Extreme long execution time

Hi,
lately, I realized that Jubula needs extremely long for all the progresses...
For example, deleting TestResults or after execution of TestCases, the Progress "Collecting Information" and "Writing Report to Database" needs about 15-20 minutes!!
I use the embedded database and html toolkit and my project is not big at all!
I already had larger projects and never experienced that long progresses!
Any ideas/suggestions why Jubula is suddenly working that slow?
Thanks

Hi Nicole,
Thanks for your question! I think the problem is that the h2 database isn't designed for productive use - it doesn't scale well and will indeed get slower and slower with time (not necessarily size of the project, just time).
If you need to keep using it then you can do the following:
- stop Jubula
- perform an export all to export all of the projects
- you can also copy the database files (from your home directory under .jubula) to back them up
- delete the database files from your home directory
- connect to the database: this will recreate the database
- then you can import the projects you exported
Like I say, this isn't the preferred way of working, but the steps above should help with the current performance. Bear in mind that you should ensure that you have backups before you delete the database!
Hope that helps,
Alex

Similar Messages

Extremely long "reading" times in media browser

We are running CC2014 on 3 edit systems with a shared 10Gbit 36TB Synology NAS. Each workstation has approximately 12TB of local raid storage as well. We shoot P2 primarily and I have a little over 17TB archived on the Synology. Lately, we have had extremely long "reading" times in Media Browser on all the machines. I don't quite understand how Premiere is indexing and displaying as sometimes the "reading" time is relatively quick, ie. under 10 seconds and then other times it can take 3-5 minutes to display clips within a directory.
My Directory Structure is:
Media
     P2 footage
          (P2 folders/ie. cards are all saved with their shoot dates here)
          Our total archive of P2 footage is around 70 cards.
It appears that when Media Browser is pointed to a P2 Card folder it is indexing the entire "P2 footage directory, ie. all 70 cards", rather than just the individual folder containing 1 P2 card's footage. Ist this the case?
Would I get better read speeds in Media Browser if I organized my P2 footage into more directories, ie. by year and quarter or by year and month?
Really need to know how the indexing works. Does premiere cache preview files for each clip and if so, how long are these previews valid. It seems that when I media browse a new P2 Card/Folder, it has forgotten any previous preview files that have been made and cached.
Any explanation or help would be appreciated.
We have copied large numbers of cards/folders from the Synology to our local raids to see if the latency was due to the network but the results are the same when we media browse on the local raid copies.

We are working on this issue. Could you open a support case and submit your
project so we can have support see if it is fixed in a later release?
br
William Wheeler wrote:
Is anyone experiencing long deploy times using Eclipse with the Portal/XML Beans facets...it takes approx 30 mins to deploy our ear file. The ear contains:
3 large schemas projects (using XML Bean Builder facets)
1 Control util project
1 Portal Web Project
1 Ear Project
3 Util projects
Is there some validation options that can be turned off or other actions to speed this up?
Bill Wheeler

Long execution times for TestStand conditional statements

I have two test stations – one here, one at the factory in China that has been operating for about a year. The test program uses TestStand 3.1 and calls primarily dll's developed using CVI. Up until a couple months ago, both test stations performed in a similar manner, then the computer at the factory died and was replaced with a new, faster computer. Now the same test sequence at the factory take three times as long to execute (30 min at the facotry, 10min here).
I have recoded the execution time at various point during the execution, and have found that the extra times seems to be occurring during the evaluation of conditional statements in TestStand (i.e. for loops, if statements, case statements). For example, one particular ‘for’ evaluation takes 30 ms on the test station here, but takes 400 ms at the test station at the factory (note: this is just the evaluation of the for condition, not the execution of the steps contained within the for loop).
The actual dll calls seem to be slightly faster with the new computer.
Also the ‘Module Times’ reported don’t seem to match the actual time for the module for the computer at the factory. For example, for the following piece of TestStand code:
Label1
Subsequence Call
Label2
I record the execution time to the report text in both Label1 and Label2. Subtracting one from the other gives me about 18 seconds. However the ‘Module Time’ recorded for ‘Subsequence Call’ is only 3.43 seconds.
Any body have any ideas why the long execution time with the new computer? I always setup the computers in exactly the same way, but maybe there is a TestStand setting somewhere that I have missed? Keep in mind, both test stations are running exactly the same revision of code.

