Slow copyArea Operation

I have a JPanel that scrolls an image in any given direction, as new data is collected. When new data comes in, I use copy area to move the existing image to the right, left, up, or down with a delta of 1 pixel, then fill in the newly vacated row with the new data and draw the image to screen.
The problem is that, while scrolling the image up, down, or right work fine, when I try to scroll the image left I get very poor performance. The up, down and right copys perform in 1ms or less but the left copy takes anywhere from 2-4ms. Not that big of a difference but with the data rates and number of images I'm scrolling, I see some significant degredation when scrolling to the left.
The only difference between each case is the delta X's and delta Y's I pass to the copyArea method.
Does anyone know anything about reasons this happens or have any experience with this issue? I've seen this problem using 1.6.0-b105 and 1.6.0_02-ea-b02.

Maybe you can find out more about your performance problem by profiling your application. I use eclipse TPTP for profiling.
http://www.eclipse.org/tptp/

Similar Messages

Iphone 3G is very slow in operation

Hi,
My iphone 3G is getting very slow in operation. I have very less applications installed also. opening a message, a contact and any application is slow. I have done restart also. nothing is helping. kindly suggest.
chetan

chetan.sr wrote:
...nothing is helping. kindly suggest.
chetan
Some Users have Reported that a Restore as New has helped Resolve issues...
Backup and Set Up as New Device
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4137

Very Slow Copy Operation on HP Pavilion 15 p001tx

Hi everyone. I recently bought the HP Pavilion 15 p001tx. Here are the Specifications if you need them
Intel Core i5 4210U 1.7Ghz ,Turbo Boost to 2.4GHz
4 GB DDR3 RAM
1 TB HDD
Nvidia Geforce 830M 2GB DDR3
My problem is with extremely slow copying/moving operation on USB drives. I mean I could get only 5-15 Mbps while copying/moving.
I am aware that I am using a USB 3.0 Flash Drive connected to the USB 3.0 slot but a constant 5-15 Mbps is ridiculus. I have a friend who has the same model and he could get 35-40Mbps of transfer speed.
I ran the HP utility and installed the latest device drivers for Windows 8.1. I have not run into problems while copying / moving files within the harddrive as it runs at a decent 45 Mbps , in fact here is the CrystalDisk Mark benchmark of my HDD:
* MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s]
Sequential Read : 92.794 MB/s
Sequential Write : 89.059 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 27.382 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 34.493 MB/s
Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 0.355 MB/s [ 86.6 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 1.050 MB/s [ 256.3 IOPS]
Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 0.975 MB/s [ 237.9 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 0.819 MB/s [ 199.9 IOPS]
Test : 1000 MB [C: 14.2% (64.9/455.6 GB)] (x5)
Date : 2014/09/17 20:37:37
OS : Windows 8.1 [6.3 Build 9600] (x64)
Now this is the benchmark for a USB
* MB/s = 1,000,000 byte/s [SATA/300 = 300,000,000 byte/s]
Sequential Read : 15.174 MB/s
Sequential Write : 7.067 MB/s
Random Read 512KB : 15.702 MB/s
Random Write 512KB : 0.654 MB/s
Random Read 4KB (QD=1) : 4.079 MB/s [ 995.7 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=1) : 0.006 MB/s [ 1.4 IOPS]
Random Read 4KB (QD=32) : 4.491 MB/s [ 1096.4 IOPS]
Random Write 4KB (QD=32) : 0.005 MB/s [ 1.3 IOPS]
Test : 1000 MB [H: 0.0% (0.0/3855.0 MB)] (x5)
Date : 2014/09/17 21:54:50
OS : Windows 8.1 [6.3 Build 9600] (x64)
Please help me with this guys... I need to transfer lots of data to my external HDD.
I also have another problem which is the Bluetooth doesnt discover any devices around ,neither does any other device detect it. It just keeps saying searching forever.

