Poor performance when multitasking on T510, Core i5, Windows 7 64, 4GB RAM, NVidia Optimus 512MB

I'm saddly disappointed with my new Lenovo performance and don't know what might be the cause.
I just got a new T510 with Core i5 processor, 4GB RAM and Windows 7 64. When I run a couple of programs, like Photoshop, a Virtualbox (850 MB of RAM allocated), Google Chrome with a couple of tabs I get stuck.
It seems that 4GB of memory is not enough for the work I did on a 2GB machine a week ago.
The computer's response time is a couple of seconds for window switching. New programs start counting in minutes. RAM consumption reaches 98%, even though no single program is listed to consume more than a 150MB in either Task Manager or Resource monitor. Aero effects work cool, though, there's no sloppiness in the graphical layer of the system.
Even now, after having Virtualbox killed, remaining processes take up 89% of RAM memory in Resource manager.
I'm working on AC power supply with "Perfomance" power setting, but I can hardly call it a performance.
This is ridiculous, it was supposed to be a fast multitasking machine and it turns out to be a load of junk. I used to work on 2GB, 1.6GHz Celeron with Intel GMA processor, had Ubuntu host and Windows XP guest with 750MB RAM allocated plus a couple of programming tools running and never had such issues _on regular basis_.
I'm considering running a Ubuntu on this machine because I simply can't work this way on Windows 7... I can't even kill a process easily because it takes ages to End a process.
A friend of mine is running similar setup on a T410 machine with slower CPU and poorer graphics and he says this is really strange, because he never had such problems. My PC is new, 4 days since arrival, his is like 2-months old.
Has anyone experienced similar problem? What might be the cause?
At this point I have Chrome with ~10 tabs, empty Firefox, empty Photoshop, Pidgin, and 3 explorer windows running, Adobe Reader with 1 document and Sticky Notes. RAM consumption is 3495MB in use (yeah right), 276MB standby and 113 free.
What's wrong here?!
Please see the screenshot attached:
http://img715.imageshack.us/i/captureybh.png/
Solved!
Go to Solution.

Well, the issue is solved. After removing bundled Norton Internet Security suite it runs like gold-plated.
I'll get another anti-virus software, then.
Now, even with the Virtualbox running, I still have like 2GB free RAM. And no lags, no slow-downs. Woohoo.
**bleep** you Norton!

Similar Messages

DOI - I_OI_SPREADSHEET, poor performance when reading more than 9999 record

Hi,
Please read this message in the [ABAP Performance and Tuning|DOI - I_OI_SPREADSHEET, poor performance when reading more than 9999 record; section and see if you have any advise.
Best Regards,
Marjo

Hi,
I met this issue when I tried to write vaule to massive fields of excel range.
And I solve this issue by using CL_GUI_FRONTEND_SERVICES=>CLIPBOARD_EXPORT.
So, I think you may fix it in the same way.
1. Select range in by the I_OI_SPREADSHEET
2. Call method I_OI_DOCUMENT_PROXY->COPY_SELECTION
3. Call method CL_GUI_FRONTEND_SERVICES=>CLIPBOARD_IMPORT
Cheers,

Poor performance when dragging item within a list loaded with images - Flex 4

Hi,
I have a custom built List component that is using a TileLayout. I am using a custom itemRenderer to load images into this list from our server (in this test, 44 images rae loaded). I have enabled dragEnabled and dragMove so that I can move items around within the list. The problem comes when I start dragging an item. The dragging operation is very slow and clunky.
When I move the mouse to drag the item, the dropIndicator does not get refreshed for a few seconds and the movement feels like my PC is lagging pretty badly. I've also noticed that during this time my CPU usage is spiking up to around 25-40%. The funny part is I can scroll the list just fine without any lag at all, but the minute I drag the application starts to lag really bad. I do have some custom dragOver code that I used to override the dragOverHandler of the list control, but the problem persists even if I take that code out. I've tried with useVirtualLayout set to both true and false and neither setting made a difference.
Any ideas as to what could be causing the poor performance and/or how I can go abouts fixing it?
Thanks a lot in advance!

