CC 2014 - another noticeable degradation in performance

Hi all, just posting up to get a consensus on the current performance of CC 2014, for me, I've found it to be another very noticeable downgrade, to the point where its not useable for me in my workflow. I've since deleted 2014 and am hoping it doesn't replace Illustrator CC any time soon.
While I love the new pen tool and general accuracy of selecting anchor points and closing paths, it seems to have brought with it a very noticeable lag in selection and laying out points. In previous versions I'd say it performs like having Smart Guides enabled on a complex file, only with or without Smart Guides enabled in CC2014 the lagginess remains.
The file above is used as an example of the problem I'm having, its a small, relatively basic file. In Illustrator CC, when selecting the paving on the left, I get minimal to zero selection lag. When selecting that same area on Illustrator CC 2014, I get a 0.5 to 1 second delay, with or without smart guides enabled.
I have a late 2012 iMac, fully upgraded with best videocard, fastest processor and 32gb of ram. I run my apps off a small local SSD and the artwork files of a Thunderbolt RAID array. It doesn't matter where I put the artwork, local, or RAID, the performance issues are the same.
Anyone having a similar experience? It seems to me with every release or update, Adobe says it comes with "Improved performance" but I've yet to see any release that performed better than the previous.

Hello Crispe,
Could you please share with us the test file @ "[email protected]" so that we can reproduce the problem at our end? Please be assured that your test file would solely be used for reproducing the issue and won't be shared elsewhere.
Please include the link (CC 2014 - another noticeable degradation in performance) in the mail you send.
Regards,
Dhirendra

Similar Messages

Updated Illustrator CC to CC 2014, having problems with CC performance. Slow and does not quit

Updated Illustrator CC to CC 2014, having problems with CC performance. Slow and does not quit. What can be causing the issue?

Hello, please checkout my post concerning lagging issues.
I've also provided a link to a video I've recorded showing the Illustrator behavior on my iMac 27"
Adobe Illustrator Cs6 Lagging Extremely Slow on Yosemite 27" iMac i7 late 2013

While in Indesign CC 2014 i am unable to perform a color separation to Acrobat DC 2014

While in Indesign CC 2014 i am unable to perform a color separation to Acrobat DC 2014. Is there a fix to this?

You can export using one of the PDF/X presets from InDesign and then print separations from Acrobat DC via Print>Advanced>Color>Separations.

If adding more in-params to the stored proc degrade the performance at all?

Hi All,
I have a stored proc, currently having 18 in-params and i have to add 4 new in-params. I just want to know, if there will be any performance degradation or not?
Thanks & Regards
--Dev

Billy,
How can i deviate from the SW engr. concepts? I'm not from Mars. I just want to know, if there will be any perf. degradation, what is the cause behind that? What are the technical events occured inside the pl/sql compiler that degrades the performance.
--DKar

Degraded Monitor Performance Post Snow Leopard Install

Hi.
I have noticed substantial degraded Monitor Performance since installing Snow Leopard. The Monitor is an NEC MultiSync 20WMGX2. The picture is "washed out" looking. Any ideas what the problem might be? The Monitor Settings are as followngs:
Brightness 50.0%
Contrast 43.0%
Sharpness 50.0%
Advanced DV Mode is "on"
DV Mode is set for Text
The Graphics Card is the standard Mac Mini Intel GMA950 with 64MB of shared system memory.
Thanks for any suggestions on how to get the performance back for this monitor.
Mike

Are you aware that the default display gamma has been switched from 1.8 to the default value of 2.2? If you want to build a 1.8 profile, then you still can. Some interpret the change as degradation.
8,961

Does he use of my internal mic degrade the performance of Dragon three dictate

Does using my internal microphone of my MacBook Pro 2008 degrade the performance of my new Dragon dictate three.? It seems to work fine.

I don't think it would degrade dragon dictate software. I've been using dragon naturally speaking for windows on my pc for several years and when I did not have my mic handy I would use the laptop's internal mic with no problems except for a little reduced accuracy. But everything would be back to normal once I switched back to my mic.