I also have same problem which is the Bluetooth doesnt discover any devices around ,neither does any other device detect it. It just keeps saying searching forever.connected then within seconds it shows not connected

MDT 2012 \ WinPE 3.0 Slow Install Operating System

I have an issue with a custom wim I have incorporated into my Task sequence. When I use a custom Wim, at the point where the MDT Tasksequence begins to "Install Operating System" it slows down to a crawl. What previously took 5-10 minutes on a
previous wim, is now taking 30-50. When the "Install Operating System" task begins, it starts a at a very decent rate, you can see the percentage or time increasing/changing every few seconds with out issue, but when it gets to 30% completion, it
starts to slow down dramatically. Eventually it will get to 100% Completion, where it will stay for the next 5 minutes, at which point it will apply the unattend.xml which will also take a very very long time to complete.
Once it reboots from applying the Unattend.xml everything runs normal.
My Setup:
I am using MDT 2012 - with WinPE3.0
To create my Custom Wim I did the following:
I created a brand new standard tasksequence, to deploy an OS to a machine, install updates then sysprep and capture to a wim. I set a custom variable in the tasksequence which set DoCapture=Yes. This allowed me to Capture the Operating system after the windows
updates were done without having to do any additional steps. I then imported the Image into the operating systems section of my MDT Deployment share, and incorporated it into my previous Tasksequence.
I have also noticed that the size of the wim file I created is about 1.5 gigs larger than my previous wim.
Steps I've Taken for remediation:
I've tried rebuilding my boot.wim several times.
Increased the scratch size from 32 -> 64 -> 256 -> 512MB
Removed unnecessary drivers from the boot.wim
Any ideas you guys might have with regard to getting my Install Operating System phase to speed up to normal speeds with be greatly appreciated. Is there an extra step with the install.wim that I importing into MDT that I should be doing?

I completed a robocopy in the full blown OS to download the 4.9g wim, it takes 1 minute and 36 seconds. It does have gigabit connection active in the full blown os.
When I am running WinPE, Task Manager is showing my local area connection is running at 1Gbps.
Another discrepancy I'm noticing is that @ 12:16:04 [Line1801] the task sequence finishes apply the wim. It takes 10 minutes for it to start the next task found on Line 1807. Any Ideas on why it taking so long to apply the bootsect.exe
command?
I did disable the "Apply Patches" task, and it did remove 20 minutes by not applying those patches. Thank you for that suggestion.
MCSA Server 2008R2 \ 2012 MCSE Server Infrastructure CCNA

Very, very slow file operations

I needed to make a specific change to an exif field of some images. So what I did was to move identify the files that I needed to change in Lightroom (they were in various folders on my disk) and move them to other folders so they would be easy to operate on. Then I used exiftool to change the field in these files, and then I thought it would be easy to read in the changed data and move them back to their original folders in Lightroom. What I found included:
I tried to Synchronize Metadata on the folders after changing the exif field. One folder had about 500 images in it, the other about 2,000. After 3 hours, the progress bar had barely moved, and I aborted.
When I tried to quit Lightroom it said that it was "writing metadata", even tho the synchronization had changed the external data and it should only have been reading metadata. I quit anyways and rebooted.
After rebooting, and relaunching Lightroom I looked at the "metadata status" column in Grid view. It was (as always, it seems) completely wrong about which files were up to date.
I was able to "read metadata" on these 2,500 images in "only" about an hour or two. Note that I didn't ask Lightroom to update the cached images, only to read the metadata. Reading metadata at 1,000-2,000 images an hour seems exceptionally slow.
Now I am trying to move the files back to their correct folders. I dragged about 1,000 raw images (CR2 + xmp) from one folder to another in Lightroom. Three hours later it is about 50% finished according to the progress bar. I'm going to bed and hope it will finish by the morning. I have to move all the other images as well, but because Lightroom won't update the filter bars in Grid View while moving files, I can't start these moves until Lightroom finishes the first.
Do other people fine absolutely absurd speeds for file operations in Lightroom? Is there any solution other than quitting and rebooting (which doesn't always work)? I hate to quit in the middle of a synchronize, read metadata, or move files operation even when it seems to be barely chugging along, because I am afraid that when I abort the operation, I will somehow leave a file orphaned, or it's metadata out of sync (which happens to me all the time, but I never know why).
When I am doing other operations I also find that I can use Lightroom for only a few hours before it gets so slow that I quit and reboot, after which operations speed up considerably. This doesn't seem like it should be necessary for a "modern" program and operating system, but in my experience it is.
I'm using a Macintosh (4 core i7, 16 GB of RAM), Mavericks latest, Lightroom 5.5, and a RAID disk, so hardware shouldn't be limiting. During this last interminable copy operation, it appears that Lightroom is pegged at 100% of a processor (core).