Ahh, good call about the Performance profiler. I'm pretty new to the profiling thing with Flex (haven't used Builder Pro before
the Flex 4 beta) so please forgive me
I found some interesting things running the performance profiler but I'm not sure I understand what to make of it all. I cleared the Performance Profile data when right before I loaded the images into the list. I then moved some images around and then captured the Profiling Data (If I understand Adobe correctly, this is the correct way to capture performance information for a set of actions).
What I found is there is a [mouseEvent] item that took 3101ms with 1 "Calls" (!!!!). When I drill down into that item to see the Method Statistics, I actually see three different Callees and no callers. The sum of the time it took the Callees to execute does not even come close to adding up to the 3101 ms (about 40ms). I'm not sure what I can make of those numbers, or if they are even meaningful. Any insight into these?
The only other items that stand out to me are [pre-render] which has 863ms (Cumulative Time) / 639ms (Self Time), [enterFrameEvent] which has 746ms / 6ms (?!), and [tincan] (what the heck is tincan?) which has times of 521ms for both Cumulative and Self.
Can anyone offer some insight into these numbers and maybe make some more suggestions for me? I apologize for my ignorance on these numbers - as I said, I'm new to the whole Flex profiling thing.
Many thanks in advance!
Edit: I just did another check, this time profiling only from the start of my drag to the end of my drop, and I still see [mouseEvent] taking almost 1000ms of Cumulative Time. However, when I double click that item to see the Method Statistics, no Callers or Callees are listed. What's causing this [mouseEvent] and how come it's taking so long?

Poor performance when using kde desktop effect

Hey,
I'm having trouble when using kde effet (system settings -> desktop -> desktop effects).
I have a dual core E5200 3 ghz, 2 GB memory pc8500 and an HD4850 using fglrx driver, but I got incredible bad performance when using desktop effect and watching video, I can barely watch a 800x600 video in full screen mode without having bad performance, X getting up to 40% cpu usage.
Its really like my graphic card isnt handling the rendering stuff but 3D acceleration is working, I can play 3D game without problem so far (as long as the deskstop effect arent enabled cause the cpu have like a hard time handling both for recent game)
So I guess its some trouble with 2D acceleration or something like that, I read that some people had such issue, but I didnt figure a way to fix it.
Here is my xorg.conf, in case something is wrong with it :
Section "ServerLayout"
Identifier "X.org Configured"
Screen 0 "aticonfig-Screen[0]-0" 0 0
InputDevice "Mouse0" "CorePointer"
InputDevice "Keyboard0" "CoreKeyboard"
EndSection
Section "Files"
ModulePath "/usr/lib/xorg/modules"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/misc"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/100dpi:unscaled"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/75dpi:unscaled"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/TTF"
FontPath "/usr/share/fonts/Type1"
EndSection
Section "Module"
Load "dri2"
Load "extmod"
Load "dbe"
Load "record"
Load "glx"
Load "dri"
EndSection
Section "InputDevice"
Identifier "Keyboard0"
Driver "kbd"
EndSection
Section "InputDevice"
Identifier "Mouse0"
Driver "mouse"
Option "Protocol" "auto"
Option "Device" "/dev/input/mice"
Option "ZAxisMapping" "4 5 6 7"
EndSection
Section "Monitor"
Identifier "Monitor0"
VendorName "Monitor Vendor"
ModelName "Monitor Model"
EndSection
Section "Monitor"
Identifier "aticonfig-Monitor[0]-0"
Option "VendorName" "ATI Proprietary Driver"
Option "ModelName" "Generic Autodetecting Monitor"
Option "DPMS" "true"
EndSection
Section "Device"
### Available Driver options are:-
### Values: <i>: integer, <f>: float, <bool>: "True"/"False",
### <string>: "String", <freq>: "<f> Hz/kHz/MHz"
### [arg]: arg optional
#Option "ShadowFB" # [<bool>]
#Option "DefaultRefresh" # [<bool>]
#Option "ModeSetClearScreen" # [<bool>]
Identifier "Card0"
Driver "vesa"
VendorName "ATI Technologies Inc"
BoardName "RV770 [Radeon HD 4850]"
BusID "PCI:8:0:0"
EndSection
Section "Device"
Identifier "aticonfig-Device[0]-0"
Driver "fglrx"
BusID "PCI:8:0:0"
EndSection
Section "Screen"
Identifier "Screen0"
Device "Card0"
Monitor "Monitor0"
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 1
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 4
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 8
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 15
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 16
EndSubSection
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 24
EndSubSection
EndSection
Section "Screen"
Identifier "aticonfig-Screen[0]-0"
Device "aticonfig-Device[0]-0"
Monitor "aticonfig-Monitor[0]-0"
DefaultDepth 24
SubSection "Display"
Viewport 0 0
Depth 24
EndSubSection
EndSection
Thank you for any help.

