to move through the snippet to the desired location anymore. Run script on multiple databases Database choices can now be saved with a name and then loaded again next time. You can also choose to run the script in a new window for each chosen database. Search through grid results You can now go previous/next search result with the Prev/Next control inside the search window. This is extremely useful if you have a large resultset. IT saves you the scrolling. CRUD generator Four new variables have been added: |CurrentDate| writes current date in format yyyy-MM-dd to your script |CurrentTime| writes current time in 24h format HH:mm:ss to your script |CurrentWinUser| writes current Windows logged on user to your script |CurrentSqlUser| writes current SQL logged on login to your script This was actually quite a requested feature so if you have any other ideas for extra variables, do let me know. That's about it. I hope you're going to enjoy this version as much as the previous ones. Have fun!

    Read the article

  • IRP_MJ_WRITE latency up to 15 seconds

    - by racitup
    We have written an application that performs small (22kB) writes to multiple files at once (one thread performing asynchronous queued writes to multiple locations on behalf of other threads) on the same local volume (RAID1). 99.9% of the writes are low-latency but occasionally (maybe every minute or two) we get one or two huge latency writes (I have seen 10 seconds and above) without any real explanation. Platform: Win2003 Server with NTFS. Monitoring: Sysinternals Process Monitor (see link below) and our own application logging. We have tried multiple things to try and solve this that have been gleaned from a few websites, e.g.: Making the first part of file names unique to aid 8.3 name generation Writing files to multiple directories Changing Intel Disk Write Caching Windows File/Printer Sharing Minimize memory used Balance Maximize data throughput for file sharing Maximize data throughput for network applications System-Advanced-Performance-Advanced NtfsDisableLastAccessUpdate - use fsutil behavior set disablelastaccess 1 disable 8.3 name generation - use "fsutil behavior set disable8dot3 1" + restart Enable a large size file system cache Disable paging of the kernel code IO Page Lock Limit Turn Off (or On) the Indexing Service But nothing seems to make much difference. There's a whole host of things we haven't tried yet but we wondered if anyone had come across the same problem, a reason and a solution (programmatic or not)? We can reproduce the problem using IOMeter and a simple setup: Start IOMeter and remove all but the first worker thread in 'Topology' using the disconnect button. Select the Worker thread and put a cross in the box next to the disk you want to use in the Disk Targets tab and put '2000000' in Maximum Disk Size (NOTE: must have at least 1GB free space; sector size is 512 bytes) Next create a new access specification and add it to the worker thread: Transfer Request Size = 22kB 100% Sequential Percent of Access Spec = 100% Percent Read/Write = 100% Write Change Results Display Update Frequency to 5 seconds, Test Setup Run Time to 20 seconds and both 'Number of Workers to Spawn Automatically' settings to zero. Select the Worker Thread in the Topology panel and hit the Duplicate Worker button 59 times to create 60 threads with identical settings. Hit the 'Go' button (green flag) and monitor the Results tab. The 'Maximum I/O Response Time (ms)' always hits at least 3500 on our machine. Our machine isn't exactly slow (Xeon 8 core rack server with 4GB and onboard RAID). I'd be interested to see what other people get. We have a feeling it might be something to do with the NTFS filesystem (ours is currently 75% full of fragmented files) and we are going to try a few things around this principle. But it is also related to disk performance since we don't see it on a RAMDisk and it's not as severe on a RAID10 array. Any help is much appreciated. Richard Right-click and select 'Open Link in New Tab': ProcMon Result

    Read the article

  • MD3200 - 3 to 4x less throughput than MD1220. Am I missing something here?

