How slow will lightroom be on my athlon xp 2500?

Seems my athlon xp 2500 lacks sse2 instructions so how slow is lightroom going to be on my system. Athlon xp 2500 1 gig of duell channel ram. I am an rsp user and hate to waste the free download....Bob

I've got an Athlon 2500+ and 1GB of memory. RSP is noticeably more responsive, but Lightroom is quite good for most things. As I drag sliders in Develop, the picture updates almost instantly. Switching Folders/Collections/Keywords can be a bit slow (2-4 seconds) but reasonably usable. Applying Keywords to hundreds of photos at a time only takes a second or two.
About the only thing that I find absolutely unbearable is editing the Country/State/City/Location information. For some reason, this is incredibly slow. Updating a couple hundred photos at a time can take several minutes. Thousand at a time can take more than an hour.

Similar Messages

How well will Lightroom and Photoshop CC work on the Yoga 2 Pro?

I am looking at buying a 2 in 1 laptop. I like the Yoga 2 Pro and the reviews on it. I am wondering how well Lightroom and Photoshop CC will run on it to do photo editing like redeye, lighting, blemishes, ect. I want it to run smooth and easy.

I don't own a Yoga 2 Pro, but about resolutions:
TL;DR: If 1600x900 is an option, you shouldn't get any of the traditional blurring caused by changing resolutions.
The long version with math and some history about Apple and Lenovo:
Yes, changing a 3200x1800 native screen to 1920x1080 will make it blurry. Why? Because 3200 cannot neatly divided into 1920 and 1800 cannot neatly divided into 1080. You can't split pixels, so you get some blur as the monitor tries to round-off some things.
Buuuut, if you can set it to 1600x900 (the original Yoga's resolution, incidentally), then you might be OK. It's exactly half the native and shouldn't cause any blurring.
But, I don't own a Yoga 2 Pro, so I don't know if 1) 1600x900 is an option and 2) if there are any other weird things that happen.
But, the normal blurring that happens because you change from native resolution on an LCD is because...in the end...we can't make half-pixels. You have to use integers.
Apple was smart about this, actually:
iPhone 3GS: 480x320
iPhone 4 (first w/ Retina-branding): 960x640
Perfectly double -> no blurring. Made the whole transition a lot smoother.

Will Lightroom become a full-fledged member of Creative Cloud?

I don't know about the rest of you, but I find myself starting any workflow in Lightroom 5 (as opposed to Bridge CC). There are more functionalities in Lightroom than in Bridge. In fact, many features overlap in both products and those that do seem more refined and intuitive than in Bridge CC.
I was wondering if Lightroom was slated to become a full member of the Creative Cloud family?
Personally, if this were the case, I would gladly bid adieu to Bridge in favour of a brand new Lightroom CC as 'the new bridge'.
Gosh, I feel like this is a scene from the God Father Movies where someone gets 'made' while someone else pays the ultimate demotion.
I know a lot of you either enjoy working with, or have Bridge integrated in their workflows. I'm not suggesting and end-of-the-line to that product - well, actually, yes I am while hoping Adobe would do this as smooth a transition as possible! Lightroom is certainly much more powerful by comparison IMHO.
Best regards,

My understanding is if you are subscribing to the "full Creative Suite" then you are entitled to the use of Lightroom 5 which will install as the normal stand alone program.
The following was posted in the Lightroom Journal on May 6, 2013
Lightroom and the Creative Cloud
Posted on May 6, 2013 by Tom Hogarty | Comments (122)
Adobe’s recent announcement around our Creative Cloud update has generated quite a few questions around how it will impact Lightroom 5. I’ve answered a few of the questions below and please feel free to ask additional questions in the comments.
Q. How much will Lightroom 5 cost?
A. Lightroom 5 is available for an estimated $149 US. Customers of previous versions of Lightroom can upgrade to Lightroom 5 for an estimated $79 US.
Q. Will Lightroom 5 be included as part of Adobe Creative Cloud?
A. Yes. Lightroom 5 will be delivered to Creative Cloud members at no extra charge when it’s available.
Q. Will I still be able to purchase Lightroom 5 outside of the Creative Cloud
A. Yes. Lightroom 5 will continue to be available as a standalone product, available for purchase as an Electronic Software Download(ESD) or as a boxed product with a traditional perpetual license.
Q. Will there be a different version of Lightroom called Lightroom CC?
A. No.
Q. Will there be features of Lightroom 5 that are exclusive to Creative Cloud members?
A. No.
Q. Will Lightroom become a subscription only offering after Lightroom 5?
A. Future versions of Lightroom will be made available via traditional perpetual licenses indefinitely.
Q. Is Lightroom included with a Photoshop CC single-app subscription?
A. Lightroom is available as stand-alone purchase, and through the full Creative Cloud package. Lightroom is not included with a Photoshop CC single-app membership.