Section "Device"
### Available Driver options are:-
### Values: <i>: integer, <f>: float, <bool>: "True"/"False",
### <string>: "String", <freq>: "<f> Hz/kHz/MHz"
### [arg]: arg optional
#Option "ShadowFB" # [<bool>]
#Option "DefaultRefresh" # [<bool>]
#Option "ModeSetClearScreen" # [<bool>]
Identifier "Card0"
Driver "vesa"
VendorName "ATI Technologies Inc"
BoardName "RV770 [Radeon HD 4850]"
BusID "PCI:8:0:0"
EndSection
and
Section "Monitor"
Identifier "Monitor0"
VendorName "Monitor Vendor"
ModelName "Monitor Model"
EndSection
I see no reason for those to be there.
make a backup of your xorg.conf and remove / comment those lines.

Poor performance when accessing a MSAS 2008 cube via BI Server

I am having an issue with performance when accessing a MSAS 2008 cube via the BI Server.
I think it has to do with the way that the MDX is being generated.
Please could someone advise on any settings I could try or any known issues with the integration?
Thanks,
Kim Sarkin
[email protected]

Hi Kim,
Sorry I can't help out, but, I'm curious how you got the AS 2008 drivers installed for use with OBIEE? I have an AS2008 environment, but, my OBIEE version only supports 2000 and 2005.
Thanks,
Mark

Intel Core i5 or i7 and 4GB ram or 8GB ram for school usage and gaming Football Manager 2013

Hi all,
I'm considering bying the new Macbook Air 13'' but i'm confused whether to go for the Intel Core i5 og i7 processor and with 4GB ram or 8GB ram? I will use it for school stuff, web browsing and for gaming Football Manager 2013. Which one should I go for?

i5 should be able to handle it, however as you know MBA isn't a gaming laptop. So you can't expect the best results. Will it run smoothly? Reading some of the reviews, it's not that terrible. However if you play football manager often I would upgrade to the i7. For occasional gaming, I would definitely stick with i5 because of better battery.
Tbh, I'm not much of a gamer. But I use Final Cut Pro, photoshop, and do other type of intense tasks.
I decided to go with the i5 for myself and spend the $150 on something else (like external drive, monitor).
Anyways to answer your question, it depends on how often you play. If you play 24/7 the upgrade will be worth it.
But for occasional gaming, again I would stick for better battery :)
(But external battery can be purchased vs you won't be able to upgrade to i7.... Just a random thought..)

Does the MacBook Pro Intel Core 2 duo (2,4ghz - 4gb RAM) match with an audio dj mixer Pioneer DDJ SR

I bought a Audi DJ mixer Pioneer DDJ SR and i want to know if it matches with a Macbook pro core 2 Duo, 2,4 GHZ, 4gb RAM, 250gb DDR?
If not, then can i make it match by adding 4gb RAM or changind DDR to SSD, or others?
Thanks for your help.
(I am french and my English is not so good, so please let me know if my question is not clear)