    - by Igor Polishchuk
    I have two R710 servers with similar configuration. One in my office has MD1220 attached. Another one in the datacenter of my hosting services vendor has MD3200. I'm getting significantly worse throughput from MD3200 at my vendors setup. I'm mostly interested in sequential writes, and I'm getting these results in bonnie++ and dd tests: Seq. writes on MD1220 in my office: 1.1 GB/s - bonnie++, 1.3GB/s - dd Seq. writes on MD3200 at my vendor's: 240MB/s - bonnie++, 310MB/s - dd Unfortunately, I could not test the exactly the same configurations, but the two I have should be comparable. If anything, my good performing environment is cheaper than the bad performing. I expect at least similar throughput from these two setups. My vendor cannot really help me. Hopefully, somebody more familiar with the DAS performance can look at it and tell if I'm missing something here and my expectations are too high. To summarize, the question here is it reasonable to expect about 100MB/s of sequential write throughput per each couple of drives in RAID10 on MD3200? Is there any trick to enable such performance in MD3200 with dual controller as opposed to simple MD1220 with a single H800 adapter? More details about the configurations: A good one in my office: Dell R710 2CPU X5650 @ 2.67GHz 12 cores 96GB DDR3, OS: RHEL 5.5, kernel 2.6.18-194.26.1.el5 x86_64 20x300GB 2.5" SAS 10K in a single RAID10 1MB chunk size on MD1220 + Dell H800 I/O controller with 1GB cache in the host Not so good one at my vendor's: Dell R710 2CPU L5520 @ 2.27GHz 8 cores 144GB DDR3, OS: RHEL 5.5, kernel 2.6.18-194.11.4.el5 x86_64 20x146GB 2.5" SAS 15K in a single RAID10 512KB chunk size, Dell MD3200, 2 I/O controllers in array with 1GB cache each Additional information. I've also ran the same tests on the same vendor's host, but the storage was: two raids of 14x146GB 15K RPM drives RAID 10, striped together on the OS level on MD3000+MD1000. The performance was about 25% worse than on MD3200 despite having more drives. When I ran similar tests on the internal storage of my vendor's host (2x146GB 15K RPM drives RAID1, Perc 6i) I've got about 128MB/s seq. writes. Just two internal drives gave me about a half of 20 drives' throughput on MD3200. The random I/O performance of the MD3200 setup is ok, it gives me at least 1300 IOPS. I'm mostly have problems with sequentioal I/O throughput. Thank you for looking into it. Regards Igor

    Read the article

  • What (linux) directories are written to most/constantly?

    - by CH2048
    When I read articles on running Linux from a flash drive, many recommend that directories that see many or constant writes be mounted in ram (e.g. as tmpfs). My question is - Which directories will these typically be, and is there any way to monitor disk activity that would show which directories see many writes?

    Read the article

  • Controlling read and write access width to memory mapped registers in C

    - by srking
    I'm using and x86 based core to manipulate a 32-bit memory mapped register. My hardware behaves correctly only if the CPU generates 32-bit wide reads and writes to this register. The register is aligned on a 32-bit address and is not addressable at byte granularity. What can I do to guarantee that my C (or C99) compiler will only generate full 32-bit wide reads and writes in all cases? For example, if I do a read-modify-write operation like this: volatile uint32_t* p_reg = 0xCAFE0000; *p_reg |= 0x01; I don't want the compiler to get smart about the fact that only the bottom byte changes and generate 8-bit wide read/writes. Since the machine code is often more dense for 8-bit operations on x86, I'm afraid of unwanted optimizations. Disabling optimizations in general is not an option.

    Read the article

  • Visual Studio 2010 and .Net Framework 4.0 – Available today!

    - by joelvarty
         Senior vice president of the Developer Division at Microsoft, S. Somasegar announced the availability of VS 2010 and .Net 4.  He writes the following: “This represents the biggest tools release from Microsoft in many years.”   Silverlight 4 coming later this week He also writes about Silverlight 4 - “I am also thrilled to say that Silverlight 4 will be released to the Web later this week. When Silverlight 4 is released, you will be able to download an update for Visual Studio 2010 to support Silverlight 4 development.” See the full post here.   more later - joel

    Read the article

  • Why is design by contract considered an alternative to the pseudo programming process?

    - by zoopp
    Right now I'm reading Code Complete by Steve McConnell and in chapter 9 he talks about the Pseudo Programming Process (PPP). From what I've understood, the PPP is a way of programming in which the programmer first writes the pseudo code for the routine he's working on, then refines it up to the point where pretty much each pseudo code line can be implemented in 1-3 lines of code, then writes the code in the designated programming language and finally the pseudo code is saved as comments for the purpose of documenting the routine. In chapter 9.4 the author mentions alternatives to the PPP, one of which is 'design by contract'. In design by contract you basically assert preconditions and postconditions of each routine. Now why would that be considered an alternative? To me it seems obvious that I should use both techniques at the same time and not chose one over the other.