I have a new computer. I wish to uninstall Lightroom5 and photoshopCC on old computer and re-install on new computer. How do I do this. Also, Lightroom catalog is currently on external drive. Will Lightroom recognize it on new computer

I have a new computer. I wish to uninstall Lightroom5 and photoshopCC on old computer and re-install on new computer. How do I do this. Also, Lightroom catalog is currently on external drive. Will Lightroom recognize it on new computer

Hello Francinera,
please have a first look here: Activation & deactivation help >>> http://helpx.adobe.com/x-productkb/policy-pricing/activation-deactivation-products.html.
Please come back if necessary.
Good luck!
Hans-Günter

How much will more RAM speed up my iBook?

I am looking to upgrade my RAM.
I know that speed is a multi-factor question. I need to know what's important and what pitfalls to avoid.
I have an 12" iBook G4, 1.2GHz, 512 RAM (256 card, 256 internal). I recently installed a 120.0GB Western Digital "Scorpio" 5400RPM 9.5MM SuperSlim Notebook Drive with 8MB Data buffer.
I am choosing between a 512 or 1g RAM upgrade. My questions are:
1) How much will this speed up my computer? 2) Is the 1g really twice as fast? 3) with my specs?
I read a post where some poor cat had upgraded RAM, but didn't feel the difference in iPhoto.
My specs read pc2100 (pc2700 compatible). Will my specific machine work faster with pc2700? Comptick (which has an awesome battery price) has a 1g RAM upgrade for $189, which is pc2100. Apple's $300 1g is pc2700.
What do I need to know about the bus rate so that I don't slow things up there?

1) How much will this speed up my computer?
There is no way we can quantify this for you. It depends on your usage pattern (i.e. what application you use, how many applications open at a time, etc.).
2) Is the 1g really twice as fast?
Most certainly the answer is no. If lack or RAM was causing delays in processing, adding more RAM will alleviate those delays and make your computing experience smoother and more enjoyable. But changing your RAM from 768 MB to 1.256 GB won't double the speed of your iBook.
3) with my specs?
?? What is the question?
I read a post where some poor cat had upgraded RAM, but didn't feel the difference in iPhoto.
For the most part, iPhoto is disk intensive not RAM intensive. Therefore upgrading RAM will only improve certain aspects of iPhoto (such as photo editing).
Will my specific machine work faster with pc2700?
No, the PC2700 will operate at PC2100 speeds.
Current RAM prices from Mac knowledgeable vendors offering lifetime warranties can be found at RamSeeker.com and DealRam.com.
What do I need to know about the bus rate so that I don't slow things up there?
Nothing. Just buy PC2100 or PC2700 RAM and relax.

FAQ: Will Lightroom work with my camera, or Why won't my raw files open?

