Interesting benchmark

recently i've been playing around with different ways to do things to optimize my program, and i came across an interesting discovery. i'm not a master at making benchmarks, but i think this should be ok.
time = System.nanoTime();
          for (int i=0;i<10000;i++) {
               float x = p.x;
          System.out.println(System.nanoTime()-time);
          for (int i=0;i<10000;i++) {
               float x = posX[i];
          System.out.println(System.nanoTime()-time);what i get was
229000
426160
the first one is for when you have an array of objects, and get their values, and the second is just a float array. what i found interesting was that the first way was 2 times faster.
Edited by: kotsoft on Jan 2, 2008 8:24 PM
Edited by: kotsoft on Jan 2, 2008 8:27 PM
Edited by: kotsoft on Jan 2, 2008 8:27 PM                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           

kotsoft wrote:
recently i've been playing around with different ways to do things to optimize my program, and i came across an interesting discovery. i'm not a master at making benchmarks, but i think this should be ok.
time = System.nanoTime();
          for (int i=0;i<10000;i++) {
               float x = p.x;
          System.out.println(System.nanoTime()-time);
          for (int i=0;i<10000;i++) {
               float x = posX[i];
          System.out.println(System.nanoTime()-time);what i get was
229000
426160
the first one is for when you have an array of objects, and get their values, and the second is just a float array. what i found interesting was that the first way was 2 times faster.Because you don't reset time to the current time before starting the second loop.

Similar Messages

  • Might go for T400/500- Many questions concerning Think Vantage

    Hi,
    I am deciding on my first IBM, a T400 or T500
    I have a few questions concerning the Think Vantage Function:
    a) Does the recovery DVD set back the hard drive partitions to factory settings?
    b) Does the Think Vantage function set back the hard drive partitions to factory settings?
    This means the original size of the partitions, when they have been changed manually.
    c) Does Think Vantage work with a self buyed Windows Vista?
    d) Does Think Vantage work unter Windows XP
    e) Does Think Vantage need drivers/ anything else to work or is it entirly working on the hardware side, so no software/ windows is needed
    f)Will Think Vantage work under Windows 7 in a T400/500
    g) How was the past situation? Did a under Windows XP working Think Vantage also work on Vista / have there been drivers delivered, when needed, for the new OS
    h) Is it possible to set up a new OS (like Vista Ultimate) and then backup it up on a external hard drive and later recover from this?
    What do I want to achieve?
    I want to recover the factory settings at all times, this means partition size, number of partitions etc. and Windows Vista Business. Then I want to install Vista Ultimate do my settings and backing it up to an external drive or whatever and then recover from that all 3 Months. In the end I should be able to set back factory settings with the earliest/ first backup from Windows Business; Furthermore I might want to install Windows 7 sometimes.
    Thank you for your help! Kind regards
    Message Edited by Schwenker on 11-23-2008 08:23 AM

    Hello,
    I would recommend Acronis to do this job. Here is a link at thinkpad-forum.de.
    You´ll  get Acronis for free if you buy a PCWelt.
    Your answers:
    A. yes
    B: yes
    C: yes
    D: yes
    E: No, windows is needed and if it´s XP than MS NET 2.0 also.
    F: yes, when windows 7 is out, than Thinkvantage will work then, on Server 2008 it seems to work.
    G:Thinkvantage work in Vista and XP environment.
    H: yes, you can backup it on a extern hdd and later recover the R&R Image to the internal disc.
    What do I want to achieve?
    I would recommend Acronis to do this job. Here is a link at thinkpad-forum.de.
    You´ll  get Acronis for free, if you buy a PCWelt.
    here are some interesting benchmark with first versions of Windows 7 and XP.
    Windows 7 unmasked
    Perceptions becomes reality
    Message Edited by Agotthelf on 23-11-2008 10:23 PM
    Follow @LenovoForums on Twitter! Try the forum search, before first posting: Forum Search Option
    Please insert your type, model (not S/N) number and used OS in your posts.
    I´m a volunteer here using New X1 Carbon, ThinkPad Yoga, Yoga 11s, Yoga 13, T430s,T510, X220t, IdeaCentre B540.
    TIP: If your computer runs satisfactorily now, it may not be necessary to update the system.
     English Community       Deutsche Community       Comunidad en Español

  • Puzzled as puzzled can be: 8800 lower performance than 2600 in Pro Apps.

