Organiser Too Slow - Lightroom 3 as Alternative?

I purchased Elements 9 last year, and one of the things I've always struggled with is the slow Organiser speed. From the time I click the organiser button on the splash screen to the time that Organiser becomes responsive to any mouse clicks (it's showing the hourglass during this time) is a whopping 4 1/2 minutes. Worse, I can't even task swap to other applications (eg Firefox which is already running) while Organiser is starting. IMHO, that's pretty unacceptable, and I'd like to find if there's something fundamentally wrong. I don't have older versions of Elements loaded, and I have loaded updates for 9.0.3.
My notebook is a Dell Latitude D830, with a Intel Core2 T7500 CPU, 3 Gb Ram. Win XP SP3. Plenty of free hard disk available on 2 partitions. No network access to photo files - all stored locally on HDD.
I've had a browse around this forum and other forums which have comments about Organiser speed, and there seems to be no easy fix.
So if there's no easy fix, does anyone have any experience using Lightroom as an alternative to Organiser? Does it integrate well with Elements? I'd like as detailed an answer as possible - I don't want to shell out more of my hard earned dosh on LR3 if it's not going to provide the functionality and ease of use that Organiser should.

You will definitely like Lightroom if you shoot in raw. I rarely have to use PSE, except for the more artistic stuff and for adding text etc. But then it’s so easy (Ctr+E from Lightroom Library) to export a PSD or tif from the raw file which includes all the adjustments already made in Lightroom.
Lightroom 4 can’t be that far off and that would be a good time to purchase if you are also planning to upgrade your computer. In the meantime why not download the 30 day free trial and see if you like the program.
By the way there is a separate Lightroom forum if you have any more questions.
http://forums.adobe.com/community/lightroom

Similar Messages

Count is too slow?Any alternatives?

Query is taking forever.The data is against 11 million records.And encountered an error about metadata entry.
Any idea?
Message was edited by:
JAUS

0. And encountered an error about metadata entry.
What error?
1. What Platform is this on?
2. What version of Oracle is this?
3. How is the data configured?
Is it partitioned?
If so are you using a partitioned spatial index?
4. Is there a high level of accuracy? IE many decimal places?
5. Define slow? What is acceptable

Lightroom 2.4 Is Too Slow To Use As A Professional Product

Hello -
I would like to know how to get Lightroom to respond in less than 4-8 seconds for almost any task.
From returning to Grid mode (4.5 seconds) to adjusting a routine crop and angle (5-7 seconds per move, 60-90 seconds total) to simply shift-selecting three to fifty photos (4-9 seconds) no matter what I do in Lightroom, it is worse that Photoshop 1.0 on a Mac Plus. Really.
Returning to Lightroom from another app - 7 seconds.
Getting the menus to drop down - 4 seconds.
My lightroom settings:
standard preview size: 1680
Quality: High
Discard 1:1: Never
write changes to XMP: off
Catalog: 127 mb on F drive (24 gig free)
Catalog: 13.5k photos, 95 gig on F drive
Cache: 6 gig on F drive
NVIDIA settings: performance over quality
My computer:
HP 8730 elitebook
4 gig ram
XP Pro, SP2
Proc: Core 2 Duo T9400, 2666 MHz (10 x 267)
DirectX 4.09.00.0904 (DirectX 9.0c)
Chipset: Cantiga PM45
Video: NVIDIA Quadro FX 3700M (1024 MB)
(2x) 250 gig 7200 rmp HD
Before anyone says to export to a new catalog and re-import, etc, use a smaller catalog, etc, be advised that I have done all of that. I have imported only 250 images to a new catalog, on a newly installed OS, with Lightroom as the ONLY application. Still it acts this sluggish.
I have scoured the boards for solutions, and having tried all the varied fixes to no avail, I really quite strongly feel that a person should not EVER be in the position or running some of the most powerful available hardware and STILL have to wait interminable seconds for Lightroom to respond.
This software, as it stands now on the PC platform (unless I am missing something quite obvous) is absolutely unusable in its present state.
Can someone from Adobe or a board guru please respond in kind to my request for help?