    Read the article

  • Six Unusual Blogs I Like

    - by Bill Graziano
    I subscribe to and read over 100 SQL Server blogs every day.  I link to posts that I think are interesting.  I also read a fair number of non-SQL Server blogs.  Here are a few that I think are interesting. danah boyd. She is a researcher with Microsoft and writes about privacy, social media and teenagers.  I discovered her blog while looking for strategies to keep my personal and professional life separate.  (I haven’t found a good solution to that yet.)  Her stories of how teenagers use Facebook and other social media tools are fascinating. Clayton’s Web Snacks.  Steve Clayton works at Microsoft and has a variety of blogs out there.  This one focuses on … hmmm.  His latest posts are on graffiti, infographics, paper tweets, cartoons and slow motion videos.  It’s mostly visual and you never really know what you’ll get.  It’s always interesting though and I like what he posts.  It’s good creative stuff. Seth Godin.  Seth writes about Marketing.  I read him for motivation to get off my butt and get things done.  He’s a great motivator who encourages you to think big.  And do something! Ask the Pilot.  Patrick Smith is a commercial airline pilot writing about the airline industry.  He’s a great debunker of myths (no they don’t reduce oxygen in the cabin to keep you docile).  My favorite topics include the TSA, flying myths, airport reviews and flight delays. My old favorite flight blog used to be enplaned.  No one knew who wrote it.  It focused on the economics of the airline industry.  It was fascinating stuff.  One day it was gone.  The entire blog was deleted.  Someone tracked down some partial archives and put them online. The Agent’s Journal.  Jack Bechta is an NFL agent.  He writes about the business side of the NFL, the draft and free agency.  Lately he’s been writing about the potential lockout.  He has a distinct lack of hype which I find very refreshing.  xkcd.  I call this the comic for smart people.  A little math, some IT and internet privacy thrown in all make an unusual comic. Funny and intelligent.

    Read the article

  • What You Said: How You Customize Your Computer

    - by Jason Fitzpatrick
    Earlier this week we asked you to share the ways you customize your computing experience. You sounded off in the comments and we rounded up your tips and tricks to share. Read on to see how your fellow personalize their computers. It would seem the first stop on just about everyone’s customization route is stripping away the bloat/crapware. Lisa Wang writes: Depending on how much time I have when I receive my new machine,I might do the following in a few batches, starting with the simplest one. Usually, my list goes like this:1.Remove all bloatware and pretty much unneeded stuffs.2.Change my wallpaper,login screen,themes, and sound.3.Installing my ‘must-have’ softwares-starting with fences and rocketdock+stacks plugin4.Setting taskbar to autohide, pinning some apps there5.Installing additional languages6.Tweaking all settings and keyboard shortcuts to my preferance7.Changing the icons(either manual or with TuneUp Styler) Interface tweaks like the aforementioned Fences and Rocket Dock made quite a few appearances, as did Rainmeter. Graphalfkor writes: How to Stress Test the Hard Drives in Your PC or Server How To Customize Your Android Lock Screen with WidgetLocker The Best Free Portable Apps for Your Flash Drive Toolkit

    Read the article

  • Parsing stdout with custom format or standard format?

    - by linquize
    To integrate with other executables, a executable may launch another executable and capture its output from stdout. But most programs writes the output message to stdout in custom format and usually in human readable format. So it requires the system integrator to write a function to parse the output, which is considered trouble and the parser code may be buggy. Do you think this is old fashioned? Most Unix-style programs do that. Very few programs write to stdout in standard format such as XML or JSON, which is more modern. Example: Veracity (DVCS) writes JSON to stdout. Should we switch to use modern formats? For a console program, human readable or easy parsable: which is more important ?