    Yep. You read correctly. I'm speechlss...and very sad.
    Barefeats has published some very interesting benchmarks in Motion and iMaginator, besides some popular games. The ATI2600 wins by far on the pro apps.
    That's insane as the 8800 is far, far superior.
    Apple, listen:
    -I frooze my intention to buy a current 8 core Mac. No way. I don't want an entry-level card (2600) and I expect the 8800 to work much better than what it shows.
    -at this price range we, consumers, must pretend!
    -video derivers: obviously they are badly written.
    -cores usage: obviously they are not optimized in Apple apps as they are in Adobe's.
    I'll save my grands and will look at Windows workstations as a curiosity.
    Less iPhones-MORE MACS!
    I

    I wonder how much could be due to drivers and application support. The Graphics Update 1.0 (a new feature, having a stand-alone driver package) and how much time, now that 8800 is here, to see improvements.
    Some people said WoW saw 20% improvement. Vista drivers took a year. The 5600 is marketed to higher-end market with 1.5GB RAM.
    From the above link on Barefeats, quote:
    +the Quadro FX 5600 does feature more video memory than the GeForce 8800 GT (1.5GB vs 512MB). And, according to one Maya guru, the extra memory (and superior memory management code) of the Quadro workstation cards becomes useful for frame buffering in apps like Maya. This is especially true for redraw of multiple views of the same complex 3D model.+
    +This has been enhanced further by Quadro FX 5600's new integrated memory allocation which allows the card to dynamically allocate on-board RAM to whatever task is at hand rather than have specific hard wired allocations. So rather than say a maximum of 40% of total on-board RAM dedicated to the texture buffer the card can ramp up and down from 80% sharing with the immediate needs of the other buffers.+
    Does what applies to Maya translate into better Motion performance also?

  • Best Used Mac

    Hello and thanks for the advice. I have been shopping a bit for a new (used) Powermac. I was planning on getting a G5 Dual but the alarming chirps, and fan explosions and fluid leak issues have me a bit worried. I'm concerned about the lack of expandability for an IMac. My question is this: what is the best deal on a used Mac? Should I spend the extra dough for a Quad core or are the duals more reliable than they seem. Ive been beating up my G4 powerbook (1.67ghz) for three years and it continues to motor without any troubles. I plan to use this machine to run Mac and windows software, a bit of audio editing, and CS3 adobe programs.I am an artist and my wife will be doing most of the audio stuff. We are not going to be making a loving off of this machine. Budget: around 2K. I would love to get a screen if possible.

    Hi-
    The Quad is a formidable machine. With non-Intel optimized software, the G5 Quad still shows it's stuff when compared to the Mac Pro's.
    That the main point, though- do you need a couple seconds faster for a filter render, or do you need to get the full potential out of the latest Intel optimized software. And, as DaddyP pointed out, if you need Windows stuff on the machine, you need the Intel chip.
    There are some interesting benchmarks that show the speed and ability of a Mac Pro, compared to the speed and ability G5 Quad.
    SHOOTOUT: Quad Xeon 3.0GHz Mac Pro versus Quad G5 2.5GHz Power Mac
    ARM CHAIR ANALYSIS: Mac Pro versus Quad G5
    Geek Patrol (very good discussion after the benchmarks).
    Trouble is, I've heard and read around the traps that the current iMac 2.8 extreme is faster than the quad g5 2.5.
    True, until you put Photoshop in the iMac, or run other processor intensive tasks.
    SHOOTOUT: iMac Intel Core Duo 2.0GHz versus Others
    Mac Performance In The Raw - G5 Power Mac Quad Core 2.5 GHz versus Intel Core Duo iMac 20" 2GHz
    Sad as it may be, (Sorry, Quad owners!), the Quad is old technology, out-dated, obsolete.
    But, as long as the system starts up, the Quad is a remarkable, still viable machine. *It is the undisputed "Best Used Mac" in the PPC series.* Intel is a different Apple.....
    It's the G5 I've always wanted.....and the only G5 I've wanted.....(for whatever that's worth!)

