Same Computers/Settings - Different Render Times

Hello, great and powerful Adobe Community. My coworker and I have identical machines (Dell Precision T7600 - Xeon 2GB, 32 GB RAM, NVIDIA Quadro K5000, Windows 64 bit OS), both running Adobe CS6. Our render set-up for After Effects is to pull source footage from the main HD (2 TB), render to a second HD (150GB), with a third HD (150GB) set up for cache, media cache, and database folders. Both machines are set up to render multiple frames simultaneously. However, for some reason his machine is taking ridiculously long to render. For the same file, my machine finishes rendering in about 2hrs, while his is showing an estimated time of 17 hours. When left to run overnight, his machine still hasn't finished the next morning and shows 60+ hrs remaining. This is a recent problem and his computer has had reasonable render times up until recently. Software is up to date across the board, no new software has been installed on either machine lately, and any updates required by our system admin would have been applied to both.
Other than checking that the above listed conditiions are identical between our two towers, I'm not sure where to look for the problem. Can anyone suggest a reason for his machine's poor performance? Any insight would be appreciated. My thanks in advance for your help.

I wouldn't call it a bug.
Besides, although the effects you use in all these comps might all be precisely the same, you didn't breathe a word whether the codec of the footage used in these comps is precisely the same... and codecs can make a big difference.
Sure, you may have rendered to the same codec. Did you START with source footage that's all the same codec? If not, you're not comparing apples to apples.

Similar Messages

Why does the same clip play differently each time I play it?

Playing a flash animation clip in Adobe Media Player plays differently each time I play it. I'm looking at animation we made that has a left to right move. Sometimes it plays smoothly, other times it stutters, but the stutters happen at different points each time I play it, and the amount of stuttering changes each time I play it. I'm trying to decide if the file is acceptable to post on the web, so I'm playing the same 34 second file from my hard drive, each time in succession, yet each play is different. Boy, if you can help me with this I would sure appreciate it, as it is driving me crazy. (The same thing happens on other flash players). And no, the file isn't haunted...

Hello and thank you for trying to help me out. When I click on the itunes icon on my desktop, it does the preparing to install.... on my laptop, when I click on the icon, itunes opens automatically. I really can't figure out why one does this and the other does not.
Apparently, I was not having trouble connecting to the itunes store like I thought. Many other people complain of the same problem I had---the connecting to the itunes store progress bar goes halfway, stops, and then all I see is a blank white page that says itunes store. Well, after playing around, and clicking on VIEW and SHOW sidebar browser, I was able to see the itunes store! Yay!! It was so simple, it was unreal that so many people are having the same problem I thought I was having, connecting, when all that was was a VIEW issue.
As far as my desktop doing the preparing to install, I don't get it. I have uninstalled itunes9 and redownloaded it, reinstalled it. Same problem. Preparing to install. No matter what itunes icon I click on, or even if I click ont he application itself from it's folder. Any ideas?
So just forget about my connection problem---it was not a problem after all. Yet one pc does preparing to install when the itunes icon is clicked on, and the other pc does not. Both are running windows vista home premium. One is a desktop, one a laptop. I can't figure it out.

Wildy different render times, same effects in comps

I have 30-40 comps all exactly the same except for length which varies from 30 sec -4min, most in the 45-90sec range. Keylight, a couple of masks, render to Avid DnxHD 175 w alpha.
Rendered all day/night in one batch. Nothing else running on the workstation.
Renders times range from 1 min to 2 hrs!! Seems unrelated to length of the comp. Random render lengths, e.g.:
1h47min
28min
21min
56min
3min
4min
1hr 26 min
34 min
20min
4min
etc.
Does this qulaify as a bug?
HP z820 2x 12core/ 32GB RAM -25GB assigned to AE, render from/to 2 internal Hitachi deskstar 7200 HDD. Multi Proc off.
AE CC 12.2.0.52
Thanks!
Pete O
Orlando

I wouldn't call it a bug.
Besides, although the effects you use in all these comps might all be precisely the same, you didn't breathe a word whether the codec of the footage used in these comps is precisely the same... and codecs can make a big difference.
Sure, you may have rendered to the same codec. Did you START with source footage that's all the same codec? If not, you're not comparing apples to apples.