    Read the article

  • Round-twice error in .NET's Double.ToString method

    - by Jeppe Stig Nielsen
    Mathematically, consider for this question the rational number 8725724278030350 / 2**48 where ** in the denominator denotes exponentiation, i.e. the denominator is 2 to the 48th power. (The fraction is not in lowest terms, reducible by 2.) This number is exactly representable as a System.Double. Its decimal expansion is 31.0000000000000'49'73799150320701301097869873046875 (exact) where the apostrophes do not represent missing digits but merely mark the boudaries where rounding to 15 resp. 17 digits is to be performed. Note the following: If this number is rounded to 15 digits, the result will be 31 (followed by thirteen 0s) because the next digits (49...) begin with a 4 (meaning round down). But if the number is first rounded to 17 digits and then rounded to 15 digits, the result could be 31.0000000000001. This is because the first rounding rounds up by increasing the 49... digits to 50 (terminates) (next digits were 73...), and the second rounding might then round up again (when the midpoint-rounding rule says "round away from zero"). (There are many more numbers with the above characteristics, of course.) Now, it turns out that .NET's standard string representation of this number is "31.0000000000001". The question: Isn't this a bug? By standard string representation we mean the String produced by the parameterles Double.ToString() instance method which is of course identical to what is produced by ToString("G"). An interesting thing to note is that if you cast the above number to System.Decimal then you get a decimal that is 31 exactly! See this Stack Overflow question for a discussion of the surprising fact that casting a Double to Decimal involves first rounding to 15 digits. This means that casting to Decimal makes a correct round to 15 digits, whereas calling ToSting() makes an incorrect one. To sum up, we have a floating-point number that, when output to the user, is 31.0000000000001, but when converted to Decimal (where 29 digits are available), becomes 31 exactly. This is unfortunate. Here's some C# code for you to verify the problem: static void Main() { const double evil = 31.0000000000000497; string exactString = DoubleConverter.ToExactString(evil); // Jon Skeet, http://csharpindepth.com/Articles/General/FloatingPoint.aspx Console.WriteLine("Exact value (Jon Skeet): {0}", exactString); // writes 31.00000000000004973799150320701301097869873046875 Console.WriteLine("General format (G): {0}", evil); // writes 31.0000000000001 Console.WriteLine("Round-trip format (R): {0:R}", evil); // writes 31.00000000000005 Console.WriteLine(); Console.WriteLine("Binary repr.: {0}", String.Join(", ", BitConverter.GetBytes(evil).Select(b => "0x" + b.ToString("X2")))); Console.WriteLine(); decimal converted = (decimal)evil; Console.WriteLine("Decimal version: {0}", converted); // writes 31 decimal preciseDecimal = decimal.Parse(exactString, CultureInfo.InvariantCulture); Console.WriteLine("Better decimal: {0}", preciseDecimal); // writes 31.000000000000049737991503207 } The above code uses Skeet's ToExactString method. If you don't want to use his stuff (can be found through the URL), just delete the code lines above dependent on exactString. You can still see how the Double in question (evil) is rounded and cast.

    Read the article

  • Why does Mysql Xampp restart only when i run the mysqld.exe file manually?

    - by Ranjit Kumar
    I am using mysql-xampp v3.0.2 version. while restarting the mysql server first it show me the running status and after 2or3s it stops running automatically. So as of now i got a temporary solution like going into xampp installation folder Xampp-mysql-bin-running the msqld.exe file. i dont know whether it is the correct solution or is there any alternate solution to be made !! please suggest me errorlog 120629 15:29:59 [Note] Plugin 'FEDERATED' is disabled. 120629 15:29:59 InnoDB: The InnoDB memory heap is disabled 120629 15:29:59 InnoDB: Mutexes and rw_locks use Windows interlocked functions 120629 15:29:59 InnoDB: Compressed tables use zlib 1.2.3 120629 15:29:59 InnoDB: Initializing buffer pool, size = 16.0M 120629 15:29:59 InnoDB: Completed initialization of buffer pool InnoDB: The first specified data file D:\xampp\xampp\mysql\data\ibdata1 did not exist: InnoDB: a new database to be created! 120629 15:29:59 InnoDB: Setting file D:\xampp\xampp\mysql\data\ibdata1 size to 10 MB InnoDB: Database physically writes the file full: wait... 120629 15:29:59 InnoDB: Log file D:\xampp\xampp\mysql\data\ib_logfile0 did not exist: new to be created InnoDB: Setting log file D:\xampp\xampp\mysql\data\ib_logfile0 size to 5 MB InnoDB: Database physically writes the file full: wait... 120629 15:30:00 InnoDB: Log file D:\xampp\xampp\mysql\data\ib_logfile1 did not exist: new to be created InnoDB: Setting log file D:\xampp\xampp\mysql\data\ib_logfile1 size to 5 MB InnoDB: Database physically writes the file full: wait... InnoDB: Doublewrite buffer not found: creating new InnoDB: Doublewrite buffer created InnoDB: 127 rollback segment(s) active. InnoDB: Creating foreign key constraint system tables InnoDB: Foreign key constraint system tables created 120629 15:30:02 InnoDB: Waiting for the background threads to start

    Read the article

  • SSD cache to minimize HDD spin-up time?