Hi Rick,
Given that the MBP has a 4200RPM HD in it now, any 5400 or 7200 is likely to yield a significant speed increase during operations requiring HD access.
If it is a 15" MBP, make sure you get a 9.5mm high, 2.5 inch SATA HD. If it's a 17", a 12.5mm high HD will fit.
I don't believe any brand of current HDs is significantly better/worse than the others. That said, I think Seagate is at a low ebb of quality right now. I think Hitachi is at the top. WD blacks seem to be consistently reliable. Without question, others will have different opinions (it's like asking if a Toyota or Ford or Honda, etc. is best). I really like the idea of Seagate's hybrid drive, but there is a real mixed bag of reviews on it. It's first gen, and there are issues to be worked out/improved upon. Check out newegg for 200+ user reviews.
AFA 5400 vs 7200, all other things being equal (rarely the case) the faster drive is likely to give better response, but don't expect night and day difference. All other things being equal, it's also likely to run hotter, reduce run time on battery, and increase vibration. There's also a bit of a cost premium.
Whichever you end up with, remember to backup, backup, and backup (I highly recommend a clone and Time Machine).
The odds are you/she will be happier with any of the 5400s or 7200s over the current 4200, and a new drive should easily help you/her get another year or more out of the MBP. Good luck with the decision.
Message was edited by: tjk

Is anyone able to explain really poor performance when using 'If Exists'?

Hello all. We've recently had a performance spike when using the 'if exists' construct, which is a construct that we use through much of our code. The problem is, it appears illogical since if can be removed via a tiny modification that does
not change the core code.
I can demonstrate
This is the (simplified) format of the base original code. It's purpose is to identify when a column value has changed comparing to a main table and a complex view
select 1 from MainTable m
inner join ComplexView v on m.col2 = v.col2
where m.col3 <> v.col3
This is doing a table scan, however the table only has 17000 rows while the view only has 7000 rows. The sql executes in approximately 3 seconds.
However if we add the 'If Exists' construct around the original query, like such:
if exists (
select 1 from MainTable m
inner join ComplexView v on m.col2 = v.col2
where m.col3 <> v.col3
print 1
The sql now takes over 2 minutes to run. Note that the core sql is unchanged. All I have done is wrap it with 'If Exists'
I can't fathom why the if exists construct is taking so much longer, especially since the code code is unchanged, however more importantly I would like to understand why since we commonly use this type of syntax.
Any advice would be greatly appreciated

OK, that's interesting. Adding the top 1 clause greatly affects the performance (in a bad way).
The original query (as below) still runs in a few seconds.
select 1 from MainTable m
inner join ComplexView v on m.col2 = v.col2
where m.col3 <> v.col3
The 'Top 1' query (as below) takes almost 2 minutes however. It's exactly the same query, but with 'top 1' added to it.
select top 1 1 from MainTable m
inner join ComplexView v on m.col2 = v.col2
where m.col3 <> v.col3
I suspect that the top 1 is performing a very similar operation to the exists, in that it is 'supposed' to exit as soon as it finds a single row that satisfies it's results.
It's still not really any closer to making me understand what is causing the issue however.