  • Interesting result: Benchmarking MBP w Battery w/o Battery

    Machine: MacBookPro3,1
    Standard 15" version with 2GB ram and 256 Vram
    Running windows XP SP2 with everything updated/patched via Bootcamp 1.4
    Here are the following results: AC plug in w/o Battery AC plug in w Battery
    Aquamark 3: 69,300 / 100,500
    Final Fantasy XI - Hi: 4280 / 6310
    (official Benchmark 3)
    Couterstrike Source: 133 fps / 166fps
    1440x900, everything max
    no AA no AF
    Super PI 1.1: 1m40s / 52s
    Why battery plug-in or not is an performance issue under window XP? I haven't compared any benchmark on Mac OS X yet.
    If battery plug-in will make MBP running in full speed is truth, then it is the best "NOT" to remove your battery even it is fully charged!
    More benchmark's result will be coming soon...

    Sunny,
    Macbook Pros are capable of using more power than the magsafe adapters provide, for short periods of time. In such cases, the battery normally provides the additional power.
    When you remove the battery, firmware automatically throttles the CPU to approx. 50%, to avoid drawing more wattage than the magsafe can provide. If it did not, and the magsafe's supply was exceeded, very bad things could happen (in addition to an abrupt and improper shutdown, your MBP's components could be "fried").
    Scott

  • Benchmarks if you're interested

    I received my MacBook Pro on Friday and have been doing some benchmarks. Three benchmarking applications were used: GeekbenchPreview, XBench 1.2, and CineBench 9.5. Machines involved:
    2.0 Ghz MBP w/1 GB RAM and 100 GB Toshiba 5400 RPM drive.
    1.33 Ghz Quicksilver w/ATI 9800 Pro Video, 1.5 GB RAM, 60 GB Seagate 7200 RPM drive.
    1.0 Ghz Ti Powerbook w/1.0 GB RAM and 60 GB Hitachi 7200 RPM drive.
    1.5 Ghz Al Powerbook - configuration unknown. Info taken from Geekbench website.
    The results are in a zipped file containing an Excel spreadsheet with the data and basic analysis of performance differences. You can download the archive from my website.

    Thanks for the post, though I have thought this thru and have decided to wait-mainly because my 12" PB is just as great as the day I bought it!
    : )