    - by sirprize
    short version first: I'm looking for Linux compatible software which is able to transparently cache HDD writes using an SSD. However, I only want to spin up the HDD once or twice a day (to write the cached data to the HDD). The rest of the time, the HDD should not be spinning due to noise concerns. Now the longer version: I have built a completely silent computer running Xubuntu. It has a A10-6700T APU, huge fanless cooler, fanless PSU, SSD. The problem is: it also has (and needs) a noisy HDD and I want to forbid spinning it up during the night. All writes should be cached on the SSD, reads are not needed in the night. Throughout every day, this computer will automatically download about 5 GB of data which will be retained for about a year, giving a total needed disk capacity of slightly less than 2 TB. This data is currently stored on a 3 TB noisy hard disk drive which is spinning day and night. Sometimes, I'll need to access some data from several months ago. However, most times I'll only need data from the last 14 days, which would fit on the SSD. Ideally, I'd like a transparent solution (all data on one filesystem) which caches all writes to the SSD, writing to the HDD only once a day. Reads would be served by the cache if they were still on the SDD, else the HDD would have to spin up. I have tried bcache without much success (using cache_mode=writeback, writeback_running=0, writeback_delay=86400, sequential_cutoff=0, congested_write_threshold_us=0 - anything missing?) and I read about ZFS ZIL/L2ARC but I'm not sure I can achieve my goal with ZFS. Any pointers? If all else fails, I will simply use some scripts to automatically copy files over to the big drive while deleting the oldest files from the SSD.

    Read the article

  • NFS confusion - writing many small files

    - by Antonis Christofides
    I have a Debian squeeze amd64 which is at the same time a NFS4 server and client (it mounts itself through NFS4). The local directory that leads directly to disk is /nfs4exports/mydir, whereas /nfs4mounts/mydir is the same thing mounted through NFS, using the machine's external IP address. Here is the line from fstab: 176.9.116.102:/mydir /nfs4mounts/mydir nfs4 soft 0 0 I have an application that writes many small files. If I write directly to /nfs4exports/mydir, it writes thousands of files per second; but if I write to /nfs4mounts/mydir, it writes 4 files per second or so. I can greatly increase speed if I add async to /etc/exports. (Writing a single large file to the NFS directory goes at more than 100 MB/s.) I am confused by the description of async in NFS. If my application accesses the local directory, system calls like write and close return even if caches have not been flushed to permanent storage. Apparently this is not true with NFS sync behaviour. However, with NFS async behaviour, even calls like fsync are ignored. Isn't it possible to work like local files, i.e. generally work asynchronously, but honour fsync and O_SYNC?

    Read the article

  • Scaling databases with cheap SSD hard drives

    - by Dennis Kashkin
    Hey guys! I hope that many of you are working with high traffic database-driven websites, and chances are that your main scalability issues are in the database. I noticed a couple of things lately: Most large databases require a team of DBAs in order to scale. They constantly struggle with limitations of hard drives and end up with very expensive solutions (SANs or large RAIDs, frequent maintenance windows for defragging and repartitioning, etc.) The actual annual cost of maintaining such databases is in $100K-$1M range which is too steep for me :) Finally, we got several companies like Intel, Samsung, FusionIO, etc. that just started selling extremely fast yet affordable SSD hard drives based on SLC Flash technology. These drives are 100 times faster in random read/writes than the best spinning hard drives on the market (up to 50,000 random writes per second). Their seek time is pretty much zero, so the cost of random I/O is the same as sequential I/O, which is awesome for databases. These SSD drives cost around $10-$20 per gigabyte, and they are relatively small (64GB). So, there seems to be an opportunity to avoid the HUGE costs of scaling databases the traditional way by simply building a big enough RAID 5 array of SSD drives (which would cost only a few thousand dollars). Then we don't care if the database file is fragmented, and we can afford 100 times more disk writes per second without having to spread the database across 100 spindles. . Is anybody else interested in this? I've been testing a few SSD drives and can share my results. If anybody on this site has already solved their I/O bottleneck with SSDs, I would love to hear your war stories! PS. I know that there are plenty of expensive solutions out there that help with scalability, for example the time proven RAM-based SANs. I want to be clear that even $50K is too expensive for my project. I have to find a solution that costs no more than $10K and does not take much time to implement.

    Read the article

  • What kind of server configuration is best for a chatting app? [closed]

    - by mohabitar
    I'm just now starting to go deeper into the world of cloud hosting and databases, and am getting overwhelmed by how deep this information goes. It's all a little too much to consume in a short amount of time. I get a lot of pricing information, but I'm unable to determine what that means to me. I'm making what you might compare to an email app. Users can send messages to one another. I just don't understand, out of the several options, what would be ideal for an app like this, where users would be constantly sending and receiving text data. With Amazon DynamoDB, I have to specify a pre-defined throughput with number of reads and writes per second. Sure I can just type 50, but I'm not exactly sure what 50 writes per second represents. I'm trying to determine what would be the most cost efficient solution, and I want to know what a throughput of 50 reads/writes/second compares to. Is that a high number? What is a good throughput number for a message sending app with say 50,000 daily users? I'm just providing specific numbers so I can understand what these throughput numbers represent. 100 transactions/second to me seems like a small number since I'm not familiar with this stuff, so I'm just looking to bring everything in context. What would 100 read/write/second be useful for? Are there any average example values available? And I'm not sure what each service is good for. For a message sending app, is there any reason I'd want to choose say Amazon DynamoDB over Google App Engine? Any insight would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Application that will identify percentage of your system disk bandwidth used on a user-application by user-application basis?

