CS4 performance issues

XP, 4GB RAM with 3BG switch, nVidia 9600GT 512 vRAM.
CS4 keeps sucking up RAM (sometimes to 2GB), shows bad lag time, the OpenGL crashes, and my workflow comes to a stand still.
I just put that video card in as an upgrade from a 7300 LE, as the 9600GT was on the list of Adobe tested cards.
What's going on here?
Edit: also running LR 2.2.

Harold - Adobe tested with the latest drivers at the time we were testing. We found bugs in the drivers, and the GPU makers promised to fix those bugs. Some were fixed before we shipped, but not all. But they are still working on some of them (and finding more) because different configuration issues were missed (multiple monitors, CPU and firmware dependencies, external utilities interferring, etc.) in their fixes or their testing. Even Adobe couldn't test all the factors involved because Adobe has no visibility into the drivers to know what factors MIGHT be involved. Adobe tried to get as broad a coverage as possible, but, well, we couldn't cover it all.
People are advised to update their drivers because many still have not done that, and because the drivers are still being updated to fix many of the bugs reported here.
People are advised to contact the video card makers because some of the bugs are still not fixed, and only the authors of the driver software know what details might be important (or missing) to figure out the cause and fix the bugs in the driver software. Adobe could report the problem to the GPU makers -- but we can't even reproduce some of these problems because we don't know all the factors involved (and thus we'd never be able to help isolate the problem, or tell if it was fixed). It is far more useful for the device driver authors to contact the customer directly and find out the exact configuration causing the problem.

Similar Messages

  • Photoshop CS4 performance issue

    HI
    we use App-V for almost all of our applications and we work with a local cache mode
    as far as I know - the performance of a local application and the virtual application should be the same even if the package is big. a great example is Office 2010 App-V package which works the same as a local installation
    We saw that there are some applications that run very slow comparing to a local installation on the same hardware
    specifically - Adobe PhotoShop CS4 is a good example. when we load a 10MB picture and try to make a simple task like mark a selection - it takes forever for the application to response!
    the weirdest think is that we tried to sequence the application both in App-V 4.6 SP3 and App-V 5.0 SP2 we got the same results. we tried the default things as reset the client's cache or allowing local interaction, com objects... etc.
    I really have no idea what else we can do. as I wrote, larger applications work in our environment just fine, but there are   some that stuck us.  another application that works slower is NIS. I'm not sure if the performance issue is always from
    the same reason but I'm trying to figure out what can we do to improve it
    would love to get some ideas
    Tamir Levy

    Hello,
    Since Microsoft made this claim (as stated by you), my recommendation to improve your situation still stands;
    Open a ticket with Microsoft to understand the topic. My assumption would be that you could name the engineer who visited you a few years ago, and revisit the discussion you had with him and Microsoft directly.
    (the statement of course goes against any independt benchmarking - such as
    Project VRC,
    acknowledged facts by the Community and more..)
    As stated already; If you have tested all that you described, I can't offer anymore suggestions apart from the above.
    Nicke Källén | The Knack| Twitter:
    @Znackattack

  • Upgrade to CS5 from CS4 Performance issues

    This was originally posted in the Creative Suites section.  Bob Levine suggested I try a specific program forum to get better attention.  It has been a present performance problem for me with Premier Pro and Photoshop so I shall try here.
    I have been using CS4 for several months on a new i7 quad 64bit PC with 4 x 1TB HDs and 12GB RAM.  When I use Photoshop or P.Pro, the performance is fast for several operations but slows down as I progress to a snail pace.  At times, I have rebooted the PC to get up to speed again.  I do not know if this is a problem with the CS4 32 bit program working on a 64 bit machine, even with Photoshop.  Perhaps I am clicking too fast.  If I install the source file on a separate drive to the C drive and send the output file to a third drive, performance improves as expected.  Perhaps timing within/between drives and the 32 bit program may be a problem on a 64 bit PC.  I have ordered an upgrade to CS5 hoping that a 64 bit program will provide better performance on the 64 bit PC.  Naturally the PC performance is expected to be faster, but will the performance that slows down to a snail pace improve?

    Thank you all for your information.
    I am beginning to imagine that because of the increased speed in dealing with data, an i7 quad 64 bit PC has a challenging time to switch and route the stream of data to the various processing and temporary/permanent storage locations.  It could be that dealing with 32 bit data for the demands of video editing compounds the problem.  I may have one or several slower components in the new PC.  In anycase, I am hoping that dealing directly with 64 bits will improve the performance.  If this does not and without further suggestions from the forum, I will have the performance of the PC components thoroughly tested for compliance to the required speed specifications.