Got some more results from the factory this morning:
1) Task Manager shows that the TestExec.exe is the only thing using CPU to any significant degree. Also CPU Usage History show that the CPU Usage never reaches 100%.
2) I sent a new test program that will log test execution time in more places. Longer execution times are seen in nearly every area of the program, but one area where this is very dramatic is the time taken to return from one particular subsequence call. In this subsequence I log the time just before the <End Group> at then end of Main. There is nothing in Cleanup. I then log the time immediately after returning from this sequence. On the test system I have here this takes approximately 160 ms. On the test system at the factory this takes approximately 14.5 seconds! The program seems to be hanging here for some reason. Every time this function is called the same thing happens and for the same amount of time (and this function is called about 40 times in the test program, so this is kill me).

Alert with event for delayed job and long execution time

Dear All,
We are planning to send alert via email in case job delayed or long execution time.
I have followed below steps:
1) Create event Raise Event when job is delayed.
2) create job chain with STEP1, Job 1 and assign event in raise event parameter.
3) Once job chain delayed it should raise events.
4) Above event should trigger custom email but I can not put the Mail_To parameter as IN parameter. And can not be recognized during
execution.
It ends with the below error.
Details:
JCS-122035: Unable to persist: JCS-102075: Mandatory parameter not set: Parameter Mail_To for job 20413
at com.redwood.scheduler.model.SchedulerSessionImpl.writeDirtyListLocal(SchedulerSessionImpl.java:805)
at com.redwood.scheduler.model.SchedulerSessionImpl.persist(SchedulerSessionImpl.java:757)
Please let us know if anybody knows how to add Mail_To parameter to script.
Any help is appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
Regards,
Jiggi

Dear Jiggi,
where will you define execution time of particular job? because some jobs will take only 1 or 2 minutes, but some jobs normally take more than hours, so how will you decide execution time of individual jobs?
i thinks you can use P_TO Parameter for sending mail, if you want to add some output log activate spool output script.
Thanks and regards
Muhammad Asif

Optimize long execution time due to 'db file sequential read'

Hi to all,
I have got a query that takes long execution time. Most of the time is due to 'db file sequential read'. The query is:
SELECT * FROM Table_Name
WHERE col1 = :some_value
AND col2 BETWEEN :some_range_about_2_Million
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost |
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 21 | 504 | 26125 |
| 1 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| Table_Name | 21 | 504 | 26125 |
| 2 | INDEX RANGE SCAN | Index Name | 1705K| | 4100 |
The table is not partitioned having around 0.2 billion records. Record set for column 'col1' is around 1700K.
Another index is available for the col2 and col3 is not getting used.
Any suggestions to optimize it..
Regards.

Perhaps a combined index (col2, col1) would work...or try "parallel" hint.
:p

Extremely long build times using object oriented code

We have a LabVIEW application that we need to build an .exe for distrubution purposes. The application relies on several object-oriented classes for data handling and dynamic dispatch type casting and function selection. Currently it takes approximately 1.5 hours to build the application and it seems that most of the time is spent processing the object oriented files. Has anyone else seen this issue and are there any creative ways to improve the build times?

Hi again. We are still having issues using LVOOP due to extrmely long .exe build times as well as long labview loading times. I traced the source of this to one class hierarchy, shown below. This hierarchy also relies heavily on overriding top-level functions, declared as virtual VIs in the top level class, which I suspect contributes to this problem. While debugging another issue, I was trying to build a small piece of my main code into an .exe to verify its functionality and experienced the same extremely long build times. When I removed this class hierarchy from the VI, it built extremely fast. Also to be clear, I am using neither the mean function or Mean.vi anywhere in this set of code. To date we have been delighted with LVOOP and how it has made our code cleaner, mroe robust, and more maintanable. However, when creating new functionality in the code we often elect NOT to create new objects (even though they would be beneficial) because we are hesitant to introduce the extra time (load and build) required for LabVIEW to handle these classes. If our entire system was rewritten in LVOOP, I would suspect that it would become unmaintainable and unbuildable due to the LVOOP overhead. I was hoping that LV2009 would address some of these issues but, alas, it did not. Still looking for a way to improve this and thanks in advance for all of the replies.

Extremely long display times for HTML in mail and Safari

Is anyone else experiencing similar lags in HTML rendering?
Since upgrading to Mountain Lion, I am experiencing extremely long render times for display HTML email messages in mail. I am also experiencing extremely long render times in Safari. I have Chrome installed on this same computer, if I goto the same website on Chrome and Safari, Chrome displays the page immediatly, Safari will take between 30sec and 1 minute.

