Buffer parameter is better than direct=y

When I tried to export a history table that has 40 million rows & weighs 11GB, direct=y parameter is taking double the time compared to buffer=16000000 parameter.
exp uname/pwd@testdb file=/oradata/uat2.dmp buffer=16000000 statistics=none tables=(ALL_TXNS_MMDD)
buffer=16000000      *22 Minutes*
direct=y      *48 Minutes*
exporting onto local HDD
direct=y      *3 minutes*
buffer=16MB     *18 minutes*
Version- Oracle 9.2.0.4+
I always thought direct=y gives better speed and in all my export scripts I have used only direct=y.
does anyone know why buffer is giving better speed ?
Edited by: Sajiv on Jun 11, 2009 1:49 PM

Sajiv wrote:
When I tried to export a history table that has 40 million rows & weighs 11GB, direct=y parameter is taking double the time compared to buffer=16000000 parameter.
exp uname/pwd@testdb file=/oradata/uat2.dmp buffer=16000000 statistics=none tables=(ALL_TXNS_MMDD)
buffer=16000000      *22 Minutes*
direct=y      *48 Minutes*
exporting onto local HDD
direct=y      *3 minutes*
buffer=16MB     *18 minutes*
In your export command the @testdb suggests that you are exporting across a network. Does this mean that when you say "exporting onto a local HDD" you run the export command on the same machine as the database ?
If so then the difference in time may be related to the way in which SQL*Net can perform data compression for network traffic - and perhaps this can't be done in the same way for direct exports, leaving you with more round-trips when the traffic is across tcp/ip but fewer when using a local connection.
If you want to find out more about what's going on, you could simply query v$session_event for the session every few seconds to see where the time is going.
Regards
Jonathan Lewis
http://jonathanlewis.wordpress.com
http://www.jlcomp.demon.co.uk
"For every expert there is an equal and opposite expert."
Arthur C. Clarke

Similar Messages

Why is Garmin & TomTom far better than directions from Siri

My first smart phone is my iPhone 5S. I live in NYC. When I ask for directions, it takes me to the toll bridges and tunnels via the route with the most traffic.
She never heard of the 59th St aka Queensboro aka Edward Koch Bridge. It took me to Staples, and 5 gas stations that were closed a long time ago. My Garmin and TomTom ask if I want to pay tolls or find a different route. They don't know traffic conditions and have to be updated for the gas stations. I assumed the iPhone could know traffic conditions and stores that were still in business. Do you know any apps that can?

I think Apple maps works fine for me. What you have to remember is that Tom tom and Garmin specialize in Mapping. Obviously Google do too.
I know Apple maps are provided mainly by Tom Tom and AutoNavi who are chinese.
Maybe Apple maps needs a little more work as its relatively new.

Exported file via FCE better than from iMovie directly

Have imported in iMovie a video 1080x1920i and exported in two different ways as follows:
A) Directly by iMovie HD 1280x720
B) Transferred to FCE and exported HD 1280x720
The video exported from FCE (via iMovie) is slightly better than from iMovie directly even though the resolution and settings of the formats are the same. I would like to stress that the quality difference is very s m a l l, it just seems a tiny bit clearer.
Does anybody know why this is and what I could do to get the same quality as exported from FCE???
Thanks

Open both files using QuickTime Player and then open the Movie Inspector window.
Compare the information for each files and note the differences.

How can we say if Join better than using Sub Queries ??