  • VMWare Fusion and Parallels Desktop Benchmark Comparison

    This is a quickie benchmark of VMWare Fusion and Parallels Desktop using Super PI, PC Mark 05, and Passmark.
    VMWare Fusion 36932
    Parallels Desktop 3094 Beta 2
    Notes:
    Both virtual machines were allocated with large 10+ GB virtual disks and 640MB of RAM. The VMWare CPU was configured with two processors. The Parallels CPU was configured with 1 (two is not available). VMWare reported the CPU as 1 physical, 2 logical processors running at 2.66 GHz while Parallels reported 1 physical, 1 logical processor running at 9.6 GHz (the combined speed of all four cores on the Mac Pro). The max observed CPU utilization in activity monitor when running under VMWare was 200% and max under Parallels was 173%.
    I chose not to compare 1 VMWare CPU vs. 1 Parallels CPU. While Parallels does not support SMP or multithreaded processes on multiple processors the CPU utilization on the Mac went well above 1 core (173%). For this comparison, I wanted to see results of max processing based on what the two vendors have delivered, as opposed to benchmarking the underlying "virtual or hypervisor cpu" on a 1:1 basis. This explains why VMWare was 2x faster than Parallels on some CPU tests.
    Both of these products are beta. VMWare is running in debug mode (can not be turned off in this beta).
    Caveat emptor on these stats. This was an unscientific exercise to satisfy my curiosity. Some of the extraordinary differences are highlighted with <--.
    Platform:
    Mac Pro 2.66 GHz, 2GB RAM, Nvidia 7300GT
    Disk 1 - OS X, 73GB Raptor
    Disk 2 - dedicated disk where each virtual machine image was created separate from the OS or any OS-related virtual memory files.
    VMWare and Parallels guest OS: Windows XP Professional, SP 2
    Comparison Benchmrk
    VMWare Fusion 36932 and Parallels Desktop 3094 Beta 2
    Super PI Parallels VMWare
    512K 8s 9s
    1M 20s 21s
    4M 1m 57s 2m 03s
    PC Mark 05 Parallels VMWare
    CPU Test Suite N/A N/A
    Memory Test Suite N/A N/A
    Graphics Test Suite N/A N/A
    HDD Test Suite N/A N/A
    HDD - XP Startup 5.0 MB/s 19.54 MB/s <--
    Physics and 3D Test failed Test failed
    Transparent Windows Test failed 69.99 Windows/s
    3D - Pixel Shader Test failed Test failed
    Web Page Rendering 3.58 Pages/s 2.34 Pages/s
    File Decrypt 71.73 MB/s 67.05 MB/s
    Graphics Memory - 64 Lines 179.92 FPS 111.73 FPS
    HDD - General Usage 4.82 MB/s 42.01 MB/s <--
    Multithread Test 1 / Audio Comp N/A N/A
    Multithread Test 1 / Video Encoding Test failed Test failed
    Multithread Test 2 / Text Edit 152.85 Pages/s 138.48 Pages/s
    Multithread Test 2 / Image DeComp 5.91 MPixels/s 35.4 MPixels/s <--
    Multithread Test 3 / File Comp 3.22 MB/s 6.03 MB/s
    Multithread Test 3 / File Encrypt 19.0 MB/s 33.26 MB/s <--
    Multithread Test 3 / HDD - Virus Scan 27.91 MB/s 25.49 MB/s
    Multithread Test 3 / Mem Lat - Rnd 16MB 5.34 MAcc/s 6.63 MAcc/s
    File Comp N/A N/A
    File DeComp N/A N/A
    File Encrypt N/A N/A
    File Decrypt N/A N/A
    Image DeComp N/A N/A
    Audio Comp N/A N/A
    Multithread Test 1 / File Comp N/A N/A
    Multithread Test 1 / File Encrypt N/A N/A
    Multithread Test 2 / File DeComp N/A N/A
    Multithread Test 2 / File Decrypt N/A N/A
    Multithread Test 2 / Audio DeComp N/A N/A
    Multithread Test 2 / Image DeComp N/A N/A
    Memory Read - 16 MB N/A N/A
    Memory Read - 8 MB N/A N/A
    Memory Read - 192 kB N/A N/A
    Memory Read - 4 kB N/A N/A
    Memory Write - 16 MB N/A N/A
    Memory Write - 8 MB N/A N/A
    Memory Write - 192 kB N/A N/A
    Memory Write - 4 kB N/A N/A
    Memory Copy - 16 MB N/A N/A
    Memory Copy - 8 MB N/A N/A
    Memory Copy - 192 kB N/A N/A
    Memory Copy - 4 kB N/A N/A
    Memory Lat - Rnd 16 MB N/A N/A
    Memory Lat - Rnd 8 MB N/A N/A
    Memory Lat - Rnd 192 kB N/A N/A
    Memory Lat - Rnd 4 kB N/A N/A
    Transparent Windows N/A N/A
    Graphics Memory - 64 Lines N/A N/A
    Graphics Memory - 128 Lines N/A N/A
    WMV Video Playback N/A N/A
    3D - Fill Rate Multi Texturing N/A N/A
    3D - Polygon Throughput Multiple Lights N/A N/A
    3D - Pixel Shader N/A N/A
    3D - Vertex Shader N/A N/A
    HDD - XP Startup N/A N/A
    HDD - Application Loading N/A N/A
    HDD - General Usage N/A N/A
    HDD - Virus Scan N/A N/A
    HDD - File Write N/A N/A
    Processor Intel Core 2 9653 MHz Processor Unknown 2661 MHz
    Physical / Logical CPUs "1 Physical, 1 Logical" "1 Physical, 2 Logical"
    MultiCore 1 Processor Core Multicore 2 Processor Cores
    HyperThreading N/A N/A
    Graphics Card Generic VGA Generic VGA
    Graphics Driver Parallels Video Driver VMWare SVGA II
    Co-operative adapters No No
    DirectX Version 9.0c 9.0c
    System Memory 640 MB 640MB
    Motherboard Manufacturer N/A Intel Corporation
    Motherboard Model N/A 440BX Desktop Reference Platform
    Operating System Microsoft Windows XP Microsoft Windows XP
    Passmark Parallels VMWare
    CPU - Integer Math (MOPS) 112.35 230.31 <--
    CPU - Floating Point Math (MOPS) 280.46 588.33 <--
    CPU - Find Prime Numbers (OPS) 446.37 676.99 <--
    CPU - SSE/3DNow! (MMPS) 2118.56 4737.13 <--
    CPU - Comp (KB/s) 2994.16 5952.34 <--
    CPU - Encrypt (MB/s) 18.09 36.27 <--
    CPU - Image Rotation (IRPS) 598.21 1184.41 <--
    CPU - String Sorting (TPS) 2118.81 3672.59 <--
    Graphics 2D - Lines (TPS) 220.71 25.15 <--
    Graphics 2D - Rectangles (TPS) 189.74 61.8 <--
    Graphics 2D - Shapes (TPS) 39.54 13.71 <--
    Graphics 2D - Fonts and Text (OPS) 190.39 75.88 <--
    Graphics 2D - GUI (OPS) 439.77 63.72 <--
    Memory - Allocate Small Block (MB/s) 2533.83 2526.21
    Memory - Read Cached (MB/s) 1960.5 1906.27
    Memory - Read Uncached (MB/s) 1871.79 1826.08
    Memory - Write (MB/s) 1687.81 1545.43
    Memory - Large RAM (OPS) 60.99 46.37
    Disk - Sequential Read (MB/s) 102.11 76.45 <--
    Disk - Sequential Write (MB/s) 58.33 50.9
    Disk - Rnd Seek + RW (MB/s) 51.4 40.4
    CPU Mark 711.08 1432.72 <--
    2D Graphics Mark 743.31 176.5 <--
    Memory Mark 599.94 580.38
    Disk Mark 766.11 606.7
    PassMark Rating 557.27 637.35<br>