Photo_op8 wrote:
BradKaye wrote:
I'd have to agree with the subject of this 100%, even though I'm not experiencing anywhere near the levels of lag ellsworth is on any of my primary workhorses.
1st-Gen 17" MacBook Pro 2.4Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo with Hi-Rez Screen (about 2 years old)
1st-Gen MacPro (Dual Twin-Core 3Ghz, 3x, 10k-RPM 150GB Raptor RAID-0, partitioned to System/Scratch/Files (in that order) 16GB RAM...blah blah (about 2.2 years old)
3 week old MacPro 2x2.66 Quad-Core MacPro, 16GB RAM, Multiple Partitioned (System/Scratch/Files) Internal 4x-1.5TB RAID-0, 4x 1.5TB eSATA RAID-0, 2x NVIDIA GT 120's, 30" NEC 3090WQXi, 26" LaCie 526, 24" Apple LED Display
OS 10.5.8 on all machines.
Let me repeat-
Partitioning ONE drive to contain system files, application, cache, catalog and photos=SLOW.
It really doesn't matter that the drive is 7200 or 10k rpm if ALL items reside on the same drive. The MacPro has four bays. One drive for system and catalog, second for cache, third for photos=FAST.
Wow, I'm glad you repeated that, and used capitalized text so that I would be sure to understand.
Clearly, the benchmarks I have off of the various evolutions of my last 3, $10k computers must be in error. (single system disk, RAID-0 system disk, 10k RPM system disk, RAID-0 3x -10K rpm system disks, multiple scratch volumes on different drives, singular scratch volumes on RAIDed drives, tested via benchmark programs and application specific batch tests, etc.etc.)
More importantly as an issue of forum protocol, you didn't actually read my post.
Brad Kaye wrote:
I partition about 10% of the outside of a drive as separate and put the information I need to get to most quickly which tends to be the system folder then scratch disk in a another separate partition and then I leave the rest on that drive as gobs of 'B' space for media and other crap files, reserving the first 10%-30% of the outside of a different drive (or RAID-0 sets) for my files and Lightroom catalogs.
I'm throwing 370 mb/sec between two individual sets of 4 drive RAID-0 sets. Single 7200rpm drives sling about 80 mb/sec. My drive arrangement isn't the reason Lightroom IS TOO SLOW TO USE AS A PROFESSIONAL PRODUCT.
Also, since I referenced and linked the former software engineer turned photo FREAK in my post, whose blog I started reading last year corroborating the decisions I've made in my previous system setups with immaculate documentation and testing procedure your response even more seems like the entire reason I rarely bother posting in community forums. You seem to be here to spout, not to contribute and learn.
Take a look at all of the info contained here: (I've already read it, all of it, and more)
Diglloyd Mac Performance Guide
and if you still think I'm wrong, lets have an informed debate about it. Really.
Otherwise, lets please keep this topic moving forward with the issues Adobe needs to address next to make Lightroom a better product for professional photographers, and specifically, help out ellsworth999 who started this topic, who seems to have a big helping of problems on his plate. I can't speak to him directly of his problems since I'm not using the Windows version of the software.

Google Maps in Lightroom too slow

Hello,
I have the problem that the display velocity of the maps in Lightroom is very slow. When i am downloading the same map with a browser it is fast, so it couldn't be a question of the dan width of my internet provider.
Has anyone the same problems?
I am using Mac OS 10.9 and LR 5.7
Hagen

Sorry, yes i Have Yosemite
Hagen
Von meinem iPhone gesendet
Am 01.12.2014 um 20:32 schrieb John R. Ellis <[email protected]>:
Google Maps in Lightroom too slow
created by John R. Ellis in Photoshop Lightroom - View the full discussion
Are you sure you have OS X 10.9 (Mavericks) and not 10.10 (Yosemite)? There is a widespread problem with LR Maps on OS X 10.10 (Yosemite):
Lightroom: Issue with Map module in OS X 10.10 (Yosemite)
Please repost in that thread, regardless of whether you have 10.9 or 10.10 (include your version of OS X, of course).
If the reply above answers your question, please take a moment to mark this answer as correct by visiting: https://forums.adobe.com/message/6975923#6975923 and clicking ‘Correct’ below the answer
Replies to this message go to everyone subscribed to this thread, not directly to the person who posted the message. To post a reply, either reply to this email or visit the message page:
Please note that the Adobe Forums do not accept email attachments. If you want to embed an image in your message please visit the thread in the forum and click the camera icon: https://forums.adobe.com/message/6975923#6975923
To unsubscribe from this thread, please visit the message page at , click "Following" at the top right, & "Stop Following"
Start a new discussion in Photoshop Lightroom by email or at Adobe Community
For more information about maintaining your forum email notifications please go to https://forums.adobe.com/thread/1516624.

Lightroom 4 - Far too slow!!

I have just spent 4 hours using Lightroom 4 to adjust 600 images for one of my clients. If I had used Lightroom 3 it would have taken half the time. Sorry to say that in it's present form the software is far too slow to be considered for professional use. I hope that Adobe fix this before the software is officially launched.

Agreed... LR4b is not as speedy as LR3. In my own use, thus far, I haven't noticed too many enormous speed deficiencies... but I concur that it is slower overall.
My only point was that, given the assumption that the final release of LR4 will be refined to be mostly comparable in speed to LR3, there's no other wildcards that would affect LR's performance as high-volume post-processing software. Thus, there's no reason to fear that LR4 would be any less equipped for high-volume work than LR3. The workflow is still essentially the same... the only variable is the software's processing performance. If you "personally think that Adobe will fix the speed issue", then there's nothing to be worried about and no necessity to put the beta version through the paces with high-volume processing.
The whole point of the beta is to allow us to sample the new enhancements and provide feedback, not to put what is arguably "prototype" software into a rigorous production scenario. It's not refined for that scale of use yet. If the fundamental workflow of LR4 represented a massive diversion from that of LR3, it would be a different story... but the two versions are fundamentally the same and there's no reason that our workflow would take significantly longer with the final release of LR4.
As far as wanting a "well sorted base software" and foregoing geo-tagging video and what not, I'm not really sure what you mean. Forego geo-tagging for what? I don't get it. But if your only hang-up with LR4b is the performance of the beta version (which is certain to improve by the final release), then it would seem that you like LR4, right?

I am having trouble with lightroom and photoshop being too slow.

Currently I am using LR 5.6 64bit andCS5 64 bit. Is the programs are running too slow because I am using 64 bit? If so, how do I get the other versions. I just started having this problem with the new upgrades.
Please if anyone knows what to do please answer right away. I have jobs that I need to get out.