The only way it can get fixed is if you report it to Adobe. Posting it here may not be sufficient. There is an Acrobat feature request forum here and a bug report form here: https://www.adobe.com/cfusion/mmform/index.cfm?name=wishform

Extremely long compression time

I am trying to compress a 6 minute video into a quicktime movie. It starts out saying it will only take 3 minutes to share. Then it quickly moves up to 17 minutes before coming to a halt.
Anybody have any ideas on what I am doing wrong or is this common? On previous videos this has never happened. I've tried doing a different video and it is also taking an extremely long time to compress.
Thanks for the help

I think possibly it could have something to do with my video settings. I don't know much about video settings.
We are producing these videos that range from 7-30min from a video camera. We don't need audio (already took that out) and we don't need the best of quality on the video. It obviously needs to be decent enough to see what is going on without straining, but beyond that I don't need much.
Does anybody have any suggestions on the type of video settings I could use in the expert settings? I believe iMovie is trying to compress much more information than I really need. Thanks for the help.

Extremely long export time

Hi,
I got some big problems while exporting footage from AME and PP CC 2014. I mean – the time of exporting is extremely long. It take 4 hours to export 15 minutes of 1080p footage (with not best quality of render settings). There is no big difference in time while exporting with or without effect same as AME or PP.
I shoot my footage on SONY A7S in XAVC S and my export settings are H.264, VBR 1, 16/20.
My PC spec:
Intel Core i7 3770K 3.5 3.9 GHZ
32 GB DRR3,
HDD 2TB, SSD 128GB
GeForce GTX 770 2GB
WINDOWS 7 ULTIMATE 64 BIT
I will appreciate any help cos this problem make me sick already

I checked the log file and there are no errors in the file.
There are no ORA- xxxx error messages.
The last line in the log file is as follows:
"Processing object type schema_export/table/index/domain_index/index "
I just checked the export job run this morning and it is still on the same
index object "A685_IX1" . This is a spatial index. It has been sitting at
this same object according to the job status for at least 24 hours.

LabVIEW2012 has long execution time to write string than LabVIEW2011 on XP SP3

in for loop, each execution will output string and display it on front panel by value property.
But after upgrade to LabVIEW 2012, the execution time doubled on Chinese XP OS, I really want to know this difference between LabVIEW 2011 & LabVIEW 2012, pls advice.
"I think therefore I am"

This is no way to measure the execution time. Your parallel while loop spins as fast as the computer allows, consuming all CPU it can get in the process, and starving everything else. Your code is highly flawed!
Eli: actually I add 10milliseconds delay inside both for and while loop.
In addition, get date/time in seconds is also a relatively expensive function, not to mention all these local variables! Your benchmark is completely meaningless! All it does is slow down your regular code, nothing else. How do you know in what order things start? Where is the "start time" initilized (where is the terminal?!)
Eli: I am using the states machine, and set the "start time" during the program initialization, then calculate "test time"in next case (running block).
A proper benchmark uses a three-frame flat sequence with to high resolution relative seconds timers, on in each outer frame and the code to be benchmarked in the inner frame. (here is an example). The difference between the two timers is the exection time of the inner code in seconds. Make sure to only have wires in the benchmarking code. All controls and indicators belong outside the sequence. Also make sure that no other code can run in parallel to the sequence.
Use this and you'll be surprise how fast your code actually runs.
Then you should also disabele debugging.
Please attach your actual code (including the subVI) so we can see what else you are doing wrong.
Eli: if possible, give me your mail address, then I can sent more actual code to you separately.
"I think therefore I am"

MacBook pro Extremely long booting time After 10.10.1 + strange icons when booting

Hi all,
since the Yosemite update and the sequential patch, I've been experiencing lots and lots of issues with this releade
I posses a
MacBook Pro (13-inch, Mid 2012)
2,5 GHz Intel Core i5
After a week after the Yosemite update my Mac just froze, and for a couple of days I was unable to access it. after 4 attempts of Clean install i was finally able to restore it. but the issue with long booting time and free after sleep/wake action are the same .
I'm experiencing strange icons during boot as follows:
Only after a second reboot and clearing ram with Cmd+Alt+P+R i'm able to get rid of this , and the reboot shows this
That after 5 mins changes into this
This routine keeps happening, every single time i have to restart my mac.
Any suggestions?
tnks

Well , i guess i a HDD issue, when i was experiencing the initial issues with yosemite , I've installed the system an external Hdd and everything was working fine.
So i guess my suspicions were correct. I have to change my hdd.