  • After Effects CS4 Performance (BRUTAL)

    Despite the comments on this board (from Adobe themselves) claiming improved After Effects CS4 performance over its predecessor, my experience is the exact opposite. This version seems half baked to me.
    AE CS4 isn't just SLOW, and by slow I really mean dreadfully unusable, It's unstable as well. Even running the same template files that came with CS3 and 4, there's a huge difference in render time, ram previews etc. When you can't even rotate a simple cube without crashing, there's some real problems, and this is just the beginning. The previous version had no show stopping issues, it performed like a trooper. This latest however, I can't see how I could use it day to day for anything..
    There is no other software on this machine other than, CS4, Firefox, and Lightwave 9.5, which by the way, handles textured objects with hundreds of thousands of polys, not 6. I first get an error message that reads as followed;
    After effect error: crash occurred while invoking effect plug-in "Live Photoshop 3D"
    followed by, After Effects can't continue: sorry, After Effects has crashed. See... blah blah blah..
    By the way this occurs with or without OpenGl enabled.
    Systems specs
    8GB Ram
    Q6600
    Hard Drive space 4TB, install drive, 156 GB free
    Vista Business 64
    Nvidia GeForce 8600 GTS (driver 178.13)
    This is the same machine that ran CS3 very well, so there shouldn't be anything wrong with this rig..

    Fausto,
    I have no problem importing or animating your PSD - no crashes, at least. The resolution is very high. I got better results by cutting the resolution of your PSD in half, which may or may not be an option for you. I improved responsiveness a little by setting the PS 3D layer to "Use Photoshop Transform" in AE.
    But ultimately, the responsiveness of the 3D layer in AE is impossible to work with, except with Live Update disabled. It seems like a RAM issue to me. What size are the texture layers on each side of the cube? If they're all 3000x2000-ish like your document, and you're working at full res, consider that AE has to hold all six images in RAM, plus manipulate them in 3D.
    My own sense is that the whole 3D layer thing simply isn't ready for that kind of resolution in AE yet. And probably wont be until true 64bit code allows the storage of all those textures in RAM more easily.
    As a side note, don't know if it's my location or your server, but your 74Mb image took me almost 2 hours to download.

  • 10.7.4 huge photoshop performance issues

    I've had variants of three different versions of Photoshop installed - CS4, 5 and now 6. I'm not 100% sure when the issue
    started occurring, but I've done a lot of experimentation to analyze it.
    The components involved are
    1.Photoshop
    2.Wacom Intuos 3
    3.Lion 10.7.4
    Whenever I'm digital painting, which I'm doing professionally, all the time, the colour picking mechanism is not only slow, but doesn't work about 2/3 of the
    time. The next stroke made *after* the colour picking never works either. I do this about ONCE EVERY TWO SECONDS. So it's like being punched
    in the face all day long while you're trying to get some work done.
    Most likely, support staff will attempt to get rid of me saying 'ask wacom' or 'ask adobe.' BUT, here's the process I've gone through.
    1.Tried all three variants of photoshop. They all have issues.
    2.Switched to a different Wacom tablet (identical model), switched three different wacom pens, all identical models. Note that I also
    tested all of these on a Windows machine with the same Photoshop issue, and they all work. And I also tested them all, and photoshop,
    on my old intel powerbook running the same version of Photoshop, and it's fine. That Mac is running Leopard.
    3.I erased my HD, reinstalled Lion (10.7.4 obviously) and installed Photoshop and the Wacom drivers on top of it again. Just one version,
    nothing else to mess with it. Aaaaand, exactly the same issue.
    This has made my Mac unusable and frankly, is having a massive financial impact on me . If anyone can think of anything I've left out, please
    give it a shot. My instinct is that this has narrowed it down to the operating system, and that it's most likely something to do with the GPU. Or the USB bus. Or the application support libraries - but specific to this hardware as, like i say, I've tried another mac with leopard and all is fine.
    HEEEEELP!

    I am having serious Photoshop performance issues as well.
    My Photoshop CS5 was running well until I upgraded to Mac OS 10.7.4. My observations are highly un-scientific, but I am noticing the worst performance in Photoshop when I have my Firefox browser open. It's like the 2 programs are fighting with each other. I am also noticing Flash crash reports on Firefox when Photoshop is open.
    Even with Firefox closed, however, Photoshop CS5 is sluggish and slow with 10.7.4. Even the dreaded beachball coming back into my life.
    I have even erased my hardrive and reinstalled the OS and that did not help.
    Other programs are running fine. Even Firefox runs well when photoshop is not running.