    Thanks for posting these numbers - it's an interesting comparison.
    I would expect the final VMWare fusion performance numbers to be quite a bit better than that of Parallels - they have almost a decade's worth of experience more than the Parallels folks in this arena, and a much larger development team to boot.
    Once VMWare Fusion is released to the public, I think that you'll see a clearer distinction between the two products. VMWare will continue to appeal to the professional customer, with a more robust feature set and corporate-friendly features (and a correspondingly higher price tag); Parallels will fall more into the consumer/VirtualPC-replacement market. It will be interesting to see how Parallels will be affected when (and if) VMWare player is ported to OS X.
    Interesting about the Parallels performance stats on a native partition - looks like almost enough reason to avoid the bootcamp partition approach altogether. Sharing a native windows installation with a VM in parallels is a pretty scary situation in any case, as the two environments have entirely different hardware configurations. Do-able, but there is some black magic involved (if you want to see an example of what I mean, try to move a windows installation from one machine to another w/different hardware sometime - it ain't pretty); I wouldn't try this in a production scheme unless I had REALLY good backups.

  • PI 7.1 Benchmark results

    Hi,
    now that PI 7.1 GA is getting nearer it would be interesting to see some real life benchmark results around performance when compared to PI 7.0 or XI 3.0.
    Has anyone had the opportunity to run any as of yet or planning to do so? Would be very interested to see where and to what extent the much promoted improvements have increased the performance and be able to put these numbers in front of customers who are currently struggling with performance related issues on previous versions or who are not yet committed to PI due to uncertainty regarding the performance.
    I've tried to search in the SDN for PI 7.1 benchmark results, but if such benchmarking exists I didn't manage to find it (if you have a link, please post it as a reply).
    Cheers
    Kalle

    Hi,
    /people/udo.paltzer/blog/2007/04/26/new-sap-netweaver-process-integration-release-planned-for-2007
    https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/sdn/go/portal/prtroot/docs/library/uuid/304335f7-f33c-2a10-ae80-9c9ffdc86415
    https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/sdn/go/portal/prtroot/docs/library/uuid/00ffdb4d-e869-2a10-7688-891d7eea1b12
    Regards
    Agasthuri Doss

  • How can I benchmark my refurbished iMac i7?