Thank you both for replying. My processor is 3.2 Ghz. Ram 8gig 64 bit operating. Size of files are 29.6m
available Ram is set to 7170 range in MB i have set to 5019. I have the sync set to sync everything.
When I am importing into lightroom a new scan card, Raw, Canon D 5 Mark II raw. my Lightroom changes to DNG. It can take several minutes to edit. LR will spin quite a while when I try to look at a file in library or develop module after the files have been imported to lightroom. I have my preferences set to hold for 30 days so it should not take so long for files to refocus when I close lightroom and then reopen later. When I bring photo into photoshop, it sometimes it will not open if I have another file open in Photoshop. It takes 30 seconds for a file to open in photoshop from Lightroom.When I zoom in on a photo in LR it takes up to 30 seconds to focus.

Mac pro too slow to use, spinning ball, no finder response, only hard power off, installing system stalls at 18 minutes left.

mac pro too slow to use, spinning ball, no finder response, only hard power off, installing system stalls at 18 minutes left.
It is taking an hour to power up and mac apple logo appear onscreen. No finder controls or "clicks" are being recognized. Spinning beachball all the time.
Using hard power off and holding the mouse down, I was able to open the optical drive and then restart with "c" and ask the dvd to reinstall the system, but it has stalled before finishing the installation.
This happened about 4 days ago, first it started responding slowly, and then it just keeps spinning the beachball. I can't find hardware test. I did run etrecheck, it did not have any error messages, but I can't copy or move the data anywhere.... I am not able to access the mac pro with another machine, and now I am stuck in install freeze, so I can't copy etrecheck by hand onto a piece of paper.
Without being able to finish a reinstall, what can I try?
After it got bad, and before it got REALLY bad, I managed to repair permissions, but it took a long time. Most of a day. When I restarted from that, things were only worse.
Mac Pro 1,1 , 11 GB ram, 7300, 5TB hard drives, OS 10.6.8, the drive containing the system folder is/was 700 used, 290 free. While I could get commands to respond, I put Activity monitor on the desktop and watched it. System memory was 3.31 GB used, about 7 free, and some wired. No app was using a huge amount.
what should I try next? I put a bid on a new/old machine so that I could move the 4 hard drives over.

Thank you for all your suggestions. Please correct me as I articulate this.
I have three versions( 5, 6, CC) of the Adobe Master Collection which I keep active for different clients. I have final cut and motion. I have Office 365. I have a collection of graphic apps that are individually not too big but in all, my app folder is 65GB and my bootcamp partition is 61GB. I can't fit all this on 120 ssd and a 256 will be full once I install, correct? drives should be half open?
Somehow I did not make it clear enough that I was trying to copy onto a 2TB drive I had just initiallized in order to try and save files from my startup drive. I don't use time machine. I take a day or a few days worth of documents and physically move them to another drive at night. If a series is finished I make two dvd's as well. The second black drive that was failing was the drive I moved my backup documents onto. At no point was I trying to backup onto the failing drives. I was trying to copy off both of them onto the other two drives, a third aux backup that has been there for a while, and a newish 2 TB which I designated as the startup drive when all this trouble started.
I wondered if there were any good techniques for trying to get the data off the failing drive. Thanks for the suggestion of Data Rescue 3. I don't have it yet, but I will try it as soon as I get it. I was never trying to repair in place.
I am very interested in getting a pci bracket and an ssd, but I may wait until I can afford the larger one. If I get an older bracket that is compatible with my old mac pro 1,1 , I'd like to be able to move it to a mac pro 3,1 if I get one. Will the larger ssd drives be compatible with the sata in a pci bracket that can work in my mac pro 1,1 ? sata 2 versus something else? If 240 or 256 is my size limit, how much more than my 65 and 61 GB partitions can I put on there? How much of a scratch disc can I make if I leave another 39 GB of headroom on my bootcamp partition? I'm filling 165 GB without making any allowance for temp files.
You have said that 120 is enough for any system. I think I must be misunderstanding something. Are you saying that assuming that most people run office and photoshop and maybe lightroom?
I have and use 4 HDD in this machine, mostly for document storage in two places.
I took out all but the group of 2GB ram chips I bought a year and a half ago. The old ram had passed the hardware test the last time I had access to the hardware test. Two black drives failed, one was a year old and one was a year and a half old, and that it may have been exacerbated by the heat wave. I don't know why the video and the monitor were affected save that the startup drive was failing. I am trying to replace the card.
With all this said, I am also looking at a used mac pro 3,1 with a better video card since a newer machine will likley be compatible through another OS upgrade. If a machine costs only a little more than a new card, it might be a better way to go.
I don't have any sources that offer an ssd for 100. ( of a size that is useful)
How large is your application folder?

CS_BOM_EXPL_MAT_V2 is too slow!