Why same query takes different execution time in sql 2008

Hi!
With below query in SQL Server 2008 R2 when I change Book_ID to another value like '99000349' it takes very long time to execute while both result sets have same number of records!?
select Card_Serial,Asset_ID, Field_Name,Field_Value,Asset_Number,Field_ID,Book_ID from dbo.vw_InspectionReport where Book_ID='99000347'
I've test it more and more,A time I ran quickest one, or longest one first, restart Windows, but for some specific Book_ID values (although with same number of result set rows) it take multiple time slower than rest of Book_IDs.
Also showing state of the result set is different for these diffrent Book_IDs:
for fast ones it looks like below picture:
for slow ones it looks like below picture:
if you note, order of returned records are different!?
I'm waiting for your kindly reply!...

Do you see any changes if you add a hint to the query?
select Card_Serial,Asset_ID, Field_Name,Field_Value,Asset_Number,Field_ID,Book_ID from dbo.vw_InspectionReport where Book_ID='99000347OPTION(RECOMPILE)
Best Regards,Uri Dimant SQL Server MVP,
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/uri_dimant/
MS SQL optimization: MS SQL Development and Optimization
MS SQL Consulting:
Large scale of database and data cleansing
Remote DBA Services:
Improves MS SQL Database Performance
SQL Server Integration Services:
Business Intelligence

Performance issue, same range scan different execution times

Oracle 11gR1, queries run within seconds of each other.
I have 2 queries that are logically the same. Even the explain plans are very similar, except the second one reports an index range scan doing much more work than the first. The table is an IOT with deal_bucket_id and datetime as PK (in that order).
TKPROF output below:
select count(*) from deal_bucket_detail where deal_bucket_id
in
(815
,     816
,     817
,     818
,     997)
and datetime between to_date('01-JUL-08','dd-MON-rr') and to_date('01-JAN-09','dd-MON-rr')
call     count       cpu    elapsed       disk      query    current        rows
Parse        1      0.00       0.00          0          0          0           0
Execute      1      0.00       0.00          0          0          0           0
Fetch        2      0.79       2.24       2936       3551          0           1
total        4      0.79       2.24       2936       3551          0           1
Misses in library cache during parse: 1
Optimizer mode: ALL_ROWS
Parsing user id: 43
Rows     Row Source Operation
      1 SORT AGGREGATE (cr=3551 pr=2936 pw=2936 time=0 us)
1430928   FILTER (cr=3551 pr=2936 pw=2936 time=380920 us)
1430928    INLIST ITERATOR (cr=3551 pr=2936 pw=2936 time=372057 us)
1430928     INDEX RANGE SCAN PK_DEAL_BUCKET_DETAIL (cr=3551 pr=2936 pw=2936 time=8782 us cost=1203 size=4069596 card=339133)(object id 14199)
Elapsed times include waiting on following events:
Event waited on                             Times   Max. Wait Total Waited
----------------------------------------   Waited ---------- ------------
SQL*Net message to client                       2        0.00          0.00
db file sequential read                      2936        0.02          1.49
SQL*Net message from client                     2        0.00          0.00
select count(*) from deal_bucket_detail where deal_bucket_id
between 815 and 997
and datetime between to_date('01-JUL-08','dd-MON-rr') and to_date('01-JAN-09','dd-MON-rr')
call     count       cpu    elapsed       disk      query    current        rows
Parse        1      0.00       0.00          0          0          0           0
Execute      1      0.00       0.00          0          0          0           0
Fetch        2      3.70       8.86      29199      26986          0           1
total        4      3.70       8.86      29199      26986          0           1
Misses in library cache during parse: 1
Optimizer mode: ALL_ROWS
Parsing user id: 43
Rows     Row Source Operation
      1 SORT AGGREGATE (cr=26986 pr=29199 pw=29199 time=0 us)
1430928   FILTER (cr=26986 pr=29199 pw=29199 time=6986078 us)
1430928    INDEX RANGE SCAN PK_DEAL_BUCKET_DETAIL (cr=26986 pr=29199 pw=29199 time=6977063 us cost=45208 size=5195748 card=432979)(object id 14199)
Elapsed times include waiting on following events:
Event waited on                             Times   Max. Wait Total Waited
----------------------------------------   Waited ---------- ------------
SQL*Net message to client                       2        0.00          0.00
db file sequential read                       219        0.04          0.08
db file parallel read                          35        0.04          0.32
db file scattered read                        211        0.10          5.02
SQL*Net message from client                     2        0.00          0.00
********************************************************************************How can I work out why the second query is doing much more work than the first?
Edited by: SamB on Aug 5, 2009 6:09 PM