What is a raw file?
A raw file is the unprocessed data that was captured by your camera sensor when you took your picture. The only settings on your camera that apply to this file are aperture, shutter speed, and ISO. This means that any effects you may have applied to the file, such as white balance or black and white, may not appear in Lightroom. Your camera will create a JPEG copy of your raw file with all current settings applied and save that within the raw file for use as a thumbnail by most applications. When you first view a raw file in Lightroom, you will see this thumbnail, then Lightroom will read the raw data and create its own thumbnail, which may have a different appearance.
How does Lightroom work with raw camera files?
Lightroom interprets the raw data and makes image information out of it. But every camera has a unique sensor and thus has a unique form of raw file. Even though camera manufactures may use the same file extension each time (e.g. Nikon raw files are always .NEF), each camera model has a different way of storing information. Because of this, we must continually update Lightroom for new cameras. As we add new cameras to the list (over 300 now) we update our published list of supported cameras.
Will the raw files from my camera work with Lightroom?
To determine whether your camera is supported by Lightroom, check this list:
Supported cameras
Go to Help > Updates to install the latest release. You can also manually download and install Lightroom updates:
Macintosh
Windows
What if I own a previous version of Lightroom?
Supposing you have a camera that came out after the release of a newer version of Lightroom, so that your version of Elements is no longer recieving updates, you have two basic options:
Purchase the latest version of Lightroom that supports your camera.
Use the latest version of the free DNG Converter (for Macintosh or Windows)
You can convert your files to the universaly compatible DNG format (the files will work with any version of the Lightroom). See In depth : Digital Negative (DNG) for more information.
For more assistance on DNG:
Adobe TV - The Advantages of the DNG File Format
Adobe TV - On Using DNG in Lightroom
Adobe TV - DNG Enhancements in Lightroom 4
Can I perform tethered capture from my camera to Lightroom?
Lightroom has the ability to automatically import images from your camera, as you shoot, life. To learn more about setting up and useing tethered capture, please see Import photos from a tethered camera. This list shows all the cameras that Lightroom supports for tethered shoooting:
Tethered camera support | Lightroom 4, 3
Use this document if you run into trouble when performing tethered shooting:
Troubleshoot tethered capture | Lightroom 4, 3
For more assistance on Tethered Shooting:
Adobe TV - Import photos from a tethered camera
Will Lightroom help me automatically compensate for the image distortion caused by my camera lens?
The Develop module of Lightroom includes Lens Correction which can read what lens was used from the metadata. With this information it can pick a profile that will reduce distortion caused by the curvature of the lens. For a list of which lenses are supported by which camera bodies, see this list:
Lens profile support | Lightroom 4, 3
If your lens is not currently supported, you have a few options:
Apply the lens correction manually
Use the Adobe Lens Profile Downloader (Download: Mac, Win) to see if someone else has created a profile your camera and lens
Use the Adobe Lens Profile Creator (Download: Mac, Win) to make your own profile for your camera and lens.
For more assistance on Lens Profile Corrections:
Adobe TV - Lens Correction & Perspective Correction
Adobe TV - Create Stunning Images
Adobe TV - Correcting Perspective
Adobe TV - Apply Lens Corrections
Julieanne Kost's Blog - Lens Correction Profiles
Additional resources
For more information about Adobe Camera Raw, please check these links:
Troubleshoot Camera Raw
Why doesn’t my version of Photoshop or Lightroom support my camera?
In depth: Camera Raw
Lightroom Jourrnal (developers blog) about Camera Raw releases
Julieanne Kost's Camera Raw video tutorials
Adobe Camera Raw turns 10

Yes, junky thumb drives pour like rain. Verify same with another or a good thumb drive.
Whats the format of the USB stick?
Use Sandisk or other reliable drives.

How slow is your broadband?

Ok so i recently moved house and im on day 10 of reactivation the last day! finally i get to complain tommorrow yay. My speed today and yesterday is a whooping 30 kbps which is simply not enough to view 60 % of pages i want to view on the net including some work stuff. How can Bt say they provide a fast reliable BB to everyone when this simply is not true. I was a very happy customer until i moved and i realise its not bts fault for my move but it is bt who are penalising me for living away from a city or town. I didnt even move that far away maybe 7 or 8 mile from my old house. ive been told my line speed wont improve much higher than 130 kbps when i download which to me is a joke im used to minimum of 800kbps for years now how is it possible that even people in india and other non wealthy countries have better line speed than me. This is britain ? and now im getting enraged reading about fibre optic broadband wtf my line is apparently a 1mb line dont you guys need to upgrade us little people first before you go onto some new superfast broadband??? so for the people who live round me (all 2896 of them) who use the net get to miss out on the fast bb ie anything above 2mb and i expect this will be the same for the fibre optic which we will never see up here my exchange is puriton feel free to check it out and see our options lol anyway sorry rant over just had to get others opinions on this. So how slow is ur Broadband and do you feel the same about the speed your getting?

Another folk living in the Countryside here not too far from Puriton at all (Nether Stowey) .
Luckily I get the full 8128kbps sync but the problem still remains with no LLU. There are Villiages which are served by my exchange which only get around 1meg speeds.
But I don't think that BT will do anything about it because they don't see the point in investing for the Countryside.
The only thing people with slow connections can hope for is the new 2mb minimum law (If it does come out).
Like this post? Give it a Star . If this post answers your question, please Mark it as the Accepted Solution.

How well will Mountain Lion run on the following MacBook Pro?