    Don't get me wrong, I love my new iMac and maybe I am being paranoid because this is my first refurbished Mac, I want to run a speed test. Before my purchase I had played around with the 27" Core Duo model in an Apple Store. I was really impressed with the speed. So when I ordered the i7 (and upgraded the RAM to 8GB) I really expected I would have to wear a seat belt and a helmet because otherwise I risked getting whiplash. But as it turns out--not so much. So while I could "benchmark" it by running some comparable tasks on my MacBook I am more interested in knowing if my machine is living up to its full i7 potential. I know that not all of my apps are 64 bit ready, but basic stuff like number of bounces to launch applications, or the fluidity of some playback in Quicktime isn't blowing me away.
    I am running 10.6.4 in the 64 bit-mode. I have reinstalled 10.6.3 and updated it to 10.6.4 when it became available (today). Any ideas are appreciated.

    Your expectations are a bit off.
    The Core i7 won't necessarily be FASTER than a Core 2 Duo... In a few cases it may even be slower. What the Core i7 will do however, is make for a much SMOOTHER and CONSISTENT level of performance.
    Quick example. Have a desktop system with a Core i7 860 and a laptop with a Core 2 Duo somethingorotheriforget. Both running Windows 7 (I also have a 13" MBP) 64-bit, and largely the same. On my desktop system, I can be decompressing a large file, while playing back a high def video file, and also have a few other odd tasks going on at the same time, and there's no noticeable drop in performance. On my laptop, I start to notice a performance drop after I start up a video file while something is being decompressed in the background.
    That's what you pay the extra money for with a Core i7. A system that seemingly never misses a beat, no matter how much you throw at it. The Core 2 Duo can walk and chew gum at the same time. The Core i7 can walk, chew gum, perform complex calculus problems while juggling, and still have time to do tricks with a yo-yo on a busy street without managing to run into anyone.
    This kind of gets back to the problem a lot of people used to have with SMP systems. If someone had 2x500MHz CPUs in a system, people just assumed that it would be the same as a single 1GHz CPU. It's not.
    Just don't fall into the benchmarking trap so many people do. They spend all their free time just trying to get a few extra points. Unless you're having an e-genitals measuring contest, it's just not worth it. Be happy with what you have.

  • New 24" iMac - Benchmarks or gaming results?

    Hi,
    Has anyone got any benchmarks on the new 24" iMac?
    I'm particularly interested in gaming results, such as Call Of Duty 2 and 4, Quake 4, Halo and Doom 3 etc?
    I beleive the 24" base model has the nVidia 9400 and i'm curious to see if it runs Call Of Duty 2 as other nVidida cards seem to struggle.
    Thanks.

    Hello Mark,
    I won't post any direct links. Google is your friend...
    iMac Benchmarks
    Is a good search option that will reveal all you could ever wish to know ( about bench marks and iMacs that is! )
    Cheers.
    Ian.

  • Help finding benchmarks for current iMac variations

    Hello all,
    I am trying to find some benchmarks to compare the various choices in the current iMac lineup. Specifically I am interested in the 20" iMac and would love to know how much of a performance jump the 2600pro provides over the 2400xt, since that would be my only reason to really pay for the higher priced setup.
    Just to clarify, the system will be used for the following: Final Cut Express 4, Pro Tools 7, Diablo 3 (when it comes out), and the rest are basics.

    They are usually published in MacWorld magazine. You will also find some comparisons at Bare Feats. Google searches may find you some others.

  • Certification, Customer Performance Benchmarks & Lidar Technical Sessions At Oracle Spatial Summit