  • Report Performance Issue - Activity

    Hi gurus,
    I'm developing an Activity report using Transactional database (Online real time object).
    the purpose of the report is to list down all contacts related activities and activities NOT related to Contact by activity owner (user id).
    In order to fullfill that requirment I've created 2 report
    1) All Activities related to Contact -- Report A
    pull in Acitivity ID , Activity Type, Status, Contact ID
    2) All Activities not related to Contact UNION All Activities related to Contact (Base report) -- Report B
    to get the list of activities not related to contact i'm using Advanced filter based on result of another request which is I think is the part that slow down the query.
    <Activity ID not equal to any Activity ID in Report B>
    Anyone encountered performance issue due to the advanced filter in analytic before?
    any input is really appriciated
    Thanks in advanced,
    Fina

    Fina,
    Union is always the last option. If you can get all record in one report, do not use union.
    since all records, which you are targeting, are in the activity subject area, it is not nessecery to combine reports. add a column with the following logic
    if contact id is null (or = 'Unspecified') then owner name else contact name
    Hopefully, this is helping.

  • Report performance Issue in BI Answers

    Hi All,
    We have a performance issues with reports. Report is running more than 10 mins. we took query from the session log and ran it in database, at that time it took not more than 2 mins. We have verified proper indexes on the where clause columns.
    Could any once suggest to improve the performance in BI answers?
    Thanks in advance,

    I hope you dont have many case statements and complex calculations that you do in the Answers.
    Next thing you need to monitor is how many rows of data that you are trying to retrieve from the query. If the volume is huge then it takes time to do the formatting on the Answers as you are going to dump huge volumes of data. Database(like teradata) returns initially like 1-2000 records if you hit show all records then even db is gonna fair amount of time if you are dumping many records
    hope it helps
    thanks
    Prash

  • BW BCS cube(0bcs_vc10 ) Report huge performance issue

    Hi Masters,
    I am working out for a solution for BW report developed in 0bcs_vc10 virtual cube.
    Some of the querys is taking more 15 to 20 minutes to execute the report.
    This is huge performance issue. We are using BW 3.5, and report devloped in bex and published thru portal. Any one faced similar problem please advise how you tackle this issue. Please give the detail analysis approach how you resolved this issue.
    Current service pack we are using is
    SAP_BW 350 0016 SAPKW35016
    FINBASIS 300 0012 SAPK-30012INFINBASIS
    BI_CONT 353 0008 SAPKIBIFP8
    SEM-BW 400 0012 SAPKGS4012
    Best of Luck
    Chris
    BW BCS cube(0bcs_vc10 ) Report huge performance issue

    Ravi,
    I already did that, it is not helping me much for the performance. Reports are taking 15 t0 20 minutes. I wanted any body in this forum have the same issue how
    they resolved it.
    Regards,
    Chris

  • Interested by performance issue ?  Read this !  If you can explain, you're a master Jedi !