Degraded system performance - possibly caused by external LaCie HD

I'm stumped over what to do to solve a serious performance problem with my iMac. Here's the setup:
Prior to today, I've been running:
An iMac Intel Core 2 Duo 17" (late 2006). The guts of it all OEM: 1 GB (2x512) RAM, 250 GB HD, SuperDrive.
A 500 GB LaCie USB 2.0 External HD.
Two external optical drives; one that can read/burn CDs and one that can read//burn DVDs/CDs. Both of these are connected via FireWire
Operating system: Mac OS 10.4.x
Network: Wireless Airport on iMac to DLink wireless router to Sympatico DSL. Using OpenDNS
Over the last few weeks, system performance (and by this, I mean basic tasks like copying a file or selecting a menu option or switching between apps) has degraded to the point where it could take several seconds simply switching from one app to another. No new software or devices were added over this time.
Running Apple's Hard Disk Utility, I discovered some "Minor" problems on the internal hard drive. I booted up in safe mode, which automatically forces a disk repair, and, upon running disk utility again, the disk appears fine.
Performance problems persisted.
I ran disk utility on the external drive. No problems.
Earlier this week, I decided to upgrade the OS.
The upgrade took 5+ hours to install. (I'd heard it can take a while but 5 hours seems silly).
Performance problems persisted.
Last night, I loaded everything I needed on the internal drive and backed up to the external drive. THen I proceeded to do a clean install of the OS 10.5.6. I ran Software Update to get the latest Java machine and other updates.
Still got problems. (Copying 2 GB of files I'd backed up on my external drive back to the internal drive took more than 2 hours! via USB 2.0)
Ran Hard Disk Utility again. Everything's fine. Still have performance problems.
Shut power down on all external drives and re-booted.
Ah-ha! Now we're gettin' somewhere. Performance seems normal. System is responding to basic commands in the what seems like a normal way.
But I need those external drives. First bright idea: Perhaps it's the cheap Dyntech 5-port USB hub that's gumming things up. To test, I disconnected the hub and connected the LaCie external drive directly to the iMac.
Back to the same old problem.
Ok -- so it seems pretty clear that the iMac and the LaCie drive, which once got along famously, are now like an old married couple -- grumpy and slow to respond to each other's requests. Again -- neither the LaCie drive nor the iMac internal drive report any problems via Hard Disk Utility. Files are being successfully copied back and forth albeit at a mind-numbingly slow speed. But for all intents and purposes, so long as the iMac is attached to the LaCie drive, it has all the zip and functional usefulness of my old Centris 610.
Any and all suggestions gratefully welcomed.

True unless you frequently attach and detach the drive so that indexing never is completed. To see if this may be the case with the drive attached, open Spotlight preferences, click on the Privacy tab, then drag the drive's icon into the list.
You can also try a few other things, but start by downloading and installing AppleJack - VersionTracker or MacUpdate. Read instructions and run the program to do some cleanup. For other maintenance tips see:
Kappy's Personal Suggestions for OS X Maintenance
For disk repairs use Disk Utility. For situations DU cannot handle the best third-party utilities are: Disk Warrior; DW only fixes problems with the disk directory, but most disk problems are caused by directory corruption; Disk Warrior 4.x is now Intel Mac compatible. TechTool Pro provides additional repair options including file repair and recovery, system diagnostics, and disk defragmentation. TechTool Pro 4.5.1 or higher are Intel Mac compatible; Drive Genius is similar to TechTool Pro in terms of the various repair services provided. Versions 1.5.1 or later are Intel Mac compatible.
OS X performs certain maintenance functions that are scheduled to occur on a daily, weekly, or monthly period. The maintenance scripts run in the early AM only if the computer is turned on 24/7 (no sleep.) If this isn't the case, then an excellent solution is to download and install a shareware utility such as Macaroni, JAW PseudoAnacron, or Anacron that will automate the maintenance activity regardless of whether the computer is turned off or asleep. Dependence upon third-party utilities to run the periodic maintenance scripts had been significantly reduced in Tiger and Leopard.
OS X automatically defrags files less than 20 MBs in size, so unless you have a disk full of very large files there's little need for defragmenting the hard drive. As for virus protection there are few if any such animals affecting OS X. You can protect the computer easily using the freeware Open Source virus protection software ClamXAV. Personally I would avoid most commercial anti-virus software because of their potential for causing problems.
I would also recommend downloading the shareware utility TinkerTool System that you can use for periodic maintenance such as removing old logfiles and archives, clearing caches, etc.
For emergency repairs install the freeware utility Applejack. If you cannot start up in OS X, you may be able to start in single-user mode from which you can run Applejack to do a whole set of repair and maintenance routines from the commandline. Note that AppleJack 1.5 is required for Leopard.
When you install any new system software or updates be sure to repair the hard drive and permissions beforehand. I also recommend booting into safe mode before doing system software updates.
Get an external Firewire drive at least equal in size to the internal hard drive and make (and maintain) a bootable clone/backup. You can make a bootable clone using the Restore option of Disk Utility. You can also make and maintain clones with good backup software. My personal recommendations are (order is not significant):
1. Retrospect Desktop (Commercial - not yet universal binary)
2. Synchronize! Pro X (Commercial)
3. Synk (Backup, Standard, or Pro)
4. Deja Vu (Shareware)
5. Carbon Copy Cloner (Donationware)
6. SuperDuper! (Commercial)
7. Intego Personal Backup (Commercial)
8. Data Backup (Commercial)
9. SilverKeeper 2.0 (Freeware)
10. MimMac (Commercial)
11. CloneTool Hatchery (Shareware)
12. Clone X (Commercial)
The following utilities can also be used for backup, but cannot create bootable clones:
1. Backup (requires a .Mac account with Apple both to get the software and to use it.)
2. Toast
3. Impression
4. arRSync
Apple's Backup is a full backup tool capable of also backing up across multiple media such as CD/DVD. However, it cannot create bootable backups. It is primarily an "archiving" utility as are the other two.
Impression and Toast are disk image based backups, only. Particularly useful if you need to backup to CD/DVD across multiple media.
Visit The XLab FAQs and read the FAQs on maintenance, optimization, virus protection, and backup and restore.
Additional suggestions will be found in Mac Maintenance Quick Assist.
Referenced software can be found at www.versiontracker.com and www.macupdate.com.