Thinking about biting the bullet and upgrading to Mountain Lion on my MacBook Pro. My specs are as follows:
MacBook Pro 15"
(Late 2008 model MacBookPro5,1)
Intel core 2 duo 2.53Ghz
8GB RAM
1TB HD with 390GB free
Mac OS X 10.6.8
So, how well will Mountain Lion run on this configuration? Currently I'm finding my computer annoyingly slow, so am wondering whether an upgrade was worth trying or not?
Any advice would be most appreciated!
Thanks!
Joe.

Sorry, I should have been clearer - that's what I was thinking, which is why I was asking the question. I thought that if I was going to all the effort of a reformat etc that I should just upgrade to Mountain Lion while I was at it, but didn't want to do that if it was going to run really slowly anyway and then have to go through it all again to go back to Snow Leopard.
etresoft wrote:
.... Mountain Lion should run fine on that machine.
So, have you had any personal experience of Mountain Lion running fine on this MacBook Pro? I know that officially it will run, but I'm wondering about the "real life" experience of it running on this model.
Anyone out there able to share their expeience?

How long will it take to install ios 7.0.6?

Good day every one! May i ask if any body knows how long will it take to install ios 7.0.6 on my ipad mini? Help lease.....

I've just done the update directly on my iPhone from 7.0.4 to 7.0.6 and it took 15 minutes from start to finish - on my iPad yesterday it was similar.
However you do the update, directly on your iPad or via your computer's iTunes (via your computer will be slower), then copy your purchases over to your computer's iTunes via File > Devices > Transfer Purchases and take a backup of your iPad - and preferably copy any important documents and/or photos off as well so that you have your own copy of them (the update should go smoothly, but it's best to be safe)

How Sorry Will I Be: iMac + FCP?

I have a late '08 iMac 2.8 G Core 2 Duo with 4 gigs RAM. I have just swallowed hard and got FCP to process my underwater video.
How sorry will I be that I plan to use FC Studio 3 on my 3-year old iMac?
I am not a video professional. This is a hobby for me. Having done a few fairly complicated projects in iMovie HD, I guess I'd say I'm an intermediate beginner.
I can probably live with a little frustration in waiting for stuff to render. I know there are newer, much faster machines out there. It might even be time to consider one. The iMac has no expandability to speak of and a comparatively slow ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro graphics processor.
Am I nuts for both trying to beat down the FCP learning curve on this old, comparatively slow machine?
BTW, I just got an external 2TB HD to be connected via FW800 for my projects. I'm hoping that will help some.
Any advice to this newbie would be appreciated.

Richard Setterberg wrote:
I have a late '08 iMac 2.8 G Core 2 Duo with 4 gigs RAM. I have just swallowed hard and got FCP to process my underwater video.
How sorry will I be that I plan to use FC Studio 3 on my 3-year old iMac?
This discussion is all relative and the biggest factor is not your hardware but your willingness to work within the confines of FCP and not force it do what you think it should be doing.
I am not a video professional. This is a hobby for me. Having done a few fairly complicated projects in iMovie HD, I guess I'd say I'm an intermediate beginner.
I can probably live with a little frustration in waiting for stuff to render. I know there are newer, much faster machines out there. It might even be time to consider one. The iMac has no expandability to speak of and a comparatively slow ATI Radeon HD 2600 Pro graphics processor.
Am I nuts for both trying to beat down the FCP learning curve on this old, comparatively slow machine?
I don't believe it's that old or slow at all that's not what you should be concerned about.
What type of video are you going to be working with and how are you going to output?
Will you be working with H.264 and can't be bothered with transcoding and you need to author a Bluray disc with customizable menus? Then FCP ain't for you.
Every single day some "filmmaker" barges into the Apple forums rampaging about, complaining how they need to render everything and their brand spanking new 63 core machine is slow slow slow and they can't be bothered to learn how Final Cut Pro works with video, sequences, storage and video codecs. I actually hope these people keep coming as it makes for humorous reading.
So, you're not nuts at all for using your iMac with FCP because it will work well provided you work within the confines of the application. You've also noted the video card and the iMac's lack of expansion so just be aware that Motion is GPU dependent and complicated projects will take some time to render.
BTW, I just got an external 2TB HD to be connected via FW800 for my projects. I'm hoping that will help some.
A multiple drive FW800 raid would be better, depending upon your source video.
Any advice to this newbie would be appreciated.
Dive in and have fun and peruse the first 5 pages of this forum and learn what NOT to do.
Good luck.

When will Lightroom be added?

When will Lightroom be added to Cloud ? I was under the impression it was included.