    This is the question we will try to answer...
    What si the bottle neck (hardware) of Adobe Premiere Pro CS6
    I used PPBM5 as a benchmark testing template.
    All the data and log as been collected using performance counter
    First of all, describe my computer...
    Operating System
    Microsoft Windows 8 Pro 64-bit
    CPU
    Intel Xeon E5 2687W @ 3.10GHz
    Sandy Bridge-EP/EX 32nm Technology
    RAM
    Corsair Dominator Platinum 64.0 GB DDR3
    Motherboard
    EVGA Corporation Classified SR-X
    Graphics
    PNY Nvidia Quadro 6000
    EVGA Nvidia GTX 680   // Yes, I created bench stats for both card
    Hard Drives
    16.0GB Romex RAMDISK (RAID)
    556GB LSI MegaRAID 9260-8i SATA3 6GB/s 5 disks with Fastpath Chip Installed (RAID 0)
    I have other RAID installed, but not relevant for the present post...
    PSU
    Cosair 1000 Watts
    After many days of tests, I wanna share my results with community and comment them.
    CPU Introduction
    I tested my cpu and pushed it at maximum speed to understand where is the limit, can I reach this limit and I've logged precisely all result in graph (See pictures 1).
    Intro : I tested my E5-XEON 2687W (8 Cores Hyperthread - 16 threads) to know if programs can use the maximum of it.  I used Prime 95 to get the result.  // I know this seem to be ordinary, but you will understand soon...
    The result : Yes, I can get 100% of my CPU with 1 program using 20 threads in parallel.  The CPU gives everything it can !
    Comment : I put 3 IO (cpu, disk, ram) on the graph of my computer during the test...
    (picture 1)
    Disk Introduction
    I tested my disk and pushed it at maximum speed to understand where is the limit and I've logged precisely all result in graph (See pictures 2).
    Intro : I tested my RAID 0 556GB (LSI MegaRAID 9260-8i SATA3 6GB/s 5 disks with Fastpath Chip Installed) to know if I can reach the maximum % disk usage (0% idle Time)
    The result : As you can see in picture 2, yes, I can get the max of my drive at ~ 1.2 Gb/sec read/write steady !
    Comment : I put 3 IO (cpu, disk, ram) on the graph of my computer during the test to see the impact of transfering many Go of data during ~10 sec...
    (picture 2)
    Now, I know my limits !  It's time to enter deeper in the subject !
    PPBM5 (H.264) Result
    I rendered the sequence (H.264) using Adobe Media Encoder.
    The result :
    My CPU is not used at 100%, the turn around 50%
    My Disk is totally idle !
    All the process usage are idle except process of (Adobe Media Encoder)
    The transfert rate seem to be a wave (up and down).  Probably caused by (Encrypt time....  write.... Encrypt time.... write...)  // It's ok, ~5Mb/sec during transfert rate !
    CPU Power management give 100% of clock to CPU during the encoding process (it's ok, the clock is stable during process).
    RAM, more than enough !  39 Go RAM free after the test !  // Excellent
    ~65 thread opened by Adobe Media Encoder (Good, thread is the sign that program try to using many cores !)
    GPU Load on card seem to be a wave also ! (up and down)  ~40% usage of GPU during the process of encoding.
    GPU Ram get 1.2Go of RAM (But with GTX 680, no problem and Quadro 6000 with 6 GB RAM, no problem !)
    Comment/Question : CPU is free (50%), disks are free (99%), GPU is free (60%), RAM is free (62%), my computer is not pushed at limit during the encoding process.  Why ????  Is there some time delay in the encoding process ?
    Other : Quadro 6000 & GTX 680 gives the same result !
    (picture 3)
    PPBM5 (Disk Test) Result (RAID LSI)
    I rendered the sequence (Disk Test) using Adobe Media Encoder on my RAID 0 LSI disk.
    The result :
    My CPU is not used at 100%
    My Disk wave and wave again, but far far from the limit !
    All the process usage are idle except process of (Adobe Media Encoder)
    The transfert rate wave and wave again (up and down).  Probably caused by (Buffering time....  write.... Buffering time.... write...)  // It's ok, ~375Mb/sec peak during transfert rate !  Easy !
    CPU Power management give 100% of clock to CPU during the encoding process (it's ok, the clock is stable during process).
    RAM, more than enough !  40.5 Go RAM free after the test !  // Excellent
    ~48 thread opened by Adobe Media Encoder (Good, thread is the sign that program try to using many cores !)
    GPU Load on card = 0 (This kind of encoding is GPU irrelevant)
    GPU Ram get 400Mb of RAM (No usage for encoding)
    Comment/Question : CPU is free (65%), disks are free (60%), GPU is free (100%), RAM is free (63%), my computer is not pushed at limit during the encoding process.  Why ????  Is there some time delay in the encoding process ?
    (picture 4)
    PPBM5 (Disk Test) Result (Direct in RAMDrive)
    I rendered the same sequence (Disk Test) using Adobe Media Encoder directly in my RamDrive
    Comment/Question : Look at the transfert rate under (picture 5).  It's exactly the same speed than with my RAID 0 LSI controller.  Impossible !  Look in the same picture the transfert rate I can reach with the ramdrive (> 3.0 Gb/sec steady) and I don't go under 30% of disk usage.  CPU is idle (70%), Disk is idle (100%), GPU is idle (100%) and RAM is free (63%).  // This kind of results let me REALLY confused.  It's smell bug and big problem with hardware and IO usage in CS6 !
    (picture 5)
    PPBM5 (MPEG-DVD) Result
    I rendered the sequence (MPEG-DVD) using Adobe Media Encoder.
    The result :
    My CPU is not used at 100%
    My Disk is totally idle !
    All the process usage are idle except process of (Adobe Media Encoder)
    The transfert rate wave and wave again (up and down).  Probably caused by (Encoding time....  write.... Encoding time.... write...)  // It's ok, ~2Mb/sec during transfert rate !  Real Joke !
    CPU Power management give 100% of clock to CPU during the encoding process (it's ok, the clock is stable during process).
    RAM, more than enough !  40 Go RAM free after the test !  // Excellent
    ~80 thread opened by Adobe Media Encoder (Lot of thread, but it's ok in multi-thread apps!)
    GPU Load on card = 100 (This use the maximum of my GPU)
    GPU Ram get 1Gb of RAM
    Comment/Question : CPU is free (70%), disks are free (98%), GPU is loaded (MAX), RAM is free (63%), my computer is pushed at limit during the encoding process for GPU only.  Now, for this kind of encoding, the speed limit is affected by the slower IO (Video Card GPU)
    Other : Quadro 6000 is slower than GTX 680 for this kind of encoding (~20 s slower than GTX).
    (picture 6)
    Encoding single clip FULL HD AVCHD to H.264 Result (Premiere Pro CS6)
    You can look the result in the picture.
    Comment/Question : CPU is free (55%), disks are free (99%), GPU is free (90%), RAM is free (65%), my computer is not pushed at limit during the encoding process.  Why ????   Adobe Premiere seem to have some bug with thread management.  My hardware is idle !  I understand AVCHD can be very difficult to decode, but where is the waste ?  My computer want, but the software not !
    (picture 7)
    Render composition using 3D Raytracer in After Effects CS6
    You can look the result in the picture.
    Comment : GPU seems to be the bottle neck when using After Effects.  CPU is free (99%), Disks are free (98%), Memory is free (60%) and it depend of the setting and type of project.
    Other : Quadro 6000 & GTX 680 gives the same result in time for rendering the composition.
    (picture 8)
    Conclusion
    There is nothing you can do (I thing) with CS6 to get better performance actually.  GTX 680 is the best (Consumer grade card) and the Quadro 6000 is the best (Profressional card).  Both of card give really similar result (I will probably return my GTX 680 since I not really get any better performance).  I not used Tesla card with my Quadro, but actually, both, Premiere Pro & After Effects doesn't use multi GPU.  I tried to used both card together (GTX & Quadro), but After Effects gives priority to the slower card (In this case, the GTX 680)
    Premiere Pro, I'm speechless !  Premiere Pro is not able to get max performance of my computer.  Not just 10% or 20%, but average 60%.  I'm a programmor, multi-threadling apps are difficult to manage and I can understand Adobe's programmor.  But actually, if anybody have comment about this post, tricks or any kind of solution, you can comment this post.  It's seem to be a bug...
    Thank you.