Poor performance when Distinct and Order By Used

Hello,
I am getting an slow answer when I add Distinct and Order By to the query:
Without Distinct and Order By lasts 3.57 seconds; without Distinct and Order By lasts 28.15 seconds, which it's too much for our app.
The query is:
select distinct CC.acceso, CC.ext_acceso, TIT.TITULO_SALIDA
from (((Ocurrencias CT01 inner join
palabras p0 on (CT01.cod_palabra = p0.cod_palabra and p0.palabra like 'VENEZUELA%' AND p0.campo = 'AUTOR')) INNER JOIN
CENTRAL CC ON (CT01.ACCESO = CC.ACCESO AND CT01.EXT_ACCESO = CC.EXT_ACCESO))) inner join
codtit ctt on (CC.acceso = ctt.acceso and CC.ext_acceso = ctt.ext_acceso) inner join
titulos tit on (ctt.cod_titulo = tit.cod_titulo and ctt.portada = '1')
where CC.nivel_reg <> 's'
ORDER BY 3 ASC;
The query plan for the query WITH Distinct and Order By is:
Elapsed: 00:00:28.15
Execution Plan
0 SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=ALL_ROWS (Cost=301 Card=47 Bytes=12220)
1 0 SORT (ORDER BY) (Cost=301 Card=47 Bytes=12220)
2 1 SORT (UNIQUE) (Cost=300 Card=47 Bytes=12220)
3 2 NESTED LOOPS (Cost=299 Card=47 Bytes=12220)
4 3 NESTED LOOPS (Cost=250 Card=49 Bytes=4165)
5 4 NESTED LOOPS (Cost=103 Card=49 Bytes=2989)
6 5 NESTED LOOPS (Cost=5 Card=49 Bytes=1960)
7 6 TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'PALABRAS' (TABLE) (Cost=3 Card=1 Bytes=19)
8 7 INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'PALABRA' (INDEX (UNIQUE)) (Cost=2 Card=1)
9 6 INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'PK_OCURRENCIAS' (INDEX (UNIQUE)) (Cost=2 Card=140 Bytes=2940)
10 5 TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'CENTRAL' (TABLE) (Cost=2 Card=1 Bytes=21)
11 10 INDEX (UNIQUE SCAN) OF 'PK_CENTRAL' (INDEX (UNIQUE)) (Cost=1 Card=1)
12 4 TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'CODTIT' (TABLE) (Cost=3 Card=1 Bytes=24)
13 12 INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'PK_CODTIT' (INDEX (UNIQUE)) (Cost=2 Card=1)
14 3 TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'TITULOS' (TABLE) (Cost=1 Card=1 Bytes=175)
15 14 INDEX (UNIQUE SCAN) OF 'PK_TITULOS' (INDEX (UNIQUE)) (Cost=0 Card=1)
Statistics
154 recursive calls
0 db block gets
32070 consistent gets
1622 physical reads
0 redo size
305785 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
2807 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
212 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
10 sorts (memory)
0 sorts (disk)
3149 rows processed
The query plan for the query WITHOUT Distinct and Order By is:
Elapsed: 00:00:03.57
Execution Plan
0 SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=ALL_ROWS (Cost=299 Card=47 Bytes=12220)
1 0 NESTED LOOPS (Cost=299 Card=47 Bytes=12220)
2 1 NESTED LOOPS (Cost=250 Card=49 Bytes=4165)
3 2 NESTED LOOPS (Cost=103 Card=49 Bytes=2989)
4 3 NESTED LOOPS (Cost=5 Card=49 Bytes=1960)
5 4 TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'PALABRAS' (TABLE) (Cost=3 Card=1 Bytes=19)
6 5 INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'PALABRA' (INDEX (UNIQUE)) (Cost=2 Card=1)
7 4 INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'PK_OCURRENCIAS' (INDEX (UNIQUE)) (Cost=2 Card=140 Bytes=2940)
8 3 TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'CENTRAL' (TABLE) (Cost=2 Card=1 Bytes=21)
9 8 INDEX (UNIQUE SCAN) OF 'PK_CENTRAL' (INDEX (UNIQUE)) (Cost=1 Card=1)
10 2 TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'CODTIT' (TABLE) (Cost=3 Card=1 Bytes=24)
11 10 INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'PK_CODTIT' (INDEX (UNIQUE)) (Cost=2 Card=1)
12 1 TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'TITULOS' (TABLE) (Cost=1 Card=1 Bytes=175)
13 12 INDEX (UNIQUE SCAN) OF 'PK_TITULOS' (INDEX (UNIQUE)) (Cost=0 Card=1)
Statistics
3376 recursive calls
0 db block gets
33443 consistent gets
1061 physical reads
0 redo size
313751 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
2807 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
422 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
90 sorts (memory)
0 sorts (disk)
3149 rows processed
I would appreciate a lot if somebody can tell me how to improve the performance of the query with Distinct and Order By.
Thank you very much,
Icaro Alzuru C.