Can I use Intel 815EP AGP 4X Pentium and plug in 5 Nos NI 6002 PCI counter Timer cards, instead of going for expensive PXI based solution? Hope there will be no degradation in performance - when used for constructing an Energy Meter test Bench.

I was recommended to buy NI 6002 with PXI series, 5 Nos cards($875x 5 nos), and additionally a PXI rack costing about $ 2195 + some min--- card to interface with the computer costing another $ 875. Compare this with $ 675 x 5 Nos for 5 Nos PCI based NI 6002 + some cablesa nd connectors for synchronisation.
First option is extremely expensive. But NI marketin manager will be glad that he sold more harware. But I want the truth. Why can't Intel 815 Pentium board be used?

I am addressing the question if using PCI-6602s instead of using PXI-6602s will affect the performance, and the answer is NO. 6602 counter/timer devices comes in two different form factors, PXI/Compac PCI and PCI. The accuracy and performance is the same for both the PXI and PCI 6602s. However, using PXI solution will allow users an easier time with synchronization since that is the provided in the backplane of the PXI chassis. Additionally, if you ever need a higher accuracy solution you can add the 6608 device which has 75 parts per billion ppb vs 50 ppm of the 6602 devices. With 6608 plugged in the second slot of the PXI chassis (the one next to the controller), the high accuracy timebase is automatically shared acrossed the backplane of the PXI chassis which mean
s that other 6602 devices in the chassis will share the same accuracy of the 6608. If the difference in the accuracy is not a concern and you are currently not ready to invest in the PXI platform, then you can go with the PCI 6602 devices.
Best Regards,
June Zhu
National Instruments
Digital and Timing Product Support Engineer

CC 2014.1 AJA LHI worst performance/ sluggish

Hi there,
till the CC 2014.1 Update its nearly impossible to work with my aja kona lhi card.
When i enable the Breakout Card in the playback setting i get bad choppy audio and sometimes only the audio peakmeter waves and no sound reaches the speaker. Another thing i realised as soon as i turn on AJA the responsibility of the UI goes down as well as video on the pc displays only plays choppy (like slow motion/ chewing gum). I realized some of these small laggy behaviors till CC 2014 i put the blame on hard projects i was working on.
My workaround turn of AJA and connect client monitor via GFX card HDMI everything works.
Anyone else has this kind of problems, or with other third party hardware (Blackmagic, other Aja Cards)
Hardware:
Adobe CC 2014.01
Win 7 64bit
Nvidia Geforce GTX 680
Dual INTEL Xeon E5-2687W 3100MHz 20M Cache 8Core
64GB Samsung DDR3-1600 CL11 ECC reg
2x INTEL SSD 520 Series
8 TB SAS Raid

Hi Kmueller,
Check out this post on Creative Cow: https://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/3/959351
Hope that helps.
Thanks,
Kevin

PLZ HELP ME:::Degradation in performance of ORA-10G in solaris sparc

Hi ,
We recently installed solaris 10 (5.10) on sun sparc 64 bit machine and created oracle DB with 10.2.0.1 release .
Our java application calls the oracle procedure
and procedure returns the result set with sys_refcursor as out parameter.
After solaris 10 installation, our application performance has come down drastically.
The same application is running fine on solaris 9 ( 5.9 )
Old configuration
sun sparc 64 bit
solaris 9 (no patches applied )
oarcle 10.2.0.1 (no patches applied )
jboss      3.2.7
jdk 1.4
New configuration
sun sparc 64 bit
solaris 10 (no patches applied )
oarcle 10.2.0.1 (no patches applied )
jboss 3.2.7
jdk 1.4
would like to know about any known Solaris , Oracle DB patches to address this performance issue.
Any solution to bring back the same old performance with out downgrading , would be of great help to us.
thanks a lot in advance.