Hi all,
I am trying to understand the rationale behind "Is _Inner Join_ better than using _Sub Query_ ?" for this scenario ...
I have these tables --
Table1 { *t1_Col_1* (PrimaryKey), t1_Col_2, t1_Col_3, t1_Col_4 }
-- Number of rows = ~4Million , t1_Col_3 has say 60% entries non-zero -----> (Condition 4)
Table2 { *t2_Col_1* (PK), t2_Col_2, t2_Col_3 }
-- Number of rows = ~150Million, t2_Col_2 maps to t1_Col_1 -----> (Condition 1). This means for every distinct value of t1_Col_1 (its PK) we'll have multiple rows in Table2.
Table3 { *t3_Col_1* (PK), t3_Col_2, t3_Col_3 }
-- Number of rows = ~50K, t3_Col_1 maps to t1_Col_2 -----> (Condition 2)
Table4 { *t4_Col_1* (PK), t4_Col_2, t4_Col_3 }
-- Number of rows = ~1K, t4_Col_2 maps to t3_Col_2 -----> (Condition 3)
Now here are the 2 queries: -
Query using direct join --
SELECT t1_Col_1, t2_Col_1, t3_Col_1, t4_Col_2
FROM Table1, Table2, Table3, Table4
WHERE t1_Col_1=t2_Col_2 -- Condition 1
AND t1_Col_2=t3_Col_1 -- Condition 2
AND t3_Col_2=t4_Col_1 -- Condition 3
AND t1_Col_3 != 0
Query using SubQuery --
SELECT t1_Col_1, t2_Col_1, t3_Col_1, t4_Col_2
FROM Table2,
(SELECT t1_Col_1, t3_Col_1, t4_Col_2
FROM Table1,Table3, Table4
WHERE
AND t1_Col_2=t3_Col_1 -- Condition 2
AND t3_Col_2=t4_Col_1 -- Condition 3
AND t1_Col_3!= 0
WHERE t1_Col_1=t2_Col_2 -- Condition 1
Now the golden question is - How can I document with evidence that Type-1 is better than Type-2 or the other way ? I think the 3 things in comparison are: -
- Number of rows accessed (Type-1 better ?)
- Memory/Bytes used (Again Type-1 better ?)
- Cost ( ?? )
(PS - testing on both MySQL, Oracle10g)
Thanks,
A

So, is it right to conclude that Optimizer uses the optimal path and then processes the query resulting in nearly the same query execution time ?If the optimizer transforms two queries so that they end up the same, then they will run in the same time. Of course, sometimes it cannot do so because of the the way the data is defined (nulls are often a factor; constraints can help it) or the way the query is written, and sometimes it misses a possible optimization due to inaccurate statistics or other information not available to it, or limitations of the optimizer itself.
Is this the right place to ask for MySQL optimization ?Probably not.

About JDBC CALL STORE PROCEDURE with out parameter is greater than 4000

Hi Guys,
I have a problem call store procedure with a large string.
as i know varchar2 can contain 32767 characters in pl/sql .
But when i used varchar2 as a out parameter in a store procedure, if the out parameter is greater than 4000 characters , it always give me error message as 'the buffer is too small'.
why it happened?
I read some article that says i need configure a property in data-source.xml , and jdbc 10g driver already solved this problem, but i used jdev 10.1.3.2 ,the driver should be fine.
How can i solve this problem?
Thanks in advance,
AppCat

Object is Foundation, Execute Script
This is for a query, you can change to a stored procedure call. Pull the value back in the Java code then put into the process variable.
import javax.naming.InitialContext;
import javax.sql.DataSource;
import java.sql.*;
PreparedStatement stmt = null;
Connection conn = null;
ResultSet rs = null;
try {
InitialContext ctx = new InitialContext();
DataSource ds = (DataSource) ctx.lookup("java:IDP_DS");
conn = ds.getConnection();
stmt = conn.prepareStatement("select FUBAR from TB_PT_FUBAR where PROCESS_INSTANCE_ID=?");
stmt.setLong(1, patExecContext.getProcessDataLongValue("/process_data/@inputID"));
rs = stmt.executeQuery();
rs.next();
patExecContext.setProcessDataStringValue("/process_data/outData", rs.getString(1));
} finally {
try {
rs.close();
} catch (Exception rse) {}
try {
stmt.close();
} catch (Exception sse) {}
try {
conn.close();
} catch (Exception cse) {}

Recordlength & buffer parameter in IMP

In IMPORT of oracle we specify 2 parameter
1. recordlength
2. buffer
1. How much maximum size we can spercify for those parameter to fasten the IMPORT process? Also on which thing those values depends?
2. Also how much time will it save if we specify those parameters? e.g. If any IMPORT takes 10 Hours to import and if we specify those 2 parameters to high values then how much will it take to import?
3. Is there any other parameter which will fasten the import process?
Thanks,

for first You have to understand what those parameters mean:
The BUFFER parameter applies ONLY to conventional path Export. It has no effect on a direct path Export. This BUFFER parameter specifies the size (in bytes) of the buffer used to fetch rows. It determines the maximum number of rows in an array, fetched by Export. For direct path Export, use the RECORDLENGTH parameter to specify the size of the buffer that Export uses for writing to the export file.
The RECORDLENGTH parameter specifies the length (in bytes) of the file record. You can use this parameter to specify the size of the Export I/O buffer (highest value is 64 kb). Changing the RECORDLENGTH parameter affects only the size of data that accumulates before writing to disk. It does not affect the operating system file block size. If you do not define this parameter, it defaults to your platform-dependent value for BUFSIZ (1024 bytes in most cases).
Then read metalink note: 155477.1
Or this one:
http://www.dba-oracle.com/oracle_tips_load_speed.htm
Then test in Your test env what are the best parameters for Your particular system.

