Lightroom 4 performance issues

Hello,
Months ago I switched from Aperture 3 to Lightroom 3 and quickly fell in love with the program.
I switched due to constant freezing and crashes in Aperture 3. I invested time and money to learn Lightroom 3. Performance in Lightroom 3 was superb. Anything I would do with regards to any type of adjustment gave instant results on the screen. Program never crashed or froze onec. Quite frankly, I was shocked in a very positive way.
This was on Macbook Pro i5, 8GB RAM, Hi Res Antiglare screen with Snow Leopard.
I purchased Lightroom 4. I did a clean install of OSX Lion and, clean install of LR4. New catalogs, no importing of anything. LR 4 is sooo slow. It works just like Aperture 3 worked, the  precise reason that made me dump it.
The longer LR4 is opened, the slower it becomes. The more adjustments are applied, the slower it becomes. I will use brush and I have to wait to see results. I can't use brush. It takes me 15-30 min to brush small part of the image. I will slide adjustments and wait. I will click on crop tool and wait, wait, wait. I really love this program but I just can't work like that.
Would anyone share some light or advice on what could be done, on what is going on?
Thank you.

Rob,
I am working with NEF files and have done so in LR3. I understand from some reading that one of the benefits from converting files to DNG is that they are faster to work with. So I just copied one of my NEF as DNG and I have been working on it for about 15 minutes applying brush after brush and other adjustments to see if LR4 will slow down. Thus far it has been incredibly faster. I will continue to work on this one image and maybe convert few more to DNG to test but do you think that there might be some issue with NEF format? Another bizzare thing I just noticed is that when I open NEF image, my memory quickly goes up to over 3GB and that's not even during applying adjustments. Working now with DNG, memory is just around 1.3 GB. WHAT IS GOING ON HERE???
I wonder what type of files are other LR4 users that are reporing performance issues working with.
Please share your thoughts.
Thank you.

Similar Messages

  • Lightroom 4 performance issues solved!

    Buy or build a new computer - (intel i7 3770K or similiar) overclock to 4ghz, 16GB ram, solid state drive for boot and programs
    Install only windows, lightroom, photoshop, and windows security on computer.
    Put computer power management into high power mode (keeps the processor prepped at all times)
    turn off all development modules except basic and tone curve.. (especially evil histogram)
    This has gotten me almost lag free performance while editing in lightroom.... and I say almost because it's still not pefect . With this setup I can finally crop photos without having to wait a second or more for the draw tool to become responsive... but not in full screen mode of course.
    By the way, I think that these types of contortions are ridiculous since I used to have lag free editing in adobe camera raw on a computer with 1/16 the hardware specs (and running vista!). However the workflow is so much better in lightroom than any other option that I'm willing to bend over backwards to make it work.  So, adobe, here is your notice... We're all looking for something better.

    JimHess wrote:
    that's just what I think.
    Me too. From best I can tell, it's karma, luck, will o' th' gods...
    Works unencumbered on some moderately-powered machines, slow-as-molasses on some high powered machines, or vice versa - both Windows & Mac.
    That said, rebuilding computer forces new drivers for system devices, and re-initializes a bunch of stuff - which may contribute to performance.
    Reminder: abnormally poor performance occurs when Lr is getting held up, instead of doing it's thing - whether that happens or not is dependent on a lot of factors... - point being, if Lr4 is operating normally (meaning efficiently / unencumbered) on 2 computers, then it'll be faster on the faster machine of course, but the big trick is taking away the hurdles...
    Congrats to OP for taking the initiative to improve his/her situation .
    Interesting tidbit: My Lr performance often goes south when my internet connection drops out - which it does far too often where I live and do most of my work from. Why? I have no idea, but if I had to guess I'd say Lr is using some library that does some system call, which gets hung up when it had an internet connection but lost it - such is not handled gracefully, memory is not released, and it keeps happening..., or something like that. I know some folks problems were due to having wonky DVDs in their drive, or USB phones connected, or monitor cal devices... - doesn't take much, and not everybody will have the same problem due to the same thing...
    Even though my luck has been relatively good w/Lr4, I do hope Adobe takes a serious look at how they're doing things...
    R

  • Adobe Lightroom, Drobo performance issue.

    Setup: MacPro 2.8GHz (early 2008), 12GB ram (properly interleaved), OS 10.6.3, 4 bay FW800 Drobo
    My MacPro just went through a thorough Apple Hardware Test: Clear
    When I run the current version of Adobe Lightroom it has recently run extremely slow. Historically, I've put my catalog files on my Drobo; however, recently even a new empty catalog file that has virtually nothing in it seems to take substantially longer (Lightroom states times that are 10 x's longer or more!)
    Any advice?