    - by Warren P
    I always (subjectively) feel my computer is far too slow (however fast it is), and so I'm always looking for ways to measure and understand what my computer is actually doing, that is making it seem "slow" to me. It has been my observation that my software-developer workload is most often disk-bound (I am waiting for Disk I/O) more than CPU bound. What has made it worse, is that I am using a corporate PC that has in-memory active-scanning anti-virus software that I do not have control over, and also some IT department mandated services that seem to suck up a lot of available hard-disk bandwidth. The best tool I have seen (in Windows 7) is the Resource Monitor which I usually acess from the button in the task Manager. The disk IO page, however, seems to label Disk Activity at a very low level (for example, showing the Volume Shadow Storage, which is flushing information obviously written by something ELSE other than VSS itself, and then writes to Pagefile.sys, which are obviously due to Virtual Memory faults in some application). What I would like to know is if a utility exists that can add up all direct disk input and output by user-level process, or find the process or service that caused VM or VSS activity. In that way, I hope, you could establish a real idea of how much of your computer's precious disk subsystem bandwidth is attributable to a particular application. here's a scenario: MyApp.exe writes 100k/s and reads 100k/s directly. VSS ends up writing another 100k/s. pagefaults caused inside MyApp.exe cause another 100k/s of writes. So the total "cost" of MyApp.exe running, during a period of time (let's say 1 second) is 400k/s, whereas you can only directly observe half of that, in Resource Monitor. Is there a smarter disk-IO watching piece of software I can use?

    Read the article

  • Is NFS capable of preserving order of operations?

    - by JustJeff
    I have a diskless host 'A', that has a directory NFS mounted on server 'B'. A process on A writes to two files F1 and F2 in that directory, and a process on B monitors these files for changes. Assume that B polls for changes faster than A is expected to make them. Process A seeks the head of the files, writes data, and flushes. Process B seeks the head of the files and does reads. Are there any guarantees about how the order of the changes performed by A will be detected at B? Specifically, if A alternately writes to one file, and then the other, is it reasonable to expect that B will notice alternating changes to F1 and F2? Or could B conceivably detect a series of changes on F1 and then a series on F2? I know there are a lot of assumptions embedded in the question. For instance, I am virtually certain that, even operating on just one file, if A performs 100 operations on the file, B may see a smaller number of changes that give the same result, due to NFS caching some of the actions on A before they are communicated to B. And of course there would be issues with concurrent file access even if NFS weren't involved and both the reading and the writing process were running on the same real file system. The reason I'm even putting the question up here is that it seems like most of the time, the setup described above does detect the changes at B in the same order they are made at A, but that occasionally some events come through in transposed order. So, is it worth trying to make this work? Is there some way to tune NFS to make it work, perhaps cache settings or something? Or is fine-grained behavior like this just too much expect from NFS?

    Read the article

  • Persistent (purely functional) Red-Black trees on disk performance

    - by Waneck
    I'm studying the best data structures to implement a simple open-source object temporal database, and currently I'm very fond of using Persistent Red-Black trees to do it. My main reasons for using persistent data structures is first of all to minimize the use of locks, so the database can be as parallel as possible. Also it will be easier to implement ACID transactions and even being able to abstract the database to work in parallel on a cluster of some kind. The great thing of this approach is that it makes possible implementing temporal databases almost for free. And this is something quite nice to have, specially for web and for data analysis (e.g. trends). All of this is very cool, but I'm a little suspicious about the overall performance of using a persistent data structure on disk. Even though there are some very fast disks available today, and all writes can be done asynchronously, so a response is always immediate, I don't want to build all application under a false premise, only to realize it isn't really a good way to do it. Here's my line of thought: - Since all writes are done asynchronously, and using a persistent data structure will enable not to invalidate the previous - and currently valid - structure, the write time isn't really a bottleneck. - There are some literature on structures like this that are exactly for disk usage. But it seems to me that these techniques will add more read overhead to achieve faster writes. But I think that exactly the opposite is preferable. Also many of these techniques really do end up with a multi-versioned trees, but they aren't strictly immutable, which is something very crucial to justify the persistent overhead. - I know there still will have to be some kind of locking when appending values to the database, and I also know there should be a good garbage collecting logic if not all versions are to be maintained (otherwise the file size will surely rise dramatically). Also a delta compression system could be thought about. - Of all search trees structures, I really think Red-Blacks are the most close to what I need, since they offer the least number of rotations. But there are some possible pitfalls along the way: - Asynchronous writes -could- affect applications that need the data in real time. But I don't think that is the case with web applications, most of the time. Also when real-time data is needed, another solutions could be devised, like a check-in/check-out system of specific data that will need to be worked on a more real-time manner. - Also they could lead to some commit conflicts, though I fail to think of a good example of when it could happen. Also commit conflicts can occur in normal RDBMS, if two threads are working with the same data, right? - The overhead of having an immutable interface like this will grow exponentially and everything is doomed to fail soon, so this all is a bad idea. Any thoughts? Thanks! edit: There seems to be a misunderstanding of what a persistent data structure is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persistent_data_structure