user645751 wrote:
we dont have this problem before on the same machine.
But the machine is rebooted with new OS of solaris, and Oracle 10G is installed Freshly as previously.So you want to say that the only thing that changed is the Operating System, the remaining things haven't been touched? "Freshly" installed sounds like a new installation, but that's not what you want to say, is it?
But if we include in the new stored procedures, they r not executing at the same time as earlier procedures does.Unclear what the "new stored procedures" are you are referring to.
No change in the procedures and queries.
we have two instances of our application on the same database with stored procedures(queries included in the stored procedures), this is causing degradation.
As the second instance with no stored procedures, but the same queries will be posed is not showing any degradation.So you have two versions of your application - one using stored procedures that contain queries (and return the result set as REF CURSORs?) and the other one doesn't use these stored procedures?
You need to track down what is causing the performance degradation. Since you're already on 10g you might want to use the built-in AWR reports as a starting point to find out what might be the difference resp. what is causing the most load on the database (of course only if you have an AWR license purchased).
Regards,
Randolf
Oracle related stuff blog:
http://oracle-randolf.blogspot.com/
SQLTools++ for Oracle (Open source Oracle GUI for Windows):
http://www.sqltools-plusplus.org:7676/
http://sourceforge.net/projects/sqlt-pp/

Write Acceleration on FCIP tunnels degrading Mirrorview performance

Disaster Recovery(DR)for storage:
Odd fabric:MDS1 (fcip1)----> MDSDR(fcip1)
Even fabric: MDS1(fcip3)----> MDSDR (fcip3)
Link details: b/w=2.0g,latency(7ms)
fcip Link on the MDS is on 14+2 card.
Ip compression mode=1 turned on.
WriteAcceleration turned on.
Without WA enabled, fcip1 traffic is in MB consistently.
With WA enabled, fcip1 traffic degrades to < 5KB. Lots of small 100-300B pkts seen on the Source TX and receive RX of fcip1.

So I would leave WA off if there is no performance gain. So, you have 2G total BW for 2 FCIP links? So, what are the min/max values on the tcp profile? If this is more than 100MB/sec, I would suggest leaving compression off as more than likely it takes longer to compress than just to send it. Compression is done in HW in mode1 on the 14/2 and 9216i cards and done in SW for the IPS4 and IPS8 cards. Above 100M you will see more gain from setting the MTU from end to end to 2300.

Degraded TimesTen performance

Greetings,
I am on Solaris using TimesTen Release 7.0.5.0.0.
I fixed some threading bottlenecks in our application. Unfortunately this seems to put more pressure on TimesTen and degrades the overall throughput of our system. :-/
Someone suggested running "ttXactAdmin -latchstats show" so I did but I have a bit of trouble interpreting the results.
I ran the old software and the new software against the same performance test.
I discovered that many of the SpinCnt values are much bigger now (anywhere between 4x and 8x bigger) but what does it mean?
The number of collisions is also about 4x bigger (values range between 5 to 100) .
The important question is what does the ouput of ttXactAdmin mean and why is it worse now ? (well two questions.. ;-)
The second question is how can I improve this without touching the DB schema ? The DB schema does need some optimization work but if I could improve the performance a bit before making such changes it would be ideal.
Thanks,
Serge