We are using FM CS_BOM_EXPL_MAT_V2 in a report program that needs a fully exploded material BOM for many materials. Users have long complained that it runs too slow. We have identified this FM as the bottleneck. Is there an alternative material BOM explosion FM or some trick to make it run faster?
Here is the calling code:
CALL FUNCTION 'CS_BOM_EXPL_MAT_V2'
       EXPORTING
*         FTREL                 = ' '
*         ALTVO                 = ' '
*         AUFSW                 = ' '
*         AUMGB                 = ' '
*         aumng                 = 0
*         AUSKZ                 = ' '
*         AMIND                 = ' '
*         BAGRP                 = ' '
*         BEIKZ                 = ' '
*         BESSL                 = ' '
*         BGIXO                 = ' '
*         BREMS                 = ' '
           capid                 = pm_capid
*        cospr                 = ' '
*         cuobj                 = 000000000000000
*        cuols                 = ' '
           datuv                 = pm_datuv
*        delnl                 = ' '
*        ehndl                 = ' '
*         emeng                 = 0
*        erskz                 = ' '
*        erssl                 = ' '
*        fbstp                 = ' ' "Keine Auflsg. bei F
*        ksbvo                 = ' '
*        mbwls                 = ' '
           mktls                 = 'X' "Kurztext lesen
*        mdmps                 = ' '
           mehrs                 = 'X' "Mehrstufige Auflösung
*        mkmat                 = ' '
*        mmaps                 = ' '
*        splww                 = ' '
*        mmory                 = ' '
            mtnrv                 = t_selections-matnr
            postp                 = 'L'
*         RNDKZ                 = ' '
*         RVREL                 = ' '
*         SANFR                 = ' '
*         SANIN                 = ' '
*         SANKA                 = ' '
*         SANKO                 = ' '
*         SANVS                 = ' '
*         SCHGT                 = ' '
*         STKKZ                 = ' '
            stlal                 = pm_stlal
            stlan                 = pm_stlan
            werks                 = p_werks
*        mdnot                 = ' '
*        panot                 = ' '
*        verid                 = ' '
      IMPORTING
           topmat                = selpool   "Info zum Top-Material
*        dstst                 =
       TABLES
            stb                   = stb       "Enthält Positionsdaten
            matcat                = matcat    "Enthält Baugruppendaten
       EXCEPTIONS
            alt_not_found         = 1
            call_invalid          = 2
            material_not_found    = 3
            missing_authorization = 4
            no_bom_found          = 5
            no_plant_data         = 6
            no_suitable_bom_found = 7
            conversion_error      = 8
            OTHERS                = 9.
Edited by: Larry Browning on Jul 14, 2011 11:08 AM

Hi Rob and Larry,
I am also using FM CS_BOM_EXPL_MAT_V2 in a report program. The requirement is exactly similar to Larry's. We fully explode material BOM for many materials. Users feel that it is running very slow. This is the FM that is taking the maximum time in the program run.
I am looking for some performance tuning technique or any other option that may help remove this issue. Is there any alternative to this FM...
Below is my code:
        CALL FUNCTION 'CS_BOM_EXPL_MAT_V2'
         EXPORTING
           capid                       = 'PP01'
           datuv                       = sy-datum
           mehrs                       = 'X'
           mtnrv                       = ls_mast-matnr
           stlal                       = ls_mast-stlal
           stlan                       = ls_mast-stlan
           werks                       = ls_mast-werks
         IMPORTING
           topmat                      = ls_topmat
*          DSTST                       =
         TABLES
           stb                         = lt_stb
*          MATCAT                      =
         EXCEPTIONS
           alt_not_found               = 1
           call_invalid                = 2
           material_not_found          = 3
           missing_authorization       = 4
           no_bom_found                = 5
           no_plant_data               = 6
           no_suitable_bom_found       = 7
           conversion_error            = 8
           OTHERS                      = 9.
Thanks
Rakesh

Nokia 5610 Bluetooth too slow!!!

My Nokia 5610 XpressMusic phone's Bluetooth is working too slow. It takes up to 3-4 minutes to transfer a files 2 megabytes in size. WHY???!!!
3310 >>> 8250 >>> 3120 >>> 6070 >>> 5300 XpressMusic >>> 6120 Classic >>> 5800 XpressMusic

It sounds your phone needs a firmware upgrade.
You can find the one nearest to you at the Store Locator
Alternatively, you can try a reset of your phone by pressing *#7370#.
CAUTION: This will erase all data on your phone.
My posts are my opinion and in no way the direct views of Nokia.
If my posts are helpful, please give me some KUDOS using the green star on the left.

Zepto too slow?

I got a Zepto 6625WD laptop (core 2 duo 2,4GHz, 2gb ram, 120GB 7200rpm) and I'm trying to run lightroom 2.0 beta but it isn't workable imo because it's way too slow! Scrolling through my images is jerky and a simple thing like straightening a photo takes way too long!
This is the output of the system info window in lightroom:
Lightroom version: 2.0 Beta [439142 Beta 1]
Operating system: Microsoft Windows XP Professional Service Pack 3, v.3264 (Build 2600)
Version: 5.1 [2600]
Application architecture: x86
System architecture: x86
Physical processor count: 2
Processor speed: 2.3 GHz
Built-in memory: 2046 MB
Real memory available to Lightroom: 716.8 MB
Real memory used by Lightroom: 183 MB (25.5%)
Virtual memory used by Lightroom: 215.8 MB
Memory cache size: 106.6 MB
Application folder: C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Lightroom 2 Beta
Library Path: C:\Documents and Settings\r\My Documents\My Pictures\Silvertone\Lightroom Catalog.lrcat
A friend of mine has a way older toshiba (1,5GHz single core, 2gb ram), and it runs much better on his laptop!
I have about 2200 photo's in my catalog. I optimized the catalog and rendered all 1:1 and standard sized previews. Auto write changes to xmp is ticked off...
How can this be? Any solutions?

thanks for the advice... I did the things that are described there but no luck, still the same!
I then followed the guidelines on this site: http://www.lightroomforums.net/showthread.php?t=2137
This seemed promissing but the performance didn't improve significantly, still jerky scrolling!
I tried to install different kind of drivers but they all had the same performance...
If I put my color quality to 16bit, my gpu to performance and all other quality stuff to the minimum, then lightroom is faster but still not fast enough imo (and 16bit color really sucks)!
I now deleted my catalog and imported 70photo's, still the same so the size of the catalog is not the problem.