    Patrick,
    I can't explain everything, but let me give you some background as I understand it.
    The first issue is that CS6 has a far less efficient internal buffering or caching system than CS5/5.5. That is why the MPEG encoding in CS6 is roughly 2-3 times slower than the same test with CS5. There is some 'under-the-hood' processing going on that causes this significant performance loss.
    The second issue is that AME does not handle regular memory and inter-process memory very well. I have described this here: Latest News
    As to your test results, there are some other noteworthy things to mention. 3D Ray tracing in AE is not very good in using all CUDA cores. In fact it is lousy, it only uses very few cores and the threading is pretty bad and does not use the video card's capabilities effectively. Whether that is a driver issue with nVidia or an Adobe issue, I don't know, but whichever way you turn it, the end result is disappointing.
    The overhead AME carries in our tests is something we are looking into and the next test will only use direct export and no longer the AME queue, to avoid some of the problems you saw. That entails other problems for us, since we lose the capability to check encoding logs, but a solution is in the works.
    You see very low GPU usage during the H.264 test, since there are only very few accelerated parts in the timeline, in contrast to the MPEG2-DVD test, where there is rescaling going on and that is CUDA accelerated. The disk I/O test suffers from the problems mentioned above and is the reason that my own Disk I/O results are only 33 seconds with the current test, but when I extend the duration of that timeline to 3 hours, the direct export method gives me 22 seconds, although the amount of data to be written, 37,092 MB has increased threefold. An effective write speed of 1,686 MB/s.
    There are a number of performance issues with CS6 that Adobe is aware of, but whether they can be solved and in what time, I haven't the faintest idea.
    Just my $ 0.02

  • Performance Issue for BI system

    Hello,
    We are facing performance issues for BI System. Its a preproductive system and its performance is degrading badly everyday. I was checking system came to know program buffer hit ratio is increaasing everyday due to high Swaps. So asked to change the parameter abap/buffersize which was 300Mb to 500Mb. But still no major improvement is found in the system.
    There is 16GB Ram available and Server is HP-UX and with Netweaver2004s with Oracle 10.2.0.4.0 installed in it.
    The Main problem is while running a report or creating a query is taking way too long time.
    Kindly help me.