Hello,
I am getting an slow answer when I add Distinct and Order By to the query:
Without Distinct and Order By lasts 3.57 seconds; without Distinct and Order By lasts 28.15 seconds, which it's too much for our app.
The query is:
select distinct CC.acceso, CC.ext_acceso, TIT.TITULO_SALIDA
from (((Ocurrencias CT01 inner join
palabras p0 on (CT01.cod_palabra = p0.cod_palabra and p0.palabra like 'VENEZUELA%' AND p0.campo = 'AUTOR')) INNER JOIN
CENTRAL CC ON (CT01.ACCESO = CC.ACCESO AND CT01.EXT_ACCESO = CC.EXT_ACCESO))) inner join
codtit ctt on (CC.acceso = ctt.acceso and CC.ext_acceso = ctt.ext_acceso) inner join
titulos tit on (ctt.cod_titulo = tit.cod_titulo and ctt.portada = '1')
where CC.nivel_reg <> 's'
ORDER BY 3 ASC;
The query plan for the query WITH Distinct and Order By is:
Elapsed: 00:00:28.15
Execution Plan
0 SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=ALL_ROWS (Cost=301 Card=47 Bytes=12220)
1 0 SORT (ORDER BY) (Cost=301 Card=47 Bytes=12220)
2 1 SORT (UNIQUE) (Cost=300 Card=47 Bytes=12220)
3 2 NESTED LOOPS (Cost=299 Card=47 Bytes=12220)
4 3 NESTED LOOPS (Cost=250 Card=49 Bytes=4165)
5 4 NESTED LOOPS (Cost=103 Card=49 Bytes=2989)
6 5 NESTED LOOPS (Cost=5 Card=49 Bytes=1960)
7 6 TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'PALABRAS' (TABLE) (Cost=3 Card=1 Bytes=19)
8 7 INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'PALABRA' (INDEX (UNIQUE)) (Cost=2 Card=1)
9 6 INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'PK_OCURRENCIAS' (INDEX (UNIQUE)) (Cost=2 Card=140 Bytes=2940)
10 5 TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'CENTRAL' (TABLE) (Cost=2 Card=1 Bytes=21)
11 10 INDEX (UNIQUE SCAN) OF 'PK_CENTRAL' (INDEX (UNIQUE)) (Cost=1 Card=1)
12 4 TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'CODTIT' (TABLE) (Cost=3 Card=1 Bytes=24)
13 12 INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'PK_CODTIT' (INDEX (UNIQUE)) (Cost=2 Card=1)
14 3 TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'TITULOS' (TABLE) (Cost=1 Card=1 Bytes=175)
15 14 INDEX (UNIQUE SCAN) OF 'PK_TITULOS' (INDEX (UNIQUE)) (Cost=0 Card=1)
Statistics
154 recursive calls
0 db block gets
32070 consistent gets
1622 physical reads
0 redo size
305785 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
2807 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
212 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
10 sorts (memory)
0 sorts (disk)
3149 rows processed
The query plan for the query WITHOUT Distinct and Order By is:
Elapsed: 00:00:03.57
Execution Plan
0 SELECT STATEMENT Optimizer=ALL_ROWS (Cost=299 Card=47 Bytes=12220)
1 0 NESTED LOOPS (Cost=299 Card=47 Bytes=12220)
2 1 NESTED LOOPS (Cost=250 Card=49 Bytes=4165)
3 2 NESTED LOOPS (Cost=103 Card=49 Bytes=2989)
4 3 NESTED LOOPS (Cost=5 Card=49 Bytes=1960)
5 4 TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'PALABRAS' (TABLE) (Cost=3 Card=1 Bytes=19)
6 5 INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'PALABRA' (INDEX (UNIQUE)) (Cost=2 Card=1)
7 4 INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'PK_OCURRENCIAS' (INDEX (UNIQUE)) (Cost=2 Card=140 Bytes=2940)
8 3 TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'CENTRAL' (TABLE) (Cost=2 Card=1 Bytes=21)
9 8 INDEX (UNIQUE SCAN) OF 'PK_CENTRAL' (INDEX (UNIQUE)) (Cost=1 Card=1)
10 2 TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'CODTIT' (TABLE) (Cost=3 Card=1 Bytes=24)
11 10 INDEX (RANGE SCAN) OF 'PK_CODTIT' (INDEX (UNIQUE)) (Cost=2 Card=1)
12 1 TABLE ACCESS (BY INDEX ROWID) OF 'TITULOS' (TABLE) (Cost=1 Card=1 Bytes=175)
13 12 INDEX (UNIQUE SCAN) OF 'PK_TITULOS' (INDEX (UNIQUE)) (Cost=0 Card=1)
Statistics
3376 recursive calls
0 db block gets
33443 consistent gets
1061 physical reads
0 redo size
313751 bytes sent via SQL*Net to client
2807 bytes received via SQL*Net from client
422 SQL*Net roundtrips to/from client
90 sorts (memory)
0 sorts (disk)
3149 rows processed
I would appreciate a lot if somebody can tell me how to improve the performance of the query with Distinct and Order By.
Thank you very much,
Icaro Alzuru C.