The fact is, you have the choice whether or not to upgrade to the CC product right now or wait for LR. You also have the choice to live with whatever you already use for photo management until LR is added to the Creative Cloud.
I'm guessing adding Lightroom to Creative Cloud is actually made MORE difficult due to the fact that the LR4 upgrade was released prior to CS6/CC. I'd assume that the LR licensing system is being retrofitted with the CC licensing and the install process is being integrated into the Adobe Installer process that the rest of CS6 uses. Lightroom has always been kind of an odd duck (it was the first Adobe app I can remember that had cross-platform licensing and it has never used the same install process as the rest of Adobe's apps). While CS5, 5.5 and 6 all use "Adobe Installer," Lightroom 4 is a standard Mac OS X package (on the Mac, I don't use Windows). It's going to take a while to integrate LR into the Creative Cloud. CS6 got the benefit of being developed and released alongside of Creative Cloud.
I'm sorry Adobe isn't giving you a drop-dead date, but they're actually being smart with that. If they told you June 1 and you made decisions based on that and that slipped (even a few days) you all'd be back in here moaning about how they missed their deadline and every news outlet in the world would give them guff about it. If they use nebulous language like "a few weeks" then you're (and I share this) a bit frustrated now, but it gives them a little flexibility in case things slip a bit.
I'm hardly an Adobe apologist (I think they've been a pretty abusive monopoly for a while now), but there are valid software development reasons that LR might not make it in on day 1. I also think Adobe deserves kudos for putting out a reasonably-priced subscription model and the new CS6 apps are awesome. I'm cautiously optimistic that they've turned the corner back to a company that I can get behind again.

How to fix Lightroom 5.6 crashing when backing up catalog database (external AND local backup) - Mac 10.9.5

How to fix Lightroom 5.6 from crashing when backing up catalog database (external AND local backup) - Mac 10.9.5
It starts to cue and within 3-4 seconds, the program just crashes hard. As stated, I tried it on local hard drive and external. Same result...
In the destination backup folder, it will copy over one folder, no images.
Thanks ahead of time.
-Dan

Anyone? - (Adobe?!?!?)

Which hardware upgrade to solve The Unbearable Slowness of Lightroom 3?

Hello,
I’m not going to start another thread about the slowness of Lightroom 3 because I also encounter most of the problems mentioned in the forums since upgrading to LR3: very slow response when using Adjustment Brush (which was already really slow on my machine when using LR2), loading images in Develope Module could take up to 30 seconds, browsing through the images takes forever, etc. I read lots of threads and tried several solutions but nothing works. There is no fun in post-processing images anymore.
I’m planning to upgrade my 4y old hardware very soon. Currently I’m using an Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 2.4Ghz, 4GB DDR2-800 RAM, Windows XP 32-bit, Nvidia 8800GT with 1GB RAM, WD Velociraptor (for OS, LR Catalogs, LR Cache).
I’m worried that my upgrade to faster hardware won’t solve my performance issues. I called a colleague-photographer last week who bought a MacPro dual quad-core 2.26Ghz and 8GB RAM in December last year and claims that his LR catalog with 150K images works very fast and smooth. On the other side, I have read several contradictory stories on the Adobe Forums where fast configurations also suffer performance issues, but where also normal configurations work more than fast enough. It remains vague what causes Lightroom to slow down. Probably multiple factors?
According to your experiences, which hardware upgrade will give Lightroom 3 the highest performance boost in comparison with my current system?
- Custom pc upgrade Win7 64-bit, Intel i7-930 2.8Ghz quad-core, 9 or 12GB DDR3-1600 RAM
- Custom pc upgrade Win7 64-bit, Intel i7-980 (or i7-970) six-core, 9 or 12GB DDR3-1600 RAM
- MacPro with dual quad-core 2.4Ghz, 8 or 10GB DDR3-1066 RAM
- MacPro single six-core 3.33Ghz, 8 or 10GB DDR3-1333 RAM
Is my videocard of any importance? I mean, do I choose Nvidia or ATI?
Thanks!