Extremely long sync time

I have an 8 gb 3G iphone w/ virtually no photos, about a gig of music, 3 gigs of video and a gig of apps. It takes 8 hours plus to sync since using 3.0. After the first sync, a daily sync only takes 20 to 30 min, with no change in music, video, photos or apps. I read a post about deleting back-up and starting over. Not working. I'm going on 7 hours again to sync and it's only 3/4 done. Any help is appreciated. I'm using an Intel iMac, 2.16 ghz with iTunes 9.02. Again, it's been like this since using 3.0 software.
TIA

I agree that it is probably related to an app. One of my apps was causing long sync times, many users reported it, and the developer figured out that he could store its content in the iPhone's "cache" area instead of its "data" area. (This was acceptable - the app creates a local mirror of one's online content). This simple change shortened sync times considerably because the sync did not need to run through all that data each time anymore. The app does its own syncing to its cloud, so it's no big loss to have it excluded from the iPhone sync.
You may have an app with a similar issue. You say you have a gigabyte of apps? That's a lot! Since most apps are tiny, that does sound like you have at least one app that maintains a large database, whether it be maps, game assets, or whatever. You should find a way or a utility to list your apps by size, because the biggest apps would be the most likely suspects.

Extremely long deploy times in Portal 9.2 in dev

Is anyone experiencing long deploy times using Eclipse with the Portal/XML Beans facets...it takes approx 30 mins to deploy our ear file. The ear contains:
3 large schemas projects (using XML Bean Builder facets)
1 Control util project
1 Portal Web Project
1 Ear Project
3 Util projects
Is there some validation options that can be turned off or other actions to speed this up?
Bill Wheeler

We are working on this issue. Could you open a support case and submit your
project so we can have support see if it is fixed in a later release?
br
William Wheeler wrote:
Is anyone experiencing long deploy times using Eclipse with the Portal/XML Beans facets...it takes approx 30 mins to deploy our ear file. The ear contains:
3 large schemas projects (using XML Bean Builder facets)
1 Control util project
1 Portal Web Project
1 Ear Project
3 Util projects
Is there some validation options that can be turned off or other actions to speed this up?
Bill Wheeler

Extremely long rendering times

I am trying to render a 13 minute project.
FCS 2 is telling me it will take 30+ hours.
Is this normal?
Am I doing something wrong?
Best,
Evan Jacobs

So, your source clips are Quicktime Animation, and you're editing them on a "standard" timeline, whic makes me assume that it's a DV/DVCPRO NTSC timeline, with your source material residing on your internal drive.
There are a number of things here that will cause long render times:
1. The nature of the Animation codec in this situation would indeed cause longer than normal render times. Animation is a high-quality mastering codec. When used on a Sequence that is set to use a compressed codec, such as DV/DVCPRO NTSC, your clips will need to be rendered.
To check the Sequence Settings, press Command - 0 (zero).
2. It is not recommended to use your Internal drive as a scratch drive. Not only is that one hard drive reading your source files, writing render files, but it is also running your entire OS, plus any other programs that may be open. That's a LOT of work for one hard drive, so expect less than optimal performance.
Try moving your source material to an external firewire drive.

Long execution time.

Hi,
Can anyone see a problem with the below query it is taking a long time to execute in SQL developer
select ol.sku_id, oh.order_id
from order_header oh, order_line ol
where ol.qty_tasked <= 0 or ol.qty_picked <= 0
and oh.order_id = ol.order_id
and oh.order_id = '9150391359'
and oh.client_id = ol.client_id
group by oh.order_id, ol.sku_id
order by ol.sku_id#
Regards,
Sam.

You can try something like this:
select
    ol.sku_id, oh.order_id
from
    (select order_id, client_id
     from order_header
     where order_id = '9150391359') oh,
    (select order_id, client_id, skew_id
     from order_line
     where qty_tasked <= 0 OR qty_picked <= 0) ol
where
    oh.order_id = ol.order_id AND
    oh.client_id = ol.client_id
group by
    oh.order_id, ol.sku_id
order by
    ol.sku_idThis will reduce the number of rows before the join and may speed things up.

Extreme long execution time

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for