Both are doing an index range scan, however a different index range scan.
query 1: inlist iterator with <n> index range scan for 1 value, due to hard-coded values.
query 2: index range scan for all values, starting at the lowest, due to between.
Sybrand Bakker
Senior Oracle DBA

FCP 7.01 Render times 5-6 times longer than FCP 6

I just upgraded to 7.01. I am doing the same job I was doing last week. Exactly the same. The week with 7.01 render times are approximately 5-6 times longer. How can that be possible? I have FC Studio, can I go back to version 6 just for FCP? I'm amazed because FCP 7 has been out for months. Isn't everyone else seeing the same problem??
I work to complete the same day. So render times increasing means that I can't work with FCP 7! Does anyone know if Apple are going to solve this problem asap?
The sequence is Prores 422, various media in the sequence: H.264, Prores, graphics.. but the point is that last week with FCP 6 it was 5-6 times faster! I've been working with FCP fro years. There is no doubt in my mind that the render jobs are exactly the same but FCP 7 is rendering them 5-6 times slower..

I have not had a similar experience but I do always follow these two rules whenever I upgrade.
1) Do not upgrade during the middle of a project.
2) Do a clean install, don't just upgrade the software.
I presume you have double checked that your sequence settings are correct? It could be a corrupt file and you should be able to determine if one particular file is the problem. You may have to render sections or single clips in your sequence to do this.
You may also want to consider that H.264 is not a recommended edit format. It is a deliverable format. I realize more cameras are shooting it and many people claim success while editing with it but there are numerous posts on Creative Cow and other sites that do not recommend doing it. They recommend converting it to ProRes or some other format.

Does anyone have experience with having multiple editors work on the same project from different computers?

Does anyone have experience with having multiple editors work on the same project from different computers?

As much as I hate to admit it, YOU ARE RIGHT!
I will tread lightly on this project.
Thanks for the sanity check,
Ben
Ben Rayner
I am currently active on.. MainStream Preppers
Rayner's Ridge is under construction

Same sqlID with different execution plan and Elapsed Time (s), Executions time

Hello All,
The AWR reports for two days with same sqlID with different execution plan and Elapsed Time (s), Executions time please help me to find out what is reason for this change.
Please find the below detail 17th day my process are very slow as compare to 18th
17th Oct 18th Oct
221,808,602
21
2tc2d3u52rppt
213,170,100
72,495,618
9c8wqzz7kyf37
209,239,059
71,477,888
9c8wqzz7kyf37
139,331,777
1
7b0kzmf0pfpzn
144,813,295
1
0cqc3bxxd1yqy
102,045,818
1
8vp1ap3af0ma5
128,892,787
16,673,829
84cqfur5na6fg
89,485,065
1
5kk8nd3uzkw13
127,467,250
16,642,939
1uz87xssm312g
67,520,695
8,058,820
a9n705a9gfb71
104,490,582
12,443,376
a9n705a9gfb71
62,627,205
1
ctwjy8cs6vng2
101,677,382
15,147,771
3p8q3q0scmr2k
57,965,892
268,353
akp7vwtyfmuas
98,000,414
1
0ybdwg85v9v6m
57,519,802
53
1kn9bv63xvjtc
87,293,909
1
5kk8nd3uzkw13
52,690,398
0
9btkg0axsk114
77,786,274
74
1kn9bv63xvjtc
34,767,882
1,003
bdgma0tn8ajz9
Not only queries are different but also the number of blocks read by top 10 queries are much higher on 17th than 18th.
The other big difference is the average read time on two days
Tablespace IO Stats
17th Oct
Tablespace
Reads
Av Reads/s
Av Rd(ms)
Av Blks/Rd
Writes
Av Writes/s
Buffer Waits
Av Buf Wt(ms)
INDUS_TRN_DATA01
947,766
59
4.24
4.86
185,084
11
2,887
6.42
UNDOTBS2
517,609
32
4.27
1.00
112,070
7
108
11.85
INDUS_MST_DATA01
288,994
18
8.63
8.38
52,541
3
23,490
7.45
INDUS_TRN_INDX01
223,581
14
11.50
2.03
59,882
4
533
4.26
TEMP
198,936
12
2.77
17.88
11,179
1
732
2.13
INDUS_LOG_DATA01
45,838
3
4.81
14.36
348
0
1
0.00
INDUS_TMP_DATA01
44,020
3
4.41
16.55
244
0
1,587
4.79
SYSAUX
19,373
1
19.81
1.05
14,489
1
0
0.00
INDUS_LOG_INDX01
17,559
1
4.75
1.96
2,837
0
2
0.00
SYSTEM
7,881
0
12.15
1.04
1,361
0
109
7.71
INDUS_TMP_INDX01
1,873
0
11.48
13.62
231
0
0
0.00
INDUS_MST_INDX01
256
0
13.09
1.04
194
0
2
10.00
UNDOTBS1
70
0
1.86
1.00
60
0
0
0.00
STG_DATA01
63
0
1.27
1.00
60
0
0
0.00
USERS
63
0
0.32
1.00
60
0
0
0.00
INDUS_LOB_DATA01
62
0
0.32
1.00
60
0
0
0.00
TS_AUDIT
62
0
0.48
1.00
60
0
0
0.00
18th Oct
Tablespace
Reads
Av Reads/s
Av Rd(ms)
Av Blks/Rd
Writes
Av Writes/s
Buffer Waits
Av Buf Wt(ms)
INDUS_TRN_DATA01
980,283
91
1.40
4.74