Poor performance when running DBMS_STATS package

Hello,
I thought I would throw this issue out to the general population as I am stumped.
I have two identical schemas on two different severs. Database in 9.2.0.6 and for QAS and Production reasons the servers and database settings are identical.
I am running the DBMS_STATS.GATHER_SCHEMA_STATS package on both databases. On the QAS DB it takes roughly 1.5 hours while on the Production database it takes 8.0 hours.
Looking at the statspack analysis, the biggest thing to jump out at me is that the temporary tablespace is getting 4.6 Million I/O hits (reads) while the QAS is only getting a few thousand.
So .... this sort of indicates that something is going on in the PGA which could cause Oracle to use the TEMP tablespace. However when I look in the host performance (using Grid Control) the servers memory, file I/O, and CPU while high are not over 80%.
Has anyone else seen and issue like this? Any ideas where to look?
Thanks,
Chris

To the extent that you are gathering histograms on the data, Oracle potentially has to do a reasonable amount of sorting. If one machine has substantially more physical RAM, that presumably implies that it has more RAM available for the PGA, which would allow more sorts to happen in memory rather than on disk.
Depending on how you create a "refresh copy of production" and what parameters you are passing in to DBMS_STATS, it is also possible that the quality assurance database is gathering substantially more histograms than the production database (i.e. you refresh lower environments via export and import rather than doing an RMAN clone and tell Oracle to gather histograms on any columns that currently have histograms).
Justin

Poor performance when using skip-level hierarchies

Hi there,
currently we have big performance issues when drilling in a skip-level hierarchy (each drill takes around 10 seconds).
OBIEE is producing 4 physical SQL statements when drilling f.e. into the 4th level (for each level one SQL statement). The statements runs in parallel and are pretty fast (the database doesn't need more than 0,5 seconds to produce the result), but ... and here we have probably somewhere a problem ... putting all the 4 results together in OBIEE takes another 8 seconds.
This are not big datasets the database is returning - around 5-20 records for each select statement.
The question is: why does it take so long to put the data together on the server? Do we have to reconfigure some parameters to make it faster?
Please guide.
Regards,
Rafael

If you really and exclusively want to have "OBIEE can handle such queries" - i.e. not touch the database, then you had best put a clever caching strategy in place.
First angle of attack should be the database itself though. Best sit down with a data architect and/or your DBA to find the best setup possible physically and then when you've optimized that (with regard to the kind of queries emitted against it) you can move up to the OBIS. Always try t fix the issue as close to the source as possible.

BIBean poor performance when using Query.setSuppressRows()

Does anyone have experience in suppressing N/A cell values using BIBean? I was experimenting the use of Query.setSuppressRows(DataDirector.NA_SUPPRESSION). It does hide the rows that contains N/A values in a crosstab.
The problem is that the performance degrades significantly when I started drilling down the hierarchy. Without calling the method, I was able to drill into the pre-aggregated hierarchy in a few seconds. But with setSuppressRows(), it took almost 15 minutes to do the same drill.
Just for a comparison, I used DML to report on the same data that I wanted to drill into. With either 'zerorow' to yes or no, the data was fetched less than a second.
Thanks for any help.
- Wei

At the moment we are hoping this will be fixed in a 10g database patch which is due early 2005. However, if you are using an Analytic Workspace then you could use OLAP DML to filter the zero and NA rows before they are returned to the query. I think this involves modifying the OLAP views that return the AW objects via SQL commands.
Hope this helps
Business Intelligence Beans Product Management Team
Oracle Corporation