    Read the article

  • Handling of data truncation in FUSE

    - by Vi
    I expect any good program should do all their reads and writes in a loop until all data written/read without relying that write will write everything (even with regular files). Am I right? Implemented simple FUSE filesystem which only allows reading and writing with small buffers, very often returning that it is written less bytes that in a buffer (using -o direct_io). Some programs work, some not. Are them buggy or programs should not expect truncated writes and reads from the regular files?

    Read the article

  • How to take handwritten notes as image in android?

    - by krammer
    I am trying to develop an android application that could store whatever the user writes on screen as an image. For example, if the user writes "Co" followed by "ol" and presses OK, the text is stored as "Cool" as an image in a field on the form displayed on the phone. (No handwriting recognition or OCR required) I have seen the Canvas class in Android, but how would you concatenate all the letters/set of characeters and convert them to image ? Is there any open source project that does something similar ?

    Read the article

  • Windows 7: How to place SuperFetch cache on an SSD?

    - by Ian Boyd
    I'm thinking of adding a solid state drive (SSD) to my existing Windows 7 installation. I know I can (and should) move my paging file to the SSD: Should the pagefile be placed on SSDs? Yes. Most pagefile operations are small random reads or larger sequential writes, both of which are types of operations that SSDs handle well. In looking at telemetry data from thousands of traces and focusing on pagefile reads and writes, we find that Pagefile.sys reads outnumber pagefile.sys writes by about 40 to 1, Pagefile.sys read sizes are typically quite small, with 67% less than or equal to 4 KB, and 88% less than 16 KB. Pagefile.sys writes are relatively large, with 62% greater than or equal to 128 KB and 45% being exactly 1 MB in size. In fact, given typical pagefile reference patterns and the favorable performance characteristics SSDs have on those patterns, there are few files better than the pagefile to place on an SSD. What I don't know is if I even can put a SuperFetch cache (i.e. ReadyBoost cache) on the solid state drive. I want to get the benefit of Windows being able to cache gigabytes of frequently accessed data on a relativly small (e.g. 30GB) solid state drive. This is exactly what SuperFetch+ReadyBoost (or SuperFetch+ReadyDrive) was designed for. Will Windows offer (or let) me place a ReadyBoost cache on a solid state flash drive connected via SATA? A problem with the ReadyBoost cache over the ReadyDrive cache is that the ReadyBoost cache does not survive between reboots. The cache is encrypted with a per-session key, making its existing contents unusable during boot and SuperFetch pre-fetching during login. Update One I know that Windows Vista limited you to only one ReadyBoost.sfcache file (I do not know if Windows 7 removed that limitation): Q: Can use use multiple devices for EMDs? A: Nope. We've limited Vista to one ReadyBoost per machine Q: Why just one device? A: Time and quality. Since this is the first revision of the feature, we decided to focus on making the single device exceptional, without the difficulties of managing multiple caches. We like the idea, though, and it's under consideration for future versions. I also know that the 4GB limit on the cache file was a limitation of the FAT filesystem used on most USB sticks - an SSD drive would be formatted with NTFS: Q: What's the largest amount of flash that I can use for ReadyBoost? A: You can use up to 4GB of flash for ReadyBoost (which turns out to be 8GB of cache w/ the compression) Q: Why can't I use more than 4GB of flash? A: The FAT32 filesystem limits our ReadyBoost.sfcache file to 4GB Can a ReadyBoost cache on an NTFS volume be larger than 4GB? Update Two The ReadyBoost cache is encrypted with a per-boot session key. This means that the cache has to be re-built after each boot, and cannot be used to help speed boot times, or latency from login to usable. Windows ReadyDrive technology takes advantage of non-volatile (NV) memory (i.e. flash) that is incorporated with some hybrid hard drives. This flash cache can be used to help Windows boot, or resume from hibernate faster. Will Windows 7 use an internal SSD drive as a ReadyBoost/*ReadyDrive*/SuperFetch cache? Is it possible to make Windows store a SuperFetch cache (i.e. ReadyBoost) on a non-removable SSD? Is it possible to not encrypt the ReadyBoost cache, and if so will Windows 7 use the cache at boot time? See also SuperUser.com: ReadyBoost + SSD = ? Windows 7 - ReadyBoost & SSD drives? Support and Q&A for Solid-State Drives Using SDD as a cache for HDD, is there a solution? Performance increase using SSD for paging/fetch/cache or ReadyBoost? (Win7) Windows 7 To Boost SSD Performance How to Disable Nonvolatile Caching