    Hello SIva,
    Thanks for your reply but i have checked ST02 and ST03 and also SM50 and its normal
    we are having 9 dialog processes, 3 Background , 2 Update and 1 spool.
    No one is using the system currently but in ST02 i can see the swaps are in red.
    Buffer                 HitRatio   % Alloc. KB  Freesp. KB   % Free Sp.   Dir. Size  FreeDirEnt   % Free Dir    Swaps    DB Accs
    Nametab (NTAB)                                                                                0
       Table definition     99,60     6.798                                                   20.000                                            29.532    153.221
       Field definition     99,82      31.562        784                 2,61           20.000      6.222          31,11          17.246     41.248
       Short NTAB           99,94     3.625      2.446                81,53          5.000        2.801          56,02             0            2.254
       Initial records      73,95        6.625        998                 16,63          5.000        690             13,80             40.069     49.528
                                                                                    0
    boldprogram                97,66     300.000     1.074                 0,38           75.000     67.177        89,57           219.665    725.703bold
    CUA                    99,75         3.000        875                   36,29          1.500      1.401          93,40            55.277      2.497
    Screen                 99,80         4.297      1.365                 33,35          2.000      1.811          90,55              119         3.214
    Calendar              100,00       488            361                  75,52            200         42              21,00               0            158
    OTR                   100,00         4.096      3.313                  100,00        2.000      2.000          100,00              0
                                                                                    0
    Tables                                                                                0
       Generic Key          99,17    29.297      1.450                  5,23           5.000        350             7,00             2.219      3.085.633
       Single record        99,43    10.000      1.907                  19,41           500         344            68,80              39          467.978
                                                                                    0
    Export/import          82,75     4.096         43                      1,30            2.000        662          33,10            137.208
    Exp./ Imp. SHM         89,83     4.096        438                    13,22         2.000      1.482          74,10               0    
    SAP Memory      Curr.Use %    CurUse[KB]    MaxUse[KB]    In Mem[KB]    OnDisk[KB]    SAPCurCach      HitRatio %
    Roll area               2,22                5.832               22.856             131.072     131.072                   IDs           96,61
    Page area              1,08              2.832                24.144               65.536    196.608              Statement     79,00
    Extended memory     22,90       958.464           1.929.216          4.186.112          0                                         0,00
    Heap memory                                    0                  0                    1.473.767          0                                         0,00
    Call Stati             HitRatio %     ABAP/4 Req      ABAP Fails     DBTotCalls         AvTime[ms]      DBRowsAff.
      Select single     88,59               63.073.369        5.817.659      4.322.263             0                         57.255.710
      Select               72,68               284.080.387          0               13.718.442             0                        32.199.124
      Insert                 0,00                  151.955             5.458             166.159               0                           323.725
      Update               0,00                    378.161           97.884           395.814               0                            486.880
      Delete                 0,00                    389.398          332.619          415.562              0                             244.495
    Edited by: Srikanth Sunkara on May 12, 2011 11:50 AM

  • RE: Case 59063: performance issues w/ C TLIB and Forte3M

    Hi James,
    Could you give me a call, I am at my desk.
    I had meetings all day and couldn't respond to your calls earlier.
    -----Original Message-----
    From: James Min [mailto:jminbrio.forte.com]
    Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2000 2:50 PM
    To: Sharma, Sandeep; Pyatetskiy, Alexander
    Cc: sophiaforte.com; kenlforte.com; Tenerelli, Mike
    Subject: Re: Case 59063: performance issues w/ C TLIB and Forte 3M
    Hello,
    I just want to reiterate that we are very committed to working on
    this issue, and that our goal is to find out the root of the problem. But
    first I'd like to narrow down the avenues by process of elimination.
    Open Cursor is something that is commonly used in today's RDBMS. I
    know that you must test your query in ISQL using some kind of execute
    immediate, but Sybase should be able to handle an open cursor. I was
    wondering if your Sybase expert commented on the fact that the server is
    not responding to commonly used command like 'open cursor'. According to
    our developer, we are merely following the API from Sybase, and open cursor
    is not something that particularly slows down a query for several minutes
    (except maybe the very first time). The logs show that Forte is waiting for
    a status from the DB server. Actually, using prepared statements and open
    cursor ends up being more efficient in the long run.
    Some questions:
    1) Have you tried to do a prepared statement with open cursor in your ISQL
    session? If so, did it have the same slowness?
    2) How big is the table you are querying? How many rows are there? How many
    are returned?
    3) When there is a hang in Forte, is there disk-spinning or CPU usage in
    the database server side? On the Forte side? Absolutely no activity at all?
    We actually have a Sybase set-up here, and if you wish, we could test out
    your database and Forte PEX here. Since your queries seems to be running
    off of only one table, this might be the best option, as we could look at
    everything here, in house. To do this:
    a) BCP out the data into a flat file. (character format to make it portable)
    b) we need a script to create the table and indexes.
    c) the Forte PEX file of the app to test this out.
    d) the SQL staement that you issue in ISQL for comparison.
    If the situation warrants, we can give a concrete example of
    possible errors/bugs to a developer. Dial-in is still an option, but to be
    able to look at the TOOL code, database setup, etc. without the limitations
    of dial-up may be faster and more efficient. Please let me know if you can
    provide this, as well as the answers to the above questions, or if you have
    any questions.
    Regards,
    At 08:05 AM 3/30/00 -0500, Sharma, Sandeep wrote:
    James, Ken:
    FYI, see attached response from our Sybase expert, Dani Sasmita. She has
    already tried what you suggested and results are enclosed.
    ++
    Sandeep
    -----Original Message-----
    From: SASMITA, DANIAR
    Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2000 6:43 PM
    To: Pyatetskiy, Alexander
    Cc: Sharma, Sandeep; Tenerelli, Mike
    Subject: Re: FW: Case 59063: Select using LIKE has performance
    issues
    w/ CTLIB and Forte 3M
    We did that trick already.
    When it is hanging, I can see what is doing.
    It is doing OPEN CURSOR. But not clear the exact statement of the cursor
    it is trying to open.
    When we run the query directly to Sybase, not using Forte, it is clearly
    not opening any cursor.
    And running it directly to Sybase many times, the response is always
    consistently fast.
    It is just when the query runs from Forte to Sybase, it opens a cursor.
    But again, in the Forte code, Alex is not using any cursor.
    In trying to capture the query,we even tried to audit any statementcoming
    to Sybase. Same thing, just open cursor. No cursor declaration anywhere.==============================================
    James Min
    Technical Support Engineer - Forte Tools
    Sun Microsystems, Inc.
    1800 Harrison St., 17th Fl.
    Oakland, CA 94612
    james.minsun.com
    510.869.2056
    ==============================================
    Support Hotline: 510-451-5400
    CUSTOMERS open a NEW CASE with Technical Support:
    http://www.forte.com/support/case_entry.html
    CUSTOMERS view your cases and enter follow-up transactions:
    http://www.forte.com/support/view_calls.html