The AWR reports for two days with same sqlID with different execution plan and Elapsed Time (s), Executions time please help me to find out what is reason for this change.
Please find the below detail 17th day my process are very slow as compare to 18th
You wrote with different execution plan, I think, you saw plans. It is very difficult, you get old plan.
I think Execution plans is not changed in different days, if you not added index or ...
What say ADDM report about this script?
As you know, It is normally, different Elapsed Time for same statement in different day.
It is depend your database workload.
It think you must use SQL Access and SQl Tuning advisor for this script.
You can get solution for slow running problem.
Regards
Mahir M. Quluzade

In iTunes: why different run times for same track?

I have occasional repeats of the same given track stored in iTunes. Sometimes, the 2 identical tracks show different running times. This happens when one track came from the Net (downloaded before I started using iTunes, then imported into iTunes) and the other comes from a commercial CD. Do you know why the differing times? FYI: In each case, I have checked the endings of both tracks; they are identical, so the music is the same even though one track is rated to run [much] longer than the other. Also, in "Get Info" there's a way to change the running time of a track, but this is no solution: if I enter a shorter run time, the track will truncate itself, and finish playing before the proper end of the song -- if I enter a longer time, I get dead air after the end of the recording. Any ideas?
Windows XP
Windows XP Pro
Windows XP Pro

"will iphone users in Singapore have access to application from other countries? "
No. You can buy from the itunes store in the country in which you reside.
Each country has the same rules:
"SINGAPORE ONLY. The Service is available to you only in Singapore and is not available in any other location. You agree not to use or attempt to use the Service from outside of the available territory. iTunes may use technologies to verify such compliance."
http://www.apple.com/legal/itunes/appstore/sg/terms.html#APPS

2 different lease time on same scope

Hi, is it possible to add 2 different lease time on same scope.
I have server and workstation on the same scope and I want to give the servers longer lease time, than the workstation.

Hi
It is possible to achieve this in the Windows 2012 and higher versions of DHCP Servers using the feature of DHCP policies. You can create a policy within a scope. In that policy you can specify the type of clients you want this policy enabled for. The type
of clients can be differentiated based on
MAC Address
Vendor Class
User Class
Client Identifier
Relay Agent Information (and its sub options – remote id, circuit id and subscriber id)
in DHCP Server 2012
and based on FQDN along with above in DHCP Server 2012 R2.
Once the policy has been created you can set the lease time for the policy as per your needs. For more details you can look at the blog post entry below.
http://blogs.technet.com/b/teamdhcp/archive/2012/08/22/granular-dhcp-server-administration-using-dhcp-policies-in-windows-server-2012.aspx
Thanks

I live in the UAE and i dont have the face time app on my iphone 5 and it's not showing in the settings list as well only face time mentioned in the notification center , my friends in the same area are using face time normally any advice?

i live in the UAE and i dont have the face time app on my iphone 5 and it's not showing in the settings list as well only face time mentioned in the notification center , my friends in the same area are using face time normally any advice?