ambienttroutmask wrote:
Using an on board graphics card will just not drive monitors correctly at high resolutions and also will use the computers RAM. If you are running LR on a single low resolution monitor then on board graphics cards may be fine...but otherwise a separate card is absolutely a requirement.
I have no doubt that the above quote was meant to be helpful, but a separate (discrete) card is absolutely NOT a requirement for anyone specing a new machine for Lightroom.
Lightroom does not currently use graphics card/chips to do any image rendering. Things like demosaicing, noise reduction, sharpening and lens/perspective correction happen exactly at the same speed with integrated graphics as they do with $500 graphics cards. And displaying an image on high or low resolution monitors is handled by a low-level component know as a RAMDAC - which is independent of whether you have integrated or discrete graphics.
My dual core deskside and notebook computers running Win 7-64 are each capable of delivering about the same Lightroom performance. But in practice, I find that my deskside is much better for rendering because my new notebook only uses Turbo Boost to run at 3 GHz for a minute or two, before it throttles back because of heat (notebook CPU fans are much smaller than desktop/deskside fans). A discrete card would only excerbate the heat problem on my notebook and wouldn't add anything but cost for Lightroom on my 8GB deskside.
Some details for folks interested in the technical bits:
I have two systems that I use Lightroom on. Both have intel dual cores, have integrated graphics and run Win7-64. The older deskside has a 3 GHz e8400 with integrated graphics implemented on a separate chip, 8GB of memory and 4 internal disk drives. The newer notebook has a 2.4 to 2.9 GHz i5-520M with 4GB of memory, graphics embeded in the CPU chip and two internal disk drives. There is no Lightroom use case that would benefit buy "upgrading" either of these two machines to use a separate graphics card - except one. If I were routinely processing images much larger than almost all photographers create, a discreet card could help expand memory. But if memory is the constraint, it makes much more sense to add it directly to the base machine that it does to spend more money on a separate graphics card.
Dan

Will Lightroom benefit from "switchable" NVIDIA NVS 512MB Optimus graphics?

Hi all, I'm about to get a new laptop -- one model includes "switchable" NVIDIA NVS Optimus 512MB graphics, meaning it has both built-in Intel graphics as well as the NVIDIA NVS Optimus 512MB, and can switch between them (to Intel for better battery life, and to NVIDIA for better graphics performance).
My question is: will Lightroom perform noticeably better with the NVIDIA chip vs. the Intel chip? I've seen demos showing considerably improved 3d performance, but I'm not sure if the same performance boost applies to Lightroom graphics.
Thanks kindly for any advice!

TurnstyleNYC wrote:
fwiw, I don't necessarily mind spending more for better performance (the dual graphics is about $100) but I was hoping I could make that decision based on some sort of practical expectation (ie, such as "expect about 15% snappier Lightroom performace").
Because we are discussing a side-effect here, there is no way to come up with a number like this. That is, Lr doesn't really care about how excellent your video adapter is, but the integrated adapter uses system memory, and Lr is memory intensive. So, making sure you have maximum memory freed up for applications is just prudent. But no one can say how this might translate into specific performance issues, or affect apps at all. It depends on what you are doing, and what else is running, and the state of your OS. It's very non-deterministic.
As I said before, with lots of physical memory, all of this might be moot, except in the most extreme circumstances.
Bottom line: Lr will work with pretty much any modern video adapter. Not using integrated graphics means more memory for the system and, therefore, more memory for applications. But whether or not this will make or break your experience is not really deterministic. But more memory headroom is never a bad thing.
Make your decision based on that, not on some (probably made-up, or based on anecdotal evidence) specific application performance projection.

How long will SAPRSEUJ run?

Hi Guys,
Does anybody experience about this report? (EU_INIT batch job)
Can somebody explain how long will it run after a system installation?
(Other question: do we really need to run it after an installation?)
Thank you in advance
Balazs

Hi Balazs,
see SAP Note 28022: "The report has a very long runtime and can run up to 100 hours (5 days)".
You can control the progress by SM37 job log which displays a line after every 1000 objects (more than 200.000 in total) and by SM50 process details (number of RFC calls in the bottom lines of the details)
I experienced that this job is very slow on VIRTUAL machines (Hyper-V host and machines with Microsoft Windows 2008 RTM as well as Microsoft Windows 2008 R2). Furthermore, when running very slow, this job often slows down all other system activities. As a workaround I scheduled a daily job EU_INIT starting in the evening, and every day in the morning I kill the job process in TA SM50 so that our developers can proceed with their work. This procedure lasts some weeks ...
Also pay attention to the different programs that are run by different EU_INIT-Jobs:
SAPRSEUB for SAP Basis objects
SAPRSEUC for Customer objects
SAPRSEUI for Incremental changes
SAPRSEUT for objects changed after Transports
Regards
Walter

How slow will lightroom be on my athlon xp 2500?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for