[SOLVED] Older NVIDIAs - (quite poor) performance when watching movies

I'd like to ask what packages and configuration you use to achieve the best performance for NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200, mainly for watching movies. I've come to this observation:
Global parameters
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 (AGP 4x, 128 MB)
1680x1050, 60 Hz
Pentium 4 2.4 GHz, 1 GB RAM
SMPlayer 0.6.9 (SVN r3447)
Used video: 1280 x 720, 23.976 FPS, fullscreen
Windows XP (SP2):
Driver: 16. 5. 2008 (version 6.14.11.7519)
MPlayer SVN r30369
Output method: directx(fast)
Video: fluent
Ubuntu 11.04:
Driver: nvidia-173 (probably, Ubuntu is so confusing)
MPlayer 1.0rc4-4.5.2
Output method: xv
Video: fluent but often with a diagonal break
Arch Linux:
Driver: nouveau
MPlayer SVN r34426
Output method: xv
Video: goes to few FPS after a minute
Last edited by nemamradfazole (2011-12-26 00:02:23)

I'm not an A/v guy, but I think you can encode stuff in different ways and that might make a difference, so just because I haven't had any problems with 720p doesn't mean you're doing something wrong, maybe you're viewing higher-quality material.
I don't get choppy video even when I'm maxing-out the cpu.
mplayer --framedrop -vfm ffmpeg -lavdopts lowres=1:fast:skiploopfilter=all
is the magic incantation I use to view some 720p stuff on my other PC which has just and old, unsupported integrated Intel card. I get "almost-fluent but often with a diagonal break" video.
Yes, this not 30fps 720p anymore, so I'm cheating ;P
nemamradfazole wrote:I am curious, can you watch 1080p as well?
Not really.

Poor Performance when using Question Pooling

I'm wondering if anyone else out there is experiencing
Captivate running very slow when using question pooling. We have
about 195 questions with some using screenshots in jpeg format.
By viewing the Windows Task Manager, CP is using anywhere
between 130 to 160 K worth of memory. What is going on here? It's
hammering the system pretty hard. It takes a large effort just to
reposition the screenshot or even move a distractor.
I'm running this on a 3.20GHz machine with 3GB of RAM.
Any Captivate Gurus out there care to tackle this one?
Help.

MtnBiker1966,
I have noticed the same problem. I only have 60 slides with
43 questions and the Question Pool appears to be a big drain on
performance. Changing the buttons from Continue to Go to next slide
helped a little, but performance still drags compared to not using
a question pool. I even tried reducing the number of question
pools, but that did not affect the performance any. The search
continues.
Darin

Poor performance when xmlquery contains attribute matching XPATH

We send a select xmlquery to Oracle 11g database, if the query contains an XPATH that has an attribute name test in it, the performance is significantly worse than if indexing is used. Here are the two queries:
1)
select xmlquery('declare default element namespace "namespace"; for $e at $pos in $c/services/service let $result := if ($pos >= 2) then "|||||ERROR|||||" else $e return $result' passing document as "c" RETURNING CONTENT).getStringVal(), "LASTUPDATE" from services where id = :1
2)
select xmlquery('declare default element namespace "namespace"; for $e at $pos in $c/services/service[1] let $result := if ($pos >= 2) then "|||||ERROR|||||" else $e return $result' passing document as "c" RETURNING CONTENT).getStringVal(), "LASTUPDATE" from services where id = :1
The only difference is the two XPATHS:
1)$c/services/service
2)$c/services/service[1]
The second query performs 7X to 10X better than the first. More specifically, the Oracle DB CPU will reach 80-100% with only 40 tps of the first query but the second could hit 500 tps.
We would expect the first to perform slightly worse than the second, because Oracle would need to compare the uri values in the doc to the query. But, the documents being searched only contain one service/@uri.
Does anyone know why the performance is so bad with the first query? Is there anything we can do to tune the DB to help in this area. We need to be able to do the first query but the current CPU utilization is extremely too much.

sorry, number 1 should be $services/service(@uri="test"). That should be [ instead of (, the forum wasn't displaying it correctly above. It should be that way in the query as well.
Edited by: user6668496 on Mar 10, 2009 1:50 PM

Poor performance when multitasking on T510, Core i5, Windows 7 64, 4GB RAM, NVidia Optimus 512MB

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for