Doesn't matter. That store is likely selling illegit iphones, brought oin from somewhere else.
The fact remains the UAE government does not allow Facetime on iphones legitimately sold there.

GC time doubles in 1.5 and doesn't happen in 1.4.2 with same heap settings

I have an application which runs in 1.4.2 and 1.5.0_05 JVM. Below are my heap settings which is same in both the versions.
-Xms2048m -Xmx2048m -XX:+PrintGCDetails
-XX:NewSize=256m -XX:MaxNewSize=256m
-XX:PermSize=64m -XX:+UseParNewGC
-XX:ParallelGCThreads=4 -XX:+UseConcMarkSweepGC
-XX:+CMSPermGenSweepingEnabled
-XX:CMSInitiatingOccupancyFraction=80
-XX:+CMSClassUnloadingEnabled
-XX:+UseCMSInitiatingOccupancyOnly
-XX:+CMSParallelRemarkEnabled
-XX:MaxTenuringThreshold=0 -XX:SurvivorRatio=128
Between every GC there is an increase of 3MB in heap size in both cases. Occasionally there is an increase of 11 MB to 20 MB in heap size between GC's in both cases.
Below is a sample o/p from gc logs for 1.5 JVM. The bold portion represents a jump in GC time (approximately doubles) as the heap increases by 11 MB (marked in bold). During this increase in heap size the GC time doubles and never reverts. The timing stays there
250.839:*[GC*250.839:*[ParNew:*258176K->0K(260160K),*0.0721558*secs]*630891K->376276K(2095168K),*0.0724650*secs]
252.979:*[GC*252.980:*[ParNew:*258176K->0K(260160K),*0.0733005*secs]*634452K->379857K(2095168K),*0.0736051*secs]
255.304:*[GC*255.304:*[ParNew:*258175K->0K(260160K),*0.1298656*secs]*638033K->391535K(2095168K),*0.1302190*secs]
257.525:*[GC*257.525:*[ParNew:*258176K->0K(260160K),*0.1435846*secs]*649711K->395126K(2095168K),*0.1438980*secs]
259.790:*[GC*259.790:*[ParNew:*258176K->0K(260160K),*0.1428786*secs]*653302K->398703K(2095168K),*0.1431886*secs]
Below is the gc logs from 1.4.2 JVM for the same application with same heap settings. Eventhough there is an increase of 11 MB in heap size and the GC time doubles, the GC time reverts to the same value as before the heap size got increased.
222.174:*[GC*222.174:*[ParNew:*261760K->0K(261952K),*0.0529798*secs]*640319K->382076K(2096960K),*0.0531960*secs]
224.186:*[GC*224.186:*[ParNew:*257968K->0K(261952K),*0.0521684*secs]*640045K->385561K(2096960K),*0.0524359*secs]
226.237:*[GC*226.237:*[ParNew:*261760K->0K(261952K),*0.1865245*secs]*647321K->397045K(2096960K),*0.1867803*secs]
228.340:*[GC*228.340:*[ParNew:*261760K->0K(261952K),*0.0537954*secs]*658805K->400488K(2096960K),*0.0540503*secs]
230.324:*[GC*230.324:*[ParNew:*261760K->0K(261952K),*0.0524924*secs]*662248K->403890K(2096960K),*0.0527366*secs]
Are there any heap settings that I'm missing or are there any issues with 1.5 JVM ?
thanks

It would be helpful if we could see some context for the collections that have
doubled in durations (also for the equivalents ones with 1.4.2 that did not
double in duration). In particular, is there a concurrent collection in progress?
If you have more complete logs that you would like to provide, submit a bug
report as ramki_at_jdc suggests and attach the logs to the bug report.
Does your application have objects that are mostly of a particular size? Or
mostly objects of a few sizes?