Sorry, but I don't think your workaround works. I am moving a bunch of files from one folder to various folders (using Lightroom to discriminate between files based on their exif/iptc values), then I change them using an outside program (exiftool), then I put them back in their original folders. This involves having Lightroom read in the new data in the files, which is what is so slow. Reconnecting, if I understand it, is for when you move a folder of files to another location, and Lightroom needs to be informed of that move.
As I pointed out, the problem is that Lightroom gets progressively and painfully slower the more you use it. But quitting and restarting can be annoying if you are in the middle of an operation because you can lose context (especially if you restart your computer, which seems to help).
And I do optimize my database nearly daily when using Lightroom.
I would spend the time to fully document this problem and report it as a bug, but my experience is that Adobe shows no evidence of actually reading my bug reports, let alone responding to them.

Firefox 5 Searching for images on the web is much slower than opera and my previous Firefox version. Can I turn off the useless zoom thing when I hover over an image for a few seconds?

OK, what I want to do is search for images with Google or similar search engine. This was fine in my previous FF version. The images just loaded as thumbnails, all the same size and I had to click on one to open it in a new tab or whatever I wanted to do. Now the images load all different sizes and if I hover for a moment over on, it zooms in a bit and gives me some image details. This slows image searching to the point of being very frustrating. I thought this might be a Google things, so tried other search engines. Tried switching Javascript off to speed things up, just blank grey rectangles displayed. Tried Opera and it loads basic images like Firefox used to, FAST...

The speed of image searching isn't a problem for me. The trouble is, the automatic zoom function is lightning fast and I find it disturbing to the point that it makes me feel very ill.
I very much want a way of suppressing it.

Slowness of operating system

Out of the blue my iMac G5 started slowing down. The multi colored pinwheel shows up all the time when changing applications and such. I don't believe I have used all my memory, however I'm not sure. Any suggestion as to how to get my machine operating faster?

You can take a look at your Activity Monitor (Apps>Utilities>Activity Monitor) and see how much memory you are using, also see if there's anything that is hogging your CPU. If you find something that is using inordinate amounts of either, perhaps you can modify your usage. Safari is a well known CPU hog, but it could be any app that you regularly use.
Please post back,
Miriam

Firefox so slow and Opera won't start

I've always used firefox but latley its become unusable. After a short period my cpu useage spikes to 50-70% and firefox completley freezes. I don't usually have more than 7 tabs (one of them being hulu.com usually) and this problem has just started recently. I figured i'd just switch to opera for a while and see if that fixed the problem but when i try to run opera:
/usr/lib/opera/9.51/opera: error while loading shared libraries libqt-mt.so.3: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
however, running "locate libqt-mt.so" returns
/opt/qt/lib/libqt-mt.so
/opt/qt/lib/libqt-mt.so.3
/opt/qt/lib/libqt-mt.so.3.3
/opt/qt/lib/libqt-mt.so.3.3.8
so it appears to be there..
Only contributing factor i could think of would be that i had testing enabled for a couple days for kde4, dont' think i syu'd but i could be wrong.
midori seems to work fine, but its not my cup of tea.
thanks to anyone that can shed light on either of these problems.

Okay so ldconfig keeps track of the most recent shared libraries to be used by various programs on my system. I need to have directories where shared libraries are kept listed in /etc/ld.so.conf.
That aside, has anyone else been experiencing any huge slowdowns in Firefox like i am? I find it weird that it becomes extreamly slow (20 seconds to respond to a click i'd say) yet is only using 50-70% of the procesor, which is still an alarming amount obviously but not 100%.
I was thinking i would downgrade some dependencies and see if it would make a difference so i used the script "pactree" found it the "community contributions" forum to see what was there. There was a ton of dependencies, dependencies, dependencies, etc so i don't really know where to start (well actually i'd assume at the top but..). Can someone confirm or disconfirm that this would be a good way to go about it?

IDVD8 slows entire operating system - Normal?