Why is MME playing much better than ASIO4ALL

I have a 64 bit acer Aspire R7 with 8GB RAM and runing windows 8.1. i have bin using adobe audition(now using CS6) for about 10 years now and i have never found myself havin this problem:
1)It so happens that my MME drivers are giving less glitches than the ASIO4ALL.(no matter how much i play around with the buffer size)
2)when using the asio4all during play back,the volume is lower compared to that of the MME drivers.
3)the asio4all icon on the system tray keeps flickering from play(green) to an exclamation mark(red) constantly
i cant use my MME for my projects coz i gat quite a bunch of plugins waiting to join the party...hence it will start glitching too sooner than later(((pliz help!!!help help help!!!!

I'm usin the onboard soundcard.i know have to get an external USB soundcard(guilty)...money issues.((but the thing is i used to run the same version of audition on a much smaller laptop(hp,32 bit,3GB RAM) and it worked far much better than the acer.when i play audio in audition with plugin effects:MME used to lag while ASIO4ALL would play it smoothly.n now i have rather the opposite situation.
ryclark wrote:
What audio interface are you using with Audition? If you are using the onboard soundcard you would be much better off using an external USB connected one with proper ASIO drivers which bypass the operating system completely.
There should be no difference between using ASIO4All and MME drivers since ASIO4All uses the windows drivers anyway. It converts them to ASIO for audio interfaces that don't have ASIO drivers. However from what I hear Win 8.1 may be causing the problem with your glitchy audio especially if you are using the built in audio
What do you mean there is no difference between ASIO4ALL and MME drivers?then why does audition prompt to use ASIO4ALL if available??

Apple TV - any better than an ipod?

Before I went and got an apple tv I decided to hook up my ipod video to the tv and see what the quality was like. So I ran svideo from a dock into my 32" sony lcd. It actually looked rather good for standard def programs (ie all itunes material). The Daily Show looked just fine and even The Office and The Riches playing letterboxed widescreen looked fine even when I zoomed the letterbox full screen with the tv.
I'm sticking with the ipod for now. Wondering if someone with the apple tv would like to try a comparison.

Wondering if someone with the apple tv would like to try a comparison.I find that the same file played from TV looks visibly better than when played directly from the iPod. HDTV scalers vary so results may vary with the quality of your particular HDTV/EDTV model. However, it would seem the TV is specifically enhanced for playback of such files and, in general, does a better than average job of scaling here.

Bluetooth stereo headsets - any out there better than S9-HD, 9xxbackbeat

and jaybird? I have owned all three brands in the last month trying to find the best pair possible (thanks to best buys return policy) however, I'm looking for something a little more high end. I can not find any other ones that are higher priced or appear to be better than these "big three" at the moment.
can anyone give me some input of more stereo Bluetooth headsets?
any help is appriciated, thanks

I just got my S9-HD with the D650. I followed the directions from Motorola to set up the D650 for iPod.
Turn off Bluetooth on the iPhone.
Plug in the D650.
Put the phone in iPod mode, start a song and press PAUSE.
Then turn on the S9-HD power to put it in search mode.
Let the D650 find the headset and pair it. The light starts flashing slowly when it's paired.
Then, unplug the D650, turn off iPod mode, and go to Settings on the iPhone and turn Bluetooth on.
Restart the S9 headset back in search mode until the iPhone finds it an pairs.
Now, the phone headset works fine. When you plug the D650 in and listen to the iPod (works fine). But when you try to go to the phone mode while the D650 is plugged in, it won't stay in the phone mode. It just pops up and shuts right back down. So it doesn't appear that the phone headset will interrupt the music and allow you to use the phone as long as the D650 is plugged in.
Any help?

Yet Another Slow DSL Issue - Speed No Better Than Dialup?