    Here is a spotlight on some training sessions that may be of interest, offered at LI/Oracle Spatial Summit in DC, May 19-21.  www.locationintelligence.net/dc/agenda . 
    Preparing for the Oracle Spatial Certification Exam
    Steve Pierce, Think Huddle & Albert Godfrind, Oracle
    Learn valuable strategies and review technical topics with the experts who developed the exam – and achieve your Oracle Spatial Specialist Certification with the most efficient effort. This session will enable you to master difficult topics (such as GeoRaster, 3D/LIDAR support, topology) quickly through clear examples and demos. Sample questions and exam topic breakdown will be covered. Individual certifications can also apply to requirements for organizations seeking Oracle PartnerNetwork Specialized status.
    Offered as both a Monday technical workshop (preregistration required), and Wednesday overview session.
    Content in this session is only available at the Oracle Spatial Summit.
    The performance debate is over: Spatial 12c Performance / Customer Benchmark Track
    Hear the results of customer benchmarks testing the performance of the 12c release of Spatial and Graph – with results up to 300 times faster. In this track, Nick Salem of Neustar and Steve Pierce of Think Huddle will share benchmarks with actual performance results already realized.
    Customers can now address the largest geospatial workloads and see performance increases of 50 to 300 times for common vector analysis operations. With just a small set of configuration changes – and no changes to application code – applications can realize these significant performance improvements. You’ll also learn tips for accelerating performance and running benchmarks with your applications on your systems.
    Effectively Utilize LIDAR Data In Your Business Processes
    Daniel Geringer, Oracle
    Many organizations collect large amounts of LIDAR, or point cloud data for more precise asset management. ROI of the high costs associated with this type of data acquisition is frequently compromised by the underutilization of the data. This session focuses on ways to leverage Oracle Engineered Systems to highly compress and seamlessly store LIDAR data and effectively search it spatially in its compressed form to enhance your business process. Topics covered included loading, compressing, pyramiding, searching and generation of derivative products such as DEMs, TINs, and Contours.
    Many other technical sessions and tracks will cover spatial technologies with depth and breadth.
    Customers including Garmin, Burger King, US Census Bureau, US DOJ, and more will also present use cases using MapViewer & Spatial in location intelligence/BI, transportation, land management and more.
    We invite you to join the community there.  For more information about topics, sessions and experts at Oracle Spatial Summit 2014, visit http://www.locationintelligence.net/dc/agenda .  This training event is held in conjunction with Directions' Location Intelligence - bringing together leaders in the LI ecosystem.
    For a 10% registration discount, become a member of the Spatial SIG, LinkedIn (http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Oracle-Spatial-Graph-1848520?gid=1848520&trk=skills    ) 
    or Google+ Spatial & Graph groups (https://plus.google.com/communities/108078829007193480508 ).  Details posted there.

  • Performance, Benchmark for Oracle XE

    My buisness would like to use Oracle XE as a starter base installation for customers, so that they can easly upgrade to an full Oracle SE or EE later. However I fail to find benchmark tests (like tpc.org) which give an image of the performance of the Oracle XE and how it compares to other databases such as PostgreSQL or MySQL in the smaller application market segment that XE is targeting.
    We have been running som tests in house, but the currently I must say they are not in the Oracle XE favour. This is disapointing, as we would want to avoid for our customers to start of with a DB other than Oracle, then do an transistion to Oracle SE or EE when the need is there.
    We are working on tuning/optimizing the database to perform better. Nevertheless it would be really interesting to see some benchmarks / comparison of the performance between Oracle XE an other DBMS in this segment of the DB market. Beeing well aware that their is not necessarely one database that fits each application/segment best, such a test would be informative. And also great input for my company when choosing which DB to use. Does anyone have any experience on this subject any feedback is highly appreciated. If anyone is interested I would be glad to post details regarding our tesing in house.
    Cheers

    Hi,
    Thanks for the reply. Being well aware of the complexity of optimizing application performance I am simply trying to find as many inputs as possible to make a decision. A benchmark test would for me not yield "the truth" in any way, but simply be another parameter to consider. I am also aware that Oracle DB has several features that other DBs don't have.
    You hit the nail on you assumption:
    2) use only the very basic features of both DBsThis is correct. We are using a EJB3.0 (Hibernate) environment togheter with JBOSS 4.0.5 application server, using no specific DB implementation. I realize that at some point, to acheive max performance, one should would have to implement code optimized for a specific DB. But right now I am interested in maximizing the performance with no specific DB code. We started out using Oracle XE, and it was doing well. We than switched to Mysql mainly for curiousity, and the performance was much better "out-of-the-box". ( x 2,5!) using less CPU -20%) an memory than Oracle XE. This was a suprising result for me, and now I would like to know why.
    If the reason is that Oracle uses more resource for background processes like gathering statistics etc. this is a feasable explanation. Also in a larger system, if these processes take more or less the same resources, they would make out a smaller part of the total available resources. Right now I can't explain the performance gap, I simply observe the test results but cannot explain them.
    As my demands to the DB features are limited (basic ER datatypes, incremental backup), is there perhaps a way to "disable advanced features" of Oracle XE, so that more CPU power is available to the application?
    Also, how well does the JBOSS app. server integrate with the Oracle DB? Would the Oracle XE perform better with an Oracle App.server?
    My application has a typical web-app, having mainly read queries with a high peak load (burst). I have tried tuning the connection pool etc. but no improvment. It is quite possible that I have reached the limit of performance of the Oracle XE, perhaps I am trying to use it for something it was not intended for? Having said this I would prefer to continue using Oracle XE, but it would be nice to know the reasons for the difference in performance.
    Any feedback is highly appreciated.