    Earthlink wrote:
    Contrary to my understanding, the <font face="courier">with_pipeline</font> procedure runs 6 time slower than the legacy <font face="courier">no_pipeline</font> procedure. Am I missing something? Well, we're missing a lot here.
    Like:
    - a database version
    - how did you test
    - what data do you have, how is it distributed, indexed
    and so on.
    If you want to find out what's going on then use a TRACE with wait events.
    All nessecary steps are explained in these threads:
    HOW TO: Post a SQL statement tuning request - template posting
    http://oracle-randolf.blogspot.com/2009/02/basic-sql-statement-performance.html
    Another nice one is RUNSTATS:
    http://asktom.oracle.com/pls/asktom/ASKTOM.download_file?p_file=6551378329289980701

  • Is there a recommended limit on the number of custom sections and the cells per table so that there are no performance issues with the UI?

    Is there a recommended limit on the number of custom sections and the cells per table so that there are no performance issues with the UI?

    Thanks Kelly,
    The answers would be the following:
    1200 cells per custom section (NEW COUNT), and up to 30 custom sections per spec.
    Assuming all will be populated, and this would apply to all final material specs in the system which could be ~25% of all material specs.
    The cells will be numeric, free text, drop downs, and some calculated numeric.
    Are we reaching the limits for UI performance?
    Thanks

  • IOS 8.1+ Performance Issue

    Hello,
    I encountered a serious performance bug in Adobe Air iOS application on devices running iOS 8.1 or later. Approximately in 1-2 minutes fps drops to 7 or lower without interacting with the app. This is very noticeable in the app. The app looks like frozen for about 0.5 seconds. The bug doesn't appear on every session.
    Devices tested: iPad Mini iOS 8.1.1, iPhone 6 iOS 8.2. iPod Touch 4 iOS 6 is working correctly.
    Air SDK versions: 15 and 17 tested.
    I can track the bug using Adobe Scout. There is a noticeable spike on frame time 1.16. Framerate drops to 7.0. The App spends much time on function Runtime overhead. Sometimes the top activity is Running AS3 attached to frame or Waiting For Next Frame instead of Runtime overhead.
    The bug can be reproduced on an empty application having a one bitmap on stage. Open the app and wait for two minutes and the bug should appear. If not, just close and relaunch the app.
    Bugbase link: Bug#3965160 - iOS 8.1+ Performance Issue
    Miska Savela

    Hi
    Id already activated Messages and entered the 6 digit code I was presented with into my iPhone. I can receive txt messages from non iOS users on my iMac and can reply to those messages.
    I just can't send a new message from scratch to a non iOS user :-s
    Thanks
    Baz

  • Returning multiple values from a called tabular form(performance issue)

    I hope someone can help with this.
    I have a form that calls another form to display a multiple column tabular list of values(needs to allow for user sorting so could not use a LOV).
    The user selects one or more records from the list by using check boxes. In order to detect the records selected I loop through the block looking for boxes checked off and return those records to the calling form via a PL/SQL table.
    The form displaying the tabular list loads quickly(about 5000 records in the base table). However when I select one or more values from the table and return back to the calling form, it takes a while(about 3-4 minutes) to return to the called form with the selected values.
    I guess it is going through the block(all 5000 records) looking for boxes checked off and that is what is causing the noticeable pause.
    Is this normal given the data volumes I have or are there any other perhaps better techniques or tricks I could use to improve performance. I am using Forms6i.
    Sorry for being so long-winded and thanks in advance for any help.