I consider myself fairly computer savvy (as I work with them as a profession), but must admit that Internet Connectivity is not my forte...
I currently subscribe to the Hi Speed DSL Enhanced - lately, the speed has degraded to not much better than dialup. I have had this service for several years - nothing has changed on my end hardware-wise, so this event is not assumed to be from my end.
I am running:
Westell 6100 Modem (Transcever Rev 7.2.3.0/Software Version 4.04.03.00)
NetGear RangeMax Duo Wireless N-Router #WNDR3300
(2) computers are hooked up:
(1) XP - hardwired directly to the Westell modem
(1) Win7 - hooked up via wireless
Both computers are running latest version of OS, IE and all software is up to date.
Both computers use Kaspersky Internet Security (internet speed the same whether it is ON or OFF)
Absolutely NO Maleware/Spyware or Viruses on either computer
I reboot the modem several times/day - with no result in increased speed
(2) phones installed in home - both with appropriate filters installed
My 1st resort was to call support - I can tell you that will be the LAST time I utilize that 'service' I have come to the end of my rope with waiting extended periods of time, only to be connected with a foreign country, with a poor connection, with an operator that barely speaks english, only to have them read thru a script telling me to do ridicuously stupid things like 'reboot the modem' (no kidding) or swap my hardwire CAT cable from my computer to modem end-for-end?
Next resort was this forum - infinitely more helpful!
Ran a Transceiver Stats Check as a baseline - Speed (Down-Up) was a crappy 96 Kbits/sec by 448 Kbits/sec
Then I tried a couple suggestions from this forum - my new Transceiver Stats:
Transceiver Statistics
Transceiver Revision:
7.2.3.0
Vendor ID Code:
4
Line Mode:
G.DMT Mode
Data Path:
Interleaved
Transceiver Information
Downstream Path
Upstream Path
DSL Speed (Kbits/Sec)
608
448
Margin (dB)
8.0
13.0
Line Attenuation (dB)
63.5
31.5
Transmit Power (dBm)
14.7
11.9
HUGE improvement eh?
One thing I did notice when attempting to check for newer version of modem firmware - when trying to update from web it gave me a 'Cannot Connect to Server Error'?
Speed is noticeably increased - but is it still where it should be?
If not, what other fixes should I attempt?
And finally, why is it that every time the weather gets even slightly inclement (sky clouds over, rain, thunderstorm, etc) our DSL goes off entirely?
Thanx for all your help in advance!

Can you fill us in a bit on what you did to improve the synch speed on the modem? Did you find some advice around here to connect the modem to your NID or did you investigate for damage to the home wiring? Your line should be running at a higher speed, which for what you seem to have is 1184kbps down, 448kbps up.
Do you also have voice service with Verizon? If so, how is that, especially during storms? Getting any noise on it? It could be possible if the line is not having issues due to corrosion, somewhere along the line shielding could be missing, and in comes a storm CRC'ing the line out of service.
========
The first to bring me 1Gbps Fiber for $30/m wins!

Better than expected

I'd read all the review and watched all the videos and thats what made me buy the IPhone even though I'd just upgraded my old phone on T-mobile to a Nokia 6300.
One of the reasons for the change was that I do access the WWW, email etc and my last T-mobile bill was £120+ mostly made up of data transfer costs.
With the 02 unlimited data download, the IPhone will pay for itself in a couple of months and I have to say I am extremely impressed so far even though I've only been activated a few days.
I assumed there were bound to be some teething problems with such a jump in technology, but everything I have tried to do with the IPhone has worked and passed the test with flying colours.
Kudos also to you guys on this forum for all your help. I've read quite a few of the posts and you do a great job in providing help where needed.

You find it amazingly faster. Honestly, I just don't see it. It doesn't matter as I'm just I've gotten to on to what I really see as their architecture for future development and progress. I also gather their implementation of 64 bit is way better than Windows 7 for some reason.
At this point in time, my computer is plenty fast with Leopard or Snow Leopard. Its just a couple of pieces of software that's the problem vexxing me and other users - Entourage 2008 and the problem with Apple's sync services (I see Apple implemented a diagnostics capability in Snow Leopard to assist with sync issues) and Intuit with Quicken still being stuck at 2007 and PowerPC. I had to install Rosetta for Quicken 2007 only and honestly from what I've seen of Intuit's Quicken beta, if the next beta (due in a couple weeks) isn't a major step in the right direction as they're going for release in Feb 2010 I might be with Quicken 2007 for quite a while. These two things are the unfortunate thing for me at the moment.

Why is illustrator better than corel?

hello forumers.
im an illustrator freak,but my annoying boss wants me to learn corel ;-( ,i need some facts why illustrator is better than corel so i can shove his face in it if possible.
VIVA illi
thank you very much.