    Read the article

  • How to place SuperFetch cache on an SSD?

    - by Ian Boyd
    I'm thinking of adding a solid state drive (SSD) to my existing Windows 7 installation. I know I can (and should) move my paging file to the SSD: Should the pagefile be placed on SSDs? Yes. Most pagefile operations are small random reads or larger sequential writes, both of which are types of operations that SSDs handle well. In looking at telemetry data from thousands of traces and focusing on pagefile reads and writes, we find that Pagefile.sys reads outnumber pagefile.sys writes by about 40 to 1, Pagefile.sys read sizes are typically quite small, with 67% less than or equal to 4 KB, and 88% less than 16 KB. Pagefile.sys writes are relatively large, with 62% greater than or equal to 128 KB and 45% being exactly 1 MB in size. In fact, given typical pagefile reference patterns and the favorable performance characteristics SSDs have on those patterns, there are few files better than the pagefile to place on an SSD. What I don't know is if I even can put a SuperFetch cache (i.e. ReadyBoost cache) on the solid state drive. I want to get the benefit of Windows being able to cache gigabytes of frequently accessed data on a relativly small (e.g. 30GB) solid state drive. This is exactly what SuperFetch+ReadyBoost (or SuperFetch+ReadyDrive) was designed for. Will Windows offer (or let) me place a ReadyBoost cache on a solid state flash drive connected via SATA? A problem with the ReadyBoost cache over the ReadyDrive cache is that the ReadyBoost cache does not survive between reboots. The cache is encrypted with a per-session key, making its existing contents unusable during boot and SuperFetch pre-fetching during login. Update One I know that Windows Vista limited you to only one ReadyBoost.sfcache file (I do not know if Windows 7 removed that limitation): Q: Can use use multiple devices for EMDs? A: Nope. We've limited Vista to one ReadyBoost per machine Q: Why just one device? A: Time and quality. Since this is the first revision of the feature, we decided to focus on making the single device exceptional, without the difficulties of managing multiple caches. We like the idea, though, and it's under consideration for future versions. I also know that the 4GB limit on the cache file was a limitation of the FAT filesystem used on most USB sticks - an SSD drive would be formatted with NTFS: Q: What's the largest amount of flash that I can use for ReadyBoost? A: You can use up to 4GB of flash for ReadyBoost (which turns out to be 8GB of cache w/ the compression) Q: Why can't I use more than 4GB of flash? A: The FAT32 filesystem limits our ReadyBoost.sfcache file to 4GB Can a ReadyBoost cache on an NTFS volume be larger than 4GB? Update Two The ReadyBoost cache is encrypted with a per-boot session key. This means that the cache has to be re-built after each boot, and cannot be used to help speed boot times, or latency from login to usable. Windows ReadyDrive technology takes advantage of non-volatile (NV) memory (i.e. flash) that is incorporated with some hybrid hard drives. This flash cache can be used to help Windows boot, or resume from hibernate faster. Will Windows 7 use an internal SSD drive as a ReadyBoost/*ReadyDrive*/SuperFetch cache? Is it possible to make Windows store a SuperFetch cache (i.e. ReadyBoost) on a non-removable SSD? Is it possible to not encrypt the ReadyBoost cache, and if so will Windows 7 use the cache at boot time? See also SuperUser.com: ReadyBoost + SSD = ? Windows 7 - ReadyBoost & SSD drives? Support and Q&A for Solid-State Drives Using SDD as a cache for HDD, is there a solution? Performance increase using SSD for paging/fetch/cache or ReadyBoost? (Win7) Windows 7 To Boost SSD Performance How to Disable Nonvolatile Caching

    Read the article

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