CFDIRECTORY tag too slow.

Cfdirectory Tag is Too slow when using data from the Shared
Drive using UNC for the directory attribute in the tag, it works OK
when using the same data on the local drive on the server.
Usage:
ShowDir is \\plsw1681\Nastidata\
URL.SortBy is DateLastModified DESC
<cfdirectory directory = #ShowDir#
name = "ReportDir"
sort = "#URL.SortBy#" >
Directory contains around 5000 files with 35kb as size of
each file. It takes 12 seconds if the directory is local on the
server, but takes forever when used on the shared drive.
If the directory contains 170 files it took 1 sec on the
local drive and around 7 seconds on the Shared Drive.
Is there any alternative to get the same functionality of the
cfdirectory tag with lesser execution time when using the shared
drive???.

Try increasing the heap size:
1. Close JSC if running.
2. Open ide.cfg located in ...\sun\Creator\bin.
3. Create a backup of ide.cfg in case...
4. Edit the following line:
-J-Xms64m -J-Xmx96m or so.
5. Replace with (say):
-J-Xms128m -J-Xmx128m
or
-J-Xms128m -J-Xmx160m
6. Save changes
6. Restart JSC - It should run faster.
Cheers

RECORDING ERROR MESSAGE-'DISC TOO SLOW'

Every once and a while after I have recorded around 12+ tracks, I get a "Disc too slow" message with a black block at the end of the recording. The black block when played back is just a loud noise. What is this and what setting might I have wrong. I have the new IMac 27" with quad cores. The cores meter is barely moving and I don't hardly have any processors on. HELP.

sand box wrote:
Erik.......do you feel it is better to record direct to my external HD or the Imac HD?
External. IF it is Firewire. USB is less suitable, but it'll do too. The startup disk is also busy handling RAM for virtual memory, so it is doubly stressed when recording to it, and will 'refuse' to record, or drop out, or say "disk too slow" sooner.
What are the best settings for buffer and the other recording parameters?
Depends on your machine; rule of thumb: keep it as low as possible when recording for minimum latency (32, 64 or 128 or 256), and set it higher when playing back, (256-1024) to avoid "system overload".
The best recording format imo is 24 bit/44.1 KHz (or 48 KHz). If you record 10+ tracks that are all subtle acoustic recordings, it may ever so slighly improve sound/mix quality to go with 24/96KHz, but that will also double the overhead for the CPU. And imo the difference even then is hardly perceptible, save for the most highly trained professional ears.
I record basic rock with 16 tracks or less and not overly complicated effects. Also I still don't understand what "flattening" of a track means. Thanx.
Okay, so 24/44.1 is enough for that. Flattening a track means that you make a new audio file (solo the track, and bounce) that includes the plugin effects you applied to it. It is an (old fashioned) way of freeing up CPU (because you can switch off the plugins afterwards and use the 'flattened' audio file).
Freezing provides a better alternative for freeing up CPU though. Look it up in the manual, it is a simple and effective feature.
regards, Erik.