Multiple compositions into render queue with same export settings

Hi I've got 70 compositions in after effects project and I want to export all these comps at once with the same export settings.. with SHIFT CMD M I can put these comps into the render queue but then i still have to manually change all the export settings for every file! Is there a trick that I just don't know?

Edit your output module and set the desired render settings as a default. You'll find the settings under the edit menu at the bottom as a sub set of templates.

I recently purchased 3 CD's, some of the songs are cut off in the middle of the song. Itunes sent me a link several times to redownload the songs, but each time either the same songs or different songs would be cut short each time I redownloaded the CD's

I recently purchased 3 CD's, some of the songs are cut off in the middle of the songs. Several times ITunes sent me a link to redownload the CD's or certain songs and each time either the same songs or different songs on the CD's would be cut short. What could be causing this?

shameless bump

FCPro Render times - much longer with different Sequence?

Has anyone else noticed this? For many years I have worked with just a few Sequences in FCPro, and the render times seem to be similar in them all - at least that I've noticed. When I slow motion scenes, or render simple graphics - I kind of have a feel for how long I have to wait for various things. Both with my MacBook Pro (2010) and Mac Tower (2 years old). I've always found render times, not excessive. Usually I've worked with DVCProHD.
BUT NOW . . . I'm noticing I'm waiting 2 to 3 times longer for any render. By NOW, I mean since I bought the XF300 and am natively importing 50mbs 12x720 footage into FCPro. (I overcrank a lot, so I tend to stay with 720.) It can now be done after the firmware upgrade a few months back. I love how much faster "native" import is, and I love it using 50mbs as it should, not 70mbs, which it did using ProRez import.
BUT I'm noticing much longer times to render in the XDCAM 422 720p30. Render screen says "conforming edited MPEG-2." Of course, this takes away some of the excitement, and is downright annoying! Has anyone else noticed this, or is it just me? Can render times change significantly, depending simply on the timeline Sequence setting? If they do, I'll just live with it - but I need reassuring that it's normal to take much 2 or 3 times the time - or I'm kinda hoping I'm doing something wrong!
Thanks,
Larry

OK Shane, I've done a bit of work here - this might surprise you? Maybe you'll learn something, we'll find out. But you've certainly been helpful to me!
OK, I took a 5 minute Sequence, shot with the Canon XF300, imported natively into FCPro. The test here is to now render in XDCAN vs. render in Prorez. I LOVE Logging & Transferring in NATIVE as the files are 30% smaller (50mbs vs. 70mbs - and that goes for the ProRez exports as Self Contained movies, too - 70 vs. 50mbs.)
So now it gets interesting . . . to render the 5 minute movie using XDCAM HD rendering (same codec) as importing footage = 5 minutes to render the timeline. Not much rendering was needed. Coincidentally, 5:00 even to render about a 5 minute movie. The total render "space" it used was 932meg.
Now . . . I did the same render (after I deleted all renders) but this time I had it render in ProRez instead. It took 3:30. Soooo, it saved 1:30 in the rendering process. GOOD! So we "learned" FCPro renders faster in ProRez as compared with XDCAM, which is exactly what you said! Oh, it ony used 832 meg for the ProRez renders, which means not only is ProRez faster to render, but it uses about 10% less space to actually "do"it.
But here's the GLITCH I can't explain. I then exported to self contained movie (which we normally do in our workflow, master to a self contained movie to save). In the XDCAM render sequence, it takes 1:35 to export to self contained movie, about normal for a 5 minute movie. But the ProRez render took almost 6 minutes to export!!
WHY would it take over 3 times longer to export the ProRez sequence compared to the XDCAM sequence? This is what didn't make sense to me. (I'm wondering maybe in the export process, FCPro doesn't "see" the (ProRez) renders and has to rerender it just to export it? And that's why the export time is so much longer with ProRez? What do you think?
So to sum up, NATIVE import is faster and smaller files. Then ProRez render is faster and smaller files. So I'll do that! BUT then it takes longer to export the "ProRez" rendered Sequence You just can't win!!! If you have a 60 minute timeline, it's seriously longer!
Do your findings parallel mine? Anyway, thanks for your time, and if you can't tinker with this, I certainly understand. I'm just trying to setup a workflow here. I've tested this 3 times, my results are consistent.
Thanks again,
Larry

Same Computers/Settings - Different Render Times

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for