Do not, I repeat do not, ask James or Scott or Hans.
Indeed.
Only ask Jacob, who is still using a four-version out-of-date copy of Illustrator and who tries to personify it as a female idol.
If the comparison is to be "fair" (which it clearly will not be, at least from your perspective), it should compare Corel Draw X4 to Illustrator CS3 or CS4. Release dates being what they were, X4 would more legitimately be considered Draw's answer to CS3; since it long predates CS4.
Talking about earlier versions of either program is not very meaningful, except in the sense of history of development. When I compare the release histories of Draw, FreeHand, Canvas, and Illustrator, Illustrator comes in an often-embarrassing last in terms of features long taken-for-granted in other programs.
im an illustrator freak,but my annoying boss wants me to learn corel...i need some facts [that] I can shove his face..
Shove in your boss's face? For presenting you an opportunity to escape fearful dependency upon a single software?
i need the pros and cons...to outline to him why illustrator is better...
Why don't you simply welcome this opportunity to actually know something about that which you claim a completely bogus "preference"?
Were you at all interested in gaining input that would help you help your boss reach a rational and objective decision, you would at least describe something about the kind of work your boss pays you to do. What kind of business employs you? Is the Macintosh platform even relevant to your boss's business market? How large a workgroup is affected by the software choice? What kind of artwork does that workgroup produce? How is it delivered? What are its initial content sources? Who are the end-users of the artwork? In how many different ways is it delivered, and in what formats?
Yet here you are, soliciting predisposed "why Illustrator is 'better' than Draw" advice from a handful of users who, so far, admit themselves having either no, or practically no, experience with Draw! If that's not blind-leading-the-blind, I don't know what is.
You are by admission predisposed toward Illustrator, even though you are not at all equipped to say why. Reason is pointless with so irrational a mindset. Since no one responding yet seems to actually know anything about Draw, I will instead offer some ammunition I hope your boss uses to see if you are even objective enough to consider it.
The following is a just-off-the-top list. Should you actually try to counter it, you should be prepared for more:
General:
Lower cost, both initially and in upgrades
Better support for non-current versions
Faster performance
Better support for several vertical-market industries (signage, embroidery, engineering-related)
More robust CAD and more business-centric import/export formats
Better multiple page implementation
Better-organized interface
Highly-customizable workspace
Features:
User-defined drawing scales
Reliable snaps
Dimension tools
Callout tools
Connector lines
Flowchart Tools
No-nonsense, 2D vector face extrusion
Live shape primitives
Smart Drawing tools (freehand shape recognition)
Virtual Segment tool
Ability to properly cut/crop vector and raster content
Contour tool (multiple parallels)
Export selection only
Barcodes
Print Merge
Bundle for Output Bureau
Scan directly into Draw
Trim (not merely mask) vector artwork to any path
Fit Text To Path
Text stats
Export artwork as Type 1 font.
Lens Fills (live details)
Live Perspective
Object Data (spreadsheet-formatted database of user-defined object data fields)
Fillet / Chamfer / Scallop
User-defined Arrowheads
Shared Features Better Implemented in Draw:
Mesh Grads
Dynamic Guides (with increment snaps)
Independent control over Snaps for Guides, Grid, Objects, Dynamic Grids
Property Bar (far more sensible and useable than AI's poorly-designed and buggy Control Panel)
Status Bar with context-sensitive instructions
Elastic Mode (vs. AI's Reshape tool)
Add/remove/line/curve/cusp/symmetrical curve commands properly implemented for all nodes (points) in a selected path
Logarithmic and Symmetrical spirals
Macro Recording (vs. AI Actions)
Envelopes (retract envelope handles without wrecking artwork)
Old-Saw Arguements Based on Overstatement, if not Myths:
Adobe's cross-app "integration" is more hype than substantive advantage.
Illustrator's text handing is worst among Adobe apps and worst-of-class among its direct competitors.
Draw opens and creates PDFs just fine.
Claims of AI superiority regarding importing of raster images is practically immaterial. In fact, Corel Draw's interaction with Corel PhotoPaint is at least as "smooth and seamless" as AI/PS, if not more so.
Using vector artwork created in Draw (or any other mainstream Bezier drawing program) in page-layout programs is no more difficult than using AI. This stuff has been being done for decades.
Again, this is just a beginning. You do yourself a huge disservice by declaring (let alone attempting to defend) a "preference" to the only choice with which you have experience (and evidently only beginning experience at that). That's true regardless of which program you claim to "favor." How can one, with any trace of intellectual honesty, claim to have a "favorite" of anything--when one has no exposure to any of the considered alternatives?
Since you already have Illustrator, you should absolutely welcome your Boss's willingness to provide you a current copy of Corel Draw. Here's an opportunity for you--at no personal cost--to actually learn something about another program; to potentially have some clue as to what you're talking about when you claim to "prefer" one over the other; to benefit from knowing more than one particular tool, and to overcome the fear of learning your way around more than one offering among similar programs. For all you know, you may be arguing against the program you would actually end up preferring.
I could also build a bullet list of better-than-Draw AI features. It would not be as long as its opposite. Nor would the AI-favoring listings be as broadly practical.
Fact is, anyone can build a bullet list to favor any of them. (Just look at the sides of the boxes, or each vendor's self-serving "competitive comparisons" on their respective websites.) Fact is, all of them are really rather mediocre; mostly 20+ years-old technology.
You really should have no axe to grind in this, unless you can state something specific to your work that strongly favors the relatively few functional advantages of AI.
JET