Application running too slow on sun T5440 but run normal on sun M3000

Hi all,
I have application running on sun server T5440 4x8x1.4 GHz, 64 GB RAM, application running very slow though load average too low. when I install my application on another server SUN M3000 (One CPU 1x8x2.5GHz, 8GB RAM), application run smoothly.
Here is my server T5440 info:
Code:
bash-3.00# uname -a
SunOS 5.10 Generic_142909-17 sun4v sparc SUNW,T5440
Psrinfo -pv
Code:
bash-3.00# psrinfo -pv
The physical processor has 64 virtual processors (0-63)
UltraSPARC-T2+ (chipid 0, clock 1414 MHz)
The physical processor has 64 virtual processors (64-127)
UltraSPARC-T2+ (chipid 1, clock 1414 MHz)
The physical processor has 64 virtual processors (128-191)
UltraSPARC-T2+ (chipid 2, clock 1414 MHz)
The physical processor has 64 virtual processors (192-255)
UltraSPARC-T2+ (chipid 3, clock 1414 MHz)
/etc/system
Code:
set semsys:seminfo_semopm=10000
set semsys:seminfo_semmsl=10000
set semsys:seminfo_semmni=1024
set max_nprocs=50000
set msgsys:msginfo_msgmnb=2097152
set msgsys:msginfo_msgmni=2560
set msgsys:msginfo_msgtql=2560
set shmsys:shminfo_shmmax=1073741824
set shmsys:shminfo_shmmni=1000
set rlim_fd_cur=10000
Ipcs
Code:
bash-3.00# ipcs -a
IPC status from as of Wed Jun 13 12:31:01 ICT 2012
T ID KEY MODE OWNER GROUP CREATOR CGROUP CBYTES QNUM QBYTES LSPID LRPID STIME RTIME CTIME
Message Queues:
q 62 0x1388 --rw-rw-rw- topx topx topx topx 0 0 2097152 0 0 no-entry no-entry 8:36:22
q 61 0x1387 --rw-rw-rw- topx topx topx topx 0 0 2097152 0 0 no-entry no-entry 8:36:22
q 60 0x1318 --rw-rw-rw- topx topx topx topx 0 0 2097152 0 0 no-entry no-entry 8:36:22
q 59 0x12a9 --rw-rw-rw- topx topx topx topx 0 0 2097152 9069 9071 10:25:38 10:25:38 8:36:22
q 58 0x100f --rw-rw-rw- topx topx topx topx 0 0 2097152 9069 9070 10:06:16 10:06:16 8:36:22
q 57 0xfa0 -Rrw-rw-rw- topx topx topx topx 0 0 2097152 9071 9069 10:25:38 10:25:38 8:36:22
q 56 0xf30 --rw-rw-rw- topx topx topx topx 0 0 2097152 0 0 no-entry no-entry 8:36:20
q 55 0xc27 -Rrw-rw-rw- topx topx topx topx 0 0 2097152 0 0 no-entry no-entry 8:28:14
q 54 0xbb8 -Rrw-rw-rw- topx topx topx topx 0 0 2097152 172 9066 10:47:08 10:47:08 8:28:14
T ID KEY MODE OWNER GROUP CREATOR CGROUP NATTCH SEGSZ CPID LPID ATIME DTIME CTIME
Shared Memory:
T ID KEY MODE OWNER GROUP CREATOR CGROUP NSEMS OTIME CTIME
Semaphores:
s 104 0x9c4 --ra-ra-ra- topx topx topx topx 3 12:31:00 8:36:20
s 103 0xa8c --ra-ra-ra- topx topx topx topx 1 8:36:20 8:36:20
s 102 0xd48 --ra-ra-ra- topx topx topx topx 1 8:36:20 8:36:20
s 101 0xce4 --ra-ra-ra- topx topx topx topx 1 8:36:20 8:36:20
s 100 0x26de --ra-ra-ra- topx topx topx topx 8 10:19:34 8:28:14
s 99 0xc1c --ra-ra-ra- topx topx topx topx 1 8:36:20 8:28:14
s 98 0xbb8 --ra-ra-ra- topx topx topx topx 1 8:43:50 8:28:14
s 97 0xaf0 --ra-ra-ra- topx topx topx topx 500 8:36:20 8:28:14
s 96 0xa28 --ra-ra-ra- topx topx topx topx 500 8:36:20 8:28:14
s 95 0x7ee --ra-ra-ra- topx topx topx topx 1 8:36:20 8:28:14
s 94 0x7e4 --ra-ra-ra- topx topx topx topx 1001 8:36:20 8:28:14
s 93 0x7da --ra-ra-ra- topx topx topx topx 220 8:36:20 8:28:14
s 92 0x7d5 --ra-ra-ra- topx topx topx topx 200 12:05:15 8:28:14
s 91 0x7d0 --ra-ra-ra- topx topx topx topx 200 8:56:42 8:28:14
s 90 0xc80 --ra-ra-ra- topx topx topx topx 2 12:31:01 8:27:52 –a
Prstat
Code:
PID USERNAME SIZE RSS STATE PRI NICE TIME CPU PROCESS/NLWP
9202 topx 1460M 893M sleep 59 0 0:16:37 0.2% integrity_check/1
12455 root 3880K 3600K cpu65 59 0 0:00:00 0.0% prstat/1
9080 topx 142M 130M sleep 59 0 0:00:52 0.0% intf_resp_low/1
9125 topx 102M 78M sleep 59 0 0:00:36 0.0% interface_vsc/1
9121 topx 88M 80M sleep 59 0 0:00:32 0.0% interface_tcu/1
9120 topx 89M 80M sleep 59 0 0:00:29 0.0% interface_rcm/1
9124 topx 87M 78M sleep 59 0 0:00:29 0.0% baplie_merge_v2/1
9122 topx 86M 78M sleep 59 0 0:00:28 0.0% interface_eih/1
9115 topx 88M 77M sleep 59 0 0:00:33 0.0% intf_batch_even/1
9114 topx 88M 77M sleep 59 0 0:00:39 0.0% intf_event/1
9117 topx 87M 78M sleep 59 0 0:00:32 0.0% interface_bxy/1
9118 topx 86M 78M sleep 59 0 0:00:29 0.0% interface_ppm/1
NPROC USERNAME SWAP RSS MEMORY TIME CPU
41 topx 334M 2237M 3.4% 0:30:17 0.3%
43 root 186M 195M 0.3% 0:14:45 0.0%
1 noaccess 152M 136M 0.2% 0:04:00 0.0%
1 smmsp 3688K 11M 0.0% 0:00:04 0.0%
1 lp 1208K 3880K 0.0% 0:00:00 0.0%
6 daemon 7264K 9944K 0.0% 0:00:26 0.0%
Total: 93 processes, 259 lwps, load averages: 0.40, 0.39, 0.39
Prstat –mL
Code:
bash-3.00# prstat -mL
PID USERNAME USR SYS TRP TFL DFL LCK SLP LAT VCX ICX SCL SIG PROCESS/LWPID
9202 topx 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 99 0.0 2 0 5 0 integrity_ch/1
9080 topx 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 0.0 5 0 20 0 intf_resp_lo/1
9114 topx 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 0.0 13 0 66 0 intf_event/1
17282 root 0.1 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 0.0 20 1 324 0 prstat/1
9117 topx 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 0.0 10 1 70 0 interface_bx/1
9118 topx 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 0.0 10 1 70 0 interface_pp/1
9115 topx 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 0.0 15 0 80 0 intf_batch_e/1
9121 topx 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 0.0 10 0 70 0 interface_tc/1
9125 topx 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 0.0 10 0 70 0 interface_vs/1