Hi Serge,
Firstly, you need to be sure you are capturing accurate latchstats. Maybe you know this already but just inc case, what you need to do is, when you workload is running a reasonably steady state, run the commands:
ttXactAdmin -latchstats off dsnname
ttXactAdmin -latchstats clear dsnname
ttXactAdmin -latchstats on dsnname
sleep 60
ttXactAdmin -latchstats off dsnname
ttXactAdmin -latchstats show dsnname
This ensures you are capturing latchstats for just a 60 second period rather than any that may have been ther before. Do this for both cases (before app optimisation) and afer.
It is very likely that improving multi-thread / multi-CPu concurrency in the app will shift the concurrency issues into TimesTen. Basically high(er) values of colilisions, average spincnt and sleep count reflect increased contention within TimesTen. Depending on which objects these affect you may (or may not) be able to make some optimisations. There are several common contention points you may see depending on your workload:
1. Log buffer insertion latch. This is a common one if your workload has a lot of insert/update/delete operations. Not much you can do about this except to reduce the volume of write operations or use fewer concurrent application processes/threads.
2. Index latches (mainly for T-Tree indexes). Little to be done about these other than remove the indexes or split the table (and hence the indexes0 into multiple tables/indexes.
3. Command latches. Eliminate these by specifying PruvateCommands=1 in the ODBC attributes.
4. Heap latches. If these are on temp heaps not much can be done. if they are on Perm heaps you can try increase the number of perm heaps. the way to do this is undocumented but is sort of supported :-)
An important note; if you are using direct connection mode or local (intra machine) client/server then it is totally counterproductive to have more concurrent processes/threads accessing TimesTen than the number of CPU cores in your machine. Depending on the workload and what else is running on the machine you will see peak throughput and optimum response time with <= N concurrent processes/threads where N is the total number of CPU cores in the machine. if you are using remote client server then the optimal number of connections is obviously < N since each connection spends some time waiting for the network round trip.
Chris

HT1277 mail application degrading in performance

My mail application recently became painfully slow when performing simple tasts such as typing, scrolling, and opening and closing windows. It's only the mail app that's performing this way. I'm on os x 10.8.4. I ran disc utility, but it found no problems. Any helpful suggestions?

The Folder and Store objects are multithread safe, so that's not an issue.
Of course, it's up to you to coordinate access to the Folder so that different
threads don't confuse each other.

Does Audit Trail degrade the performance on 11g ?

Oracle 11g DB actually turns on standard audit trail function via DBCA.
Could anybody know how the negative impact for this function is ?
Is there any reference (Almost 5% perfermance impact )?
Thx so much.

Watami, reading your post reminded me that 11g comes with a set of default privileges automatically set up for auditing. Since the privileges are pretty much DDL and you should not be performing very much DDL on a production database I would think the overhead would be almost too low to measure.
For those unware of this feature change or who have forgotten like me here are the default audit privileges:
Oracle Database audits the following privileges by default:
ALTER ANY PROCEDURE CREATE ANY LIBRARY                     DROP ANY TABLE
ALTER ANY TABLE         CREATE ANY PROCEDURE                DROP PROFILE
ALTER DATABASE          CREATE ANY TABLE                        DROP USER
ALTER PROFILE              CREATE EXTERNAL JOB                   EXEMPT ACCESS POLICY
ALTER SYSTEM              CREATE PUBLIC DATABASE LINK      GRANT ANY OBJECT PRIVILEGE
ALTER USER                  CREATE SESSION                           GRANT ANY PRIVILEGE
AUDIT SYSTEM              CREATE USER                                GRANT ANY ROLE
CREATE ANY JOB           DROP ANY PROCEDURE
Oracle Database audits the following SQL shortcuts by default:
ROLE                     SYSTEM AUDIT           PUBLIC SYNONYM
DATABASE LINK      PROFILE                     SYSTEM GRANT HTH -- Mark D Powell --
edit paste had lost col alignment, try to add back
Edited by: Mark D Powell on Feb 11, 2010 7:59 AM

Large number of clients association degrade AP performance?

Cisco recommends that no more than 24 clients should associate with the AP because the throughput of the AP is reduced with each client that associates to the AP.
My questions is that if the client just assocate to the AP and not downloading any traffic, does the throughput still reduced? How much traffic (in term of Kb/Mb) does the client use to exchange to the AP?
I have some APs which have up to 150 users authenticate and associate, but little traffic were used. Should we add more APs?

If your AP has a Gig connection then it's probably 802.11N capable, in which case you're looking at 300 or 450Mbps at 5GHz plus 150Mbps at 2.4GHz.. that's why it has an interface faster than 100Mbps.
As for number of Users, bandwidth, etc.. consider two things. In most cases, User traffic is bursty, so available bandwidth isn't as 'bad' as "802.11 Rate / # Users" (which is good news), but also consider that all L2 broadcast traffic and any multicast traffic is sent at the radio's lowest supported data rate (often 1Mbps), regardless of the speed your Clients think they're connected at. As the number of Users increases, so does the amount of broadcast traffic they produce, and thus the load on the AP increases.
A loading of 25-30 APs per User is about right in an office environment, but that doesn't mean it's gospel. In HD WiFi jobs in stadia we look at significantly higher figures than this, or in highly-demanding places where Users are known to be dealing with large files, a lower number is used... There's no right or wrong, it's about balancing cost against functionality and against the number of RF channels we have available to us.

CC 2014 - another noticeable degradation in performance

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for