Is there a way that i can downgrade my iOS 7.1 on my iPhone 4 to iOS 6xx? battery life not good, and performance isn't better than iOS 6.. Please apple i am really disappointed with iOS 7 on my iPhone 4

Is there a way that i can downgrade my iOS 7.1 on my iPhone 4 to iOS 6xx? battery life not good, and performance isn't better than iOS 6.. Please apple i am really disappointed with iOS 7 on my iPhone 4, it can runs great on iPhone above 4 such as 5/5s/etc.. iPhone 4 just good with iOS 6...

No.

Why does a DVI or VGA look better than HDMI for 2nd Monitor

Why does a DVI or VGA connection for a program monitor look better than HDMI. I've tested this on several systems with CS5x and CS6. The full screen output from premiere definitely looks worse with HDMI.
I can often see visual differences with the Windows GUI as well, over sharpening of text and lines, harsh rendering of gradients. It looks like a VGA signal displayed on a television.
I've looked at the NVidia stetting and it appears to be set to 1920x1080 at 60hz either way, DVI or HDMI. On one Acer 20 inch monitor the was VGA, HDMI, Composite, Component, and Digital Tuner, but no DVI. The program monitor has always looked blah from the HDMI. So I recently switched the connection to a DVI to VGA adaptor, and now the video looks so much better.
Any thoughts or explanations?

Just because the monitors accept a 1080P signal doesn't mean their native resolution is 1920x1080. At 20 inch they very likely can scale that signal down to the native resolution of the panel which may be 1600 x 900 or another resolution that is 16 x 9 resolution. That scaling can be done by the GPU or firmware on the Monitor depending on the video driver options and the firmware options. That scaling is also the most common cause to text and icon blurriness you are talking about. As an example there are Pro monitors that accept a 4K signal but scale it down to 2.5K or 2K on the actual panel. You might try going into your video card settings such as Nvidia control panel and look for the scaling options. Select GPU scaling and see if the preview is better. If that doesn't work select no scaling and see if it's better if the monitor firmware handles the scaling.
Eric
ADK

Open DNS better than Comcast xfinity DNS?

Is OpenDNS better than using Comcast/xfinity's DNS? If yes, how do I switch over?
I go to into Airport Utility and enter in the 2 openDNS numbers, something like 222 and 220, but at the bottom of the page right now (because I am using Comcast's DNS) there's a web address something.comcast.net Do I need to change that info too? If so, what do I put in that field?
Thanks!

How did you add them?
If you are using a single computer: Open System Preferences/Network. Double click on your connection type, or select it in the drop-down menu, and in the box marked 'DNS Servers' add the following two numbers:
208.67.222.222
208.67.220.220
(You can also enter them if you click on Advanced and then DNS)
Sometimes reversing the order of the DNS numbers can be beneficial in cases where there is a long delay before web pages start to load, and then suddenly load at normal speed:
http://support.apple.com/kb/TS2296
If your computer is part of a network: please refer to this page: http://www.opendns.com/start/bestpractices/#yournetwork and follow the advice given.
(An explanation of why using Open DNS is both safe and a good idea can be read here: http://www.labnol.org/internet/tools/opendsn-what-is-opendns-why-required-2/2587 /
Open DNS also provides an anti-phishing feature: http://www.opendns.com/solutions/homenetwork/anti-phishing/ )
Wikipedia also has an interesting article about Open DNS:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDNS

Buffer parameter is better than direct=y

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for