9120 topx 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 0.0 10 0 70 0 interface_rc/1
9123 topx 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 0.0 10 0 70 0 interface_vs/1
9124 topx 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 0.0 10 1 70 0 baplie_merge/1
9122 topx 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 0.0 8 0 56 0 interface_ei/1
9119 topx 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 0.0 8 0 56 0 interface_cp/1
9204 topx 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 0.0 15 1 1K 0 sys_check/1
259 root 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 0.0 13 2 98 7 in.mpathd/1
1 root 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 0.0 3 0 99 3 init/1
1337 noaccess 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 0.0 100 0 100 0 java/14
140 root 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 0.0 19 0 114 0 nscd/851
Total: 90 processes, 256 lwps, load averages: 0.40, 0.40, 0.39
Vmstat
Code:
bash-3.00# vmstat 1 10
kthr memory page disk faults cpu
r b w swap free re mf pi po fr de sr m0 m1 m2 m3 in sy cs us sy id
0 0 0 87720712 60562856 173 645 199 44 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 886 2819 525 0 1 99
1 0 0 87563976 59743040 73 327 0 15 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 747 2831 439 0 1 99
0 0 0 87563656 59742808 61 306 0 15 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 770 2684 427 0 1 99
1 0 0 87563656 59742824 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 886 1302 525 0 1 99
1 0 0 87563656 59742816 62 305 0 15 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 722 2652 420 3 1 96
1 0 0 87563656 59742840 554 2777 0 139 139 0 0 0 0 0 0 959 9736 749 1 1 97
0 0 0 87563456 59742672 1155 5735 0 292 292 0 0 0 0 0 0 1113 17489 1145 1 3 96
1 0 0 87563656 59742840 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 845 1613 654 0 1 99
0 0 0 87563656 59742856 62 305 0 15 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 900 2647 526 0 1 99
0 0 0 87563656 59742856 62 304 0 15 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 683 2661 396 0 1 99
Mpstat
Code:
CPU minf mjf xcal intr ithr csw icsw migr smtx srw syscl usr sys wt idl
0 0 0 130 261 1 121 0 13 1 0 0 0 1 0 99
1 0 0 35 133 2 143 0 9 6 0 64 0 0 0 100
2 0 0 5 20 2 17 0 3 0 0 29 1 0 0 99
3 0 0 0 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100
4 0 0 3 14 0 15 0 2 2 0 13 0 0 0 100
73 0 0 474330 77 3 0 7 0 2 0 2596 67 33 0 0
73 0 0 487701 37 0 0 7 0 8 0 2670 66 34 0 0
73 0 0 476377 14 0 0 8 0 1 0 2610 66 34 0 0
78 0 0 473950 11 1 0 7 0 13 0 2593 67 33 0 0
78 0 0 480562 9 0 0 7 0 4 0 2630 66 34 0 0
79 0 0 320989 14 1 0 8 0 0 0 1766 77 23 0 0
79 0 0 479148 9 0 0 7 0 8 0 2622 66 34 0 0
79 0 0 479426 13 0 0 7 0 2 0 2622 67 33 0 0
79 0 0 488949 9 0 0 8 0 13 0 2678 66 34 0 0
64 0 0 482229 15 2 0 8 0 7 0 2638 65 35 0 0
77 0 0 475571 14 1 0 7 0 8 0 2602 67 33 0 0
69 0 0 467795 22 1 0 7 0 40 0 2563 66 34 0 0
69 0 0 318623 9 1 0 7 0 8 0 1751 77 23 0 0
66 0 0 465179 92 1 2 8 0 62 0 2545 66 34 0 0
When my application running, some of CPU have IDLE state = 0 and hold the CPU while another CPU have IDLE state 100. I think this is my bottleneck but I cannot find any solution for solve that.
Netstat
Code:
bash-3.00# netstat -i
Name Mtu Net/Dest Address Ipkts Ierrs Opkts Oerrs Collis Queue
lo0 8232 loopback localhost 244022 0 244022 0 0 0
nxge0 1500 TOPX-01-DUMMY1 TOPX-01-DUMMY1 3594863 0 5801650 0 0 0
nxge1 1500 TOPX-01-DUMMY2 TOPX-01-DUMMY2 160954 0 151230 0 0 0
iostat
Code:
bash-3.00# iostat -xn
extended device statistics
r/s w/s kr/s kw/s wait actv wsvc_t asvc_t %w %b device
0.1 0.1 1.5 30.8 0.0 0.0 1.8 9.0 0 0 md/d0
0.0 0.1 0.8 30.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.9 0 0 md/d1
0.0 0.1 0.8 30.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.8 0 0 md/d2
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.2 0 0 md/d3
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.9 0 0 md/d4
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.4 0 0 md/d5
0.0 0.0 2.2 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.8 7.4 0 0 md/d6
0.0 0.0 1.1 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.5 0 0 md/d7
0.0 0.0 1.1 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.2 0 0 md/d8
0.0 0.1 0.4 0.6 0.0 0.0 7.6 10.0 0 0 md/d9
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.1 0 0 md/d10
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.8 0 0 md/d11
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 10.4 0 0 md/d12
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.5 0 0 md/d13
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.4 0 0 md/d14
0.1 0.5 2.1 32.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.9 0 0 c0t0d0
0.1 0.5 2.1 32.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.8 0 0 c0t1d0
0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0 c1t0d0
0.9 0.9 125.3 123.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 34.2 0 2 c4t600144F0CC00C29A00004D1E456F0003d0
0.3 0.7 20.7 53.9 0.0 0.0 0.2 8.2 0 0 c4t600144F0CC00C29A00004D1E43880001d0
0.1 0.2 50.7 111.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 59.1 0 1 c4t600144F0CC00C29A00004D1E453E0002d0
Please help me find the bottleneck of my T5440 server?Thanks so much for all your help.