    Check Adobe's forums to see if there are any issues with Lightroom and 10.6.3.

  • Lightroom 5 performance issues

    How big is the Lightroom 5 program? My PC (2.66Mhz with 4MB RAM) is now really slow. Why?

    I'm having the exact same problem in LR5
    Selecting another picture and coming back usually fixes the problem.
    Windows 7 64-bit, Core I7 2600-K, 32GB RAM, NVidia Geforce GTX 580 - driver version 320.49 WHQL

  • Lightroom 5 performance issue

    when I open a photo, I need to wait for about a 2-3 seconds, then the photo became sharp.
    When I use spot healing brush, the brush seems frozen and hard for me to move.
    My system config:
    window 8
    8 g ram
    Core i5
    compared with lightroom 4, lightroom 5 speed is slow.

    Can you share details of System info from Lightroom?
    Open Lightroom. Choose Help > System Info.

  • Lightroom 4 performance

    Is it ok to have Lightroom 3 and Lightroom 4 installed on my computer at the same time or should I uninstall lightroom 3?  Does it pose a performance issue?  Lightroom 4 is so slow on my computer.

    Thank you for responding!  Should I have removed the Beta version before I
    installed LR4?
    This is what my system has in it although I do not have a graphics card.  Would
    it make a difference?
    Lightroom version: 4.1
    Operating system: Windows Vista Professional Service Pack 2 (Build 6002)
    Version: 6.0
    Application architecture: x86
    System architecture: x86
    Physical processor count: 2
    Processor speed: 3.2 GHz
    Built-in memory: 3317.3 MB
    Real memory available to Lightroom: 716.8 MB
    Real memory used by Lightroom: 475.8 MB (66.3%)
    Virtual memory used by Lightroom: 493.0 MB
    Memory cache size: 0.0 MB
    System DPI setting: 96 DPI
    Desktop composition enabled: Yes
    Displays: 1) 1280x1024
    Application folder: C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4.1
    Library Path: C:\Users\John\Pictures\Lightroom 4 Beta\Lightroom 4 Beta-2.lrcat
    Settings Folder: C:\Users\John\AppData\Roaming\Adobe\Lightroom
    Adapter #1: Vendor : 8086
                Device : 2772
                Subsystem : 544e8086
                Revision : 2
                Video Memory : 0
    AudioDeviceIOBlockSize: 1024
    AudioDeviceName: Speakers/HP (IDT High Definition Audio CODEC)
    AudioDeviceNumberOfChannels: 2
    AudioDeviceSampleRate: 44100
    Build: Uninitialized
    Direct2DEnabled: true
    Direct2DPresent: true
    OGLEnabled: false
    OGLPresent: false

  • Yet another Lightroom 3 Performance thread

    I have read other posts on this topic, although I will admit it was not an exhaustive search.  So, apologies if this topic has been covered already.
    Like many others I noticed a performance hit with Lr3.  I also noticed that hit seemed to get worse with every patch, including the latest 3.4 patch.  Things like cropping and adjusting sliders finally became so brutally painful I could not get my work done.
    What makes this potentially unique is my solution.  I went back through my Time Machine backup and restored the Lr3.0 executable file that I originally installed last year.  And, although performance is not what it once was, it was WAY better than the later patches.
    So what's going on here?  What's the point of patching Lr if its going to make the product perform like Nikon Capture?  I read somewhere a post that said there is a more sophisticated rendering process, which is great, I'm all for more sophisticated, but frankly, it seems to be counterproductive, especially since I don't see any real obvious benefit to it.  The pictures I produced with 3.0 are exactly the same quality as with 3.4.  Only I got them done way faster.
    So if you get to the point that the newer patches are interfering with your workflow, which of course runs counter to the whole point of Lightroom in the first place, I had reasonably good success going back to the old executable file, which presumably uses the older, but faster and plenty acceptable rendering process.
    Any news, observations, and advice will be appreciated. 

    I have a MacPro with a Quad Xeon, 5GB RAM.  I boot and run apps from a OCZ Agility 2 SSD with plenty of space. 
    I was partly motivated to upgrade to the SSD because of the growing performance issues in Lr.  My catalogs are stored on the SSD, and I did notice an increase in performance starting Lr and reading files.  The problems start when I process images.
    When I first started using Lr, I was able to zip through huge sets easily.  When processing images in Lr, generally I stick to White Balance adjustments, fills, and cropping.  The process at first was excellent.  I could do all the adjusting and cropping without any sort of delay loading or changing the image.
    My workflow involves importing DNG files produced with DxO Optics Pro.  I wonder if embedding the RAW image setting is causing the performance lag I am noticing when working with the images...

  • 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

Maybe you are looking for