    Try writing to your PL/SQL table when the user selects (or remove when deselect) by usuing a when-checkbox-changed trigger. This will eliminate the need for you top loop through a block with 5000 records and should improve your performance.
    I am not aware of any performance issues with PL/SQL tables in forms, but if you still have slow performance try using a shared record-group instead. I have used these in the past for exactly the same thing and had no performance problems.
    Hope this helps,
    Candace Stover
    Forms Product Management

  • Performance issues with class loader on Windows server

    We are observing some performance issues in our application. We are Using weblogic 11g with Java6 on a windows 2003 server
    The thread dumps indicate many threads are waiting in queue for the native file methods:
    "[ACTIVE] ExecuteThread: '106' for queue: 'weblogic.kernel.Default (self-tuning)'" RUNNABLE
         java.io.WinNTFileSystem.getBooleanAttributes(Native Method)
         java.io.File.exists(Unknown Source)
         weblogic.utils.classloaders.ClasspathClassFinder.getFileSource(ClasspathClassFinder.java:398)
         weblogic.utils.classloaders.ClasspathClassFinder.getSourcesInternal(ClasspathClassFinder.java:347)
         weblogic.utils.classloaders.ClasspathClassFinder.getSource(ClasspathClassFinder.java:316)
         weblogic.application.io.ManifestFinder.getSource(ManifestFinder.java:75)
         weblogic.utils.classloaders.MultiClassFinder.getSource(MultiClassFinder.java:67)
         weblogic.application.utils.CompositeWebAppFinder.getSource(CompositeWebAppFinder.java:71)
         weblogic.utils.classloaders.MultiClassFinder.getSource(MultiClassFinder.java:67)
         weblogic.utils.classloaders.MultiClassFinder.getSource(MultiClassFinder.java:67)
         weblogic.utils.classloaders.CodeGenClassFinder.getSource(CodeGenClassFinder.java:33)
         weblogic.utils.classloaders.GenericClassLoader.findResource(GenericClassLoader.java:210)
         weblogic.utils.classloaders.GenericClassLoader.getResourceInternal(GenericClassLoader.java:160)
         weblogic.utils.classloaders.GenericClassLoader.getResource(GenericClassLoader.java:182)
         java.lang.ClassLoader.getResourceAsStream(Unknown Source)
         javax.xml.parsers.SecuritySupport$4.run(Unknown Source)
         java.security.AccessController.doPrivileged(Native Method)
         javax.xml.parsers.SecuritySupport.getResourceAsStream(Unknown Source)
         javax.xml.parsers.FactoryFinder.findJarServiceProvider(Unknown Source)
         javax.xml.parsers.FactoryFinder.find(Unknown Source)
         javax.xml.parsers.DocumentBuilderFactory.newInstance(Unknown Source)
         org.ajax4jsf.context.ResponseWriterContentHandler.<init>(ResponseWriterContentHandler.java:48)
         org.ajax4jsf.context.ViewResources$HeadResponseWriter.<init>(ViewResources.java:259)
         org.ajax4jsf.context.ViewResources.processHeadResources(ViewResources.java:445)
         org.ajax4jsf.application.AjaxViewHandler.renderView(AjaxViewHandler.java:193)
         org.apache.myfaces.lifecycle.RenderResponseExecutor.execute(RenderResponseExecutor.java:41)
         org.apache.myfaces.lifecycle.LifecycleImpl.render(LifecycleImpl.java:140)
    On googling this seems to be an issue with java file handling on windows servers and I couldn't find a solution yet. Any recommendation or pointer is appreciated

    Hi shubhu,
    I just analyzed your partial Thread Dump data, the problem is that the ajax4jsf framework ResponseWriterContentHandler triggers internally a new instance of the DocumentBuilderFactory; every time; triggering heavy IO contention because of Class loader / JAR file search operations.
    Too many of these IO operations under heavy load will create excessive contention and severe performance degradation; regardless of the OS you are running your JVM on.
    Please review the link below and see if this is related to your problem.. This is a known issue in JBOSS JIRA when using RichFaces / ajaxJSF.
    https://issues.jboss.org/browse/JBPAPP-6166
    Regards,
    P-H
    http://javaeesupportpatterns.blogspot.com/

Maybe you are looking for