Moderator Comment and Action:
@ O.P.,
You cross-posted this to at least two other forum web sites:
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/solaris-opensolaris-20/application-running-too-slow-on-sun-sparc-t5440-but-run-normal-on-sun-m3000-4175411155/
http://www.unix.com/solaris/189945-application-running-too-slow-sun-sparc-t5440-but-run-normal-sun-m3000.html
... and didn't think that was important enough to simply mention the fact.
Timestamps suggest that OTN was the last place you posted to.
Poor forum etiquette.
Why would anyone spend the time to try to give help that you have already received elsewhere? That's a waste of their time.
(Yes, you already received the suggestion to use Dtrace in one of those other sites.)
This thread is locked as irrelevant.

Java web start application runs too slow...

Hello,
I am new to Java Web Start. I have created a java web start application and when i enable web start from local Execution, then it works perfectly well. But when i upload it on server and then download the application, then it is too too slow...i mean it takes minutes to get the output on clicking some button....my jnlp file is as under:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="no"?>
<jnlp codebase="http://(web server code base)" href="launch.jnlp" spec="1.0+">
<information>
<title>ERD</title>
<vendor>Deepika Gohil</vendor>
<homepage href="http://appframework.dev.java.net"/>
<description>A simple java desktop application based on Swing Application Framework</description>
<description kind="short">ER Deign Tools</description>
</information>
<update check="always"/>
<security>
<all-permissions/>
</security>
<resources>
<j2se version="1.5+"/>
<jar href="ERD_1_2.jar" main="true"/>
<jar href="lib/appframework-1.0.3.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/swing-worker-1.1.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/jaxb-impl.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/jaxb-xjc.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/jaxb1-impl.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/activation.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/jaxb-api.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/jsr173_api.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/ant-contrib-1.0b3.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/jaxb-impl.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/jaxb-xjc.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/FastInfoset.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/gmbal-api-only.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/http.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/jaxws-rt.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/jaxws-tools.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/management-api.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/mimepull.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/policy.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/saaj-impl.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/stax-ex.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/streambuffer.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/woodstox.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/jaxws-api.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/jsr181-api.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/jsr250-api.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/saaj-api.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/activation.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/jaxb-api.jar"/>
<jar href="lib/jsr173_api.jar"/>
</resources>
<application-desc main-class="erd.screen1">
</application-desc>
</jnlp>
I dont understand the reason. Could you please help me out.
Thank you,
Deepika Gohil.

Check your web server's access logs to see how many requests web start is sending for each jar. After you've loaded the application the first time, for each subsequent launch, if you've got everything configured right, you should only see requests for the JNLP file and maybe some gifs because web start should load everything else out of the cache (if you're using the version-based download protocol). Or if you're using the basic download protocol, then you might see requests for each jar file, but even in this case, if your web server is prepared to evaluate the last-updated attribute for each jar request and for jars that have not changed, respond with no actual payload and a header value of Not-Modified, then that should run almost as fast.
You might also want to consider changing the "check" attribute of the "update" element from "always" to "background" for a couple of reasons. It should allow your app to start sooner (but this means that you might have to launch once or twice after an update is applied to the web server before the update shows up on the workstation). Also, my impression is that "always" is broken and prevents web start from ever checking to see if your jnlp file has been updated if you launch your app from a web start shortcut - launching from a browser is less likely to have this problem, depending on how often your browser is configured to check for updated resources.

Please Help! All Sounds in Classic are too slow now!

Something dreadful happened (wish I knew what) and now every sound that is played back by any Classic application is about 70% too slow.
No matter if it is a Classic game like Unreal (I), Deus Ex, AvP for OS9 (the OSX version works fine), or Quicktime 6, or any other given Classic application. The only sounds that appear normal are the Platinum system sounds.
I don't know which files affect Classic sound playback or where they are located. Can't imagine what could cause that particular problem.
Hope someone could help...
Many thanks in advance
M:A:
PowerMac G5 2x2 GHz Mac OS X (10.4.6) 1.5 GB RAM, standard sound card (TI-TAS3004)
PowerMac G5 2x2

Sorry, didnt get an email notification, so I just checked the thread.
Starting and quitting Garage Band actually helped!
(Imagine listening to the meaningful dialogues in "Deus Ex" spoken with Sesame Street's Cookie Monster voice. Aaaaannnd reeealllly sllloowwww. Doesn't quite capture the mood...)
Do you have an explanation why Garage Band should affect Classic sound output?
Thanks a lot,
Martin

Organiser Too Slow - Lightroom 3 as Alternative?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for