  • CE Benchmark/Performance Best Practice Tips

    We are in the early stages of starting a CE project where we expect a high volume of web service calls per day (e.g. customer master service, material master service, pricing service, order creation service etc).
    Are there any best-practice guidelines which could be taken into account to avoid any possible performance problems within the web service u201Cinfrastructureu201D? 
    Should master data normally residing in the backend ECC server be duplicated outside ECC? 
    e.g. if individual reads of the master data in the backend system take 2 seconds per call, would it be more efficient to duplicate     the master data on the SAP AS Java server, or elsewhere u2013 if the master data is expected to be read thousands of times each    day.
    Also, what kind of benchmarking tools (SAP std or 3rd party) are available to assess the performance of the different layers of the infrastructure during integration + volume testing phases?
    I've tried looking for any such documentation on SDN, OSS, help.sap.com, but to no avail.
    Many thanks in advance for any help.
    Ali Crawshaw

    Hi Ali,
    For performance and benchmarking have you had a look at Wiley Introscope?
    The following presentation has some interesting information [Wiley Introscope supports CE 7.1|http://www.google.co.za/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=7&ved=0CCEQFjAG&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.thenewreality.be%2Fpresentations%2Fpdf%2FDay2Track6%2F265CTAC.pdf&ei=BUGES-yyBNWJ4QaN7KzXAQ&usg=AFQjCNE9qA310z2KKSMk4d42oyjuXJ_TfA&sig2=VD1iQvCUmWZMB5OB-Z4gEQ]
    With regards to best practice guidelines, if you are using PI for service routing try to keep to asynch services as far as possible, asynch with acknowledgments if need be. Make sure your CE Java AS is well tuned according to the SAP best practice.
    Will you be using SAP Global Data Types for your service development? If you are then the one performance tip i have regarding the use of GDT's is to keep your GDT structures as small (number of fields) as possible, as large GDT structures have an impact on memory consumption at runtime.
    Cheers
    Phillip

  • Interested in Performance Difference Between Different SL Install Methods?

    Go here: http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=10077299&#10077299.

    Run a benchmark for your specific case??
    Yes. If you are to implement such an operation, try both, using your actual data, and see which performs best. I can't speak to this particular case, but very often to performance questions is
    it depends. So the only way to find out when you are interested for a specific case is to test. And keep in mind that next time it could be different.
    Erland Sommarskog, SQL Server MVP, [email protected]

Maybe you are looking for

  • ITunes won't open because it has an issue w/ Quick Time...

    I went to use my new iPod Shuffle, and I got the above error message. I tried to uninstall and re-install quick-time, as recommended, but each time I do, it claims that an instillation of quick-time is already running. It goes on to say that I should

  • HELP REQUIRED in ALV

    I am using function module ALV. I need a add a box on the side which comes in ALV. Second i need to control it such that the person can either select one record or mutilple. I know for getting the box there is a field in the layout. Help in this rega

  • Why is the community filtering/search so broken

    Why  is filtering/search in the Visual Studio community so broken?    If I try to limit the scope of my question ("task board") to one forum ("Visual Studio Online") - it seems to be impossible to do: If I enter "task board" in the right hand search

  • Inventory - Snapshot Scenario

    Hi, I have the data model inventory with detail of the 0CALMONTH in the cube. I have read from the document SAP the scenario Snapshot and I wondered me: 1) when I extract from 2LIS_03_BF and by 2LIS_03_UM every day (the data in BW are up to the prece

  • Help with a list of PrintStreams! Again :D

    So basically im creating a list of PrintStreams and would then like to println something to all of them at once. What I have doesent work because my new PrintStream wont accept a printstream from the list :/ Not sure what to do. Help GREATLY apprecia