TIA
For some reason I am noticing > much more than before < that when using iDVD, during the whole processing periods, the operating system slows to a crawl, email, Finder actions, everything. When I try to use anything else, spinning ball of death runs and runs.
This used to be only with the Encoding Audio part.
I have 173 gig free space on my HD available
4 Gig Ram
In the activity monitor it is using 220%+ of the CPU
My iMovie files are on one of my additional internal drives, and usually write the ready to burn final file to my desktop.
Help?
d
Message was edited by: Don P
Message was edited by: Don P

Thanks SD
I have tried everything you listed previous and unfortunately, this is not a new unit. As I mentioned this didnt seem to be a big a issue as in previous experiences!
I have 4.11 installed, do you mean install updater again?
Here is disk activity
1618 iDVD 6.00 31 183.95 MB 687.17 MB
1616 iMovie HD 0.80 15 41.87 MB 462.51 MB
215 ScreenShot Plus 0.70 3 40.87 MB 633.54 MB
214 SimpleKeys 0.70 3 39.14 MB 540.78 MB
211 Classic Menu 0.20 3 38.34 MB 549.96
628 Activity Monitor 5.60 7 32.97 MB 394.13 MB
1178 QuickTime Player 0.00 7 24.53 MB 422.63 MB
209 Finder 0.00 5 14.97 MB 393.43 MB
217 Microsoft Database Daemon 0.00 3 10.04 MB 366.40 MB
220 kbd_backgroundapp 0.00 3 8.39 MB 381.08 MB
235 GrowlHelperApp 0.00 6 7.17 MB 361.86 MB
207 SystemUIServer 0.00 4 6.74 MB 372.38 MB
216 Stickies 0.00 2 6.07 MB 359.60 MB
358 Preview 0.00 5 5.58 MB 357.77 MB
87 loginwindow 0.00 4 5.56 MB 370.95 MB
221 TWAINBridge 0.00 3 5.37 MB 354.20 MB
360 TextEdit 0.00 3 5.27 MB 358.05 MB
86 ATSServer 0.00 2 5.06 MB 96.03 MB
212 Desktility 0.00 2 4.42 MB 364.63 MB
204 Dock 0.00 3 4.36 MB 365.48 MB
178 mds 0.00 8 4.10 MB 44.51 MB
213 UniversalAccessApp 0.00 2 3.91 MB 350.93 MB
218 MouseWorks Background 0.00 2 3.69 MB 350.68 MB
1299 System Events 0 .00 2 3.19 MB 346.20 MB
CPU
1618 iDVD 4.60 29 171.23 MB 668.35 MB
1616 iMovie HD 0.90 15 41.88 MB 462.51 MB
215 ScreenShot Plus 0.70 3 40.87 MB 633.54 MB
214 SimpleKeys 0.70 3 39.14 MB 540.78 MB
211 Classic Menu 0.80 3 38.34 MB 549.96 MB
1628 Activity Monitor 4.90 8 34.01 MB 379.87 MB
1178 QuickTime Player 0.00 7 24.70 MB 422.63 MB
209 Finder 0.00 5 14.96 MB 393.39 MB
217 Microsoft Database Daemon 0.00 3 10.27 MB 366.40 MB
220 kbd_backgroundapp 0.00 3 8.81 MB 381.08 MB
235 GrowlHelperApp 0.00 6 7.84 MB 361.86 MB
207 SystemUIServer 0.00 4 6.76 MB 372.38 MB
216 Stickies 0.00 2 6.13 MB 359.60 MB
358 Preview 0.00 5 6.01 MB 357.77 MB
360 TextEdit 0.00 3 5.72 MB 358.05 MB
87 loginwindow 0.00 4 5.62 MB 370.95 MB
221 TWAINBridge 0.00 3 5.55 MB 354.20 MB
86 ATSServer 0.00 2 5.01 MB 86.32 MB
212 Desktility 0.00 2 4.48 MB 364.63 MB
204 Dock 0.00 3 4.40 MB 365.48 MB
178 mds 0.00 8 4.09 MB 44.51 MB
213 UniversalAccessApp 0.30 2 3.92 MB 350.93 MB
218 MouseWorks Background 0.00 2 3.86 MB 350.1299
System Events 0.00 2 3.24 MB 346.
Thank you,
d

OSD Task slow downloading Operation System Wim

Hello,
Let me start by saying that I have my OSD task sequence working and I am able to deploy it to multiple computers and it all works fine.
However, I am experiencing a slight annoyance. When the Task Sequence begins the download of the Operation System wim file to apply to the HDD, the download is very slow. Looking at SCCM Data rates, the server is only sending it out at 40 mbps which means
it takes like 45-60 minutes just to download the wim file.
I tried the F8 option into CMD and tried manually copying the wim file over from the server and the server sent the file at 600 mbps which is ideally what you want for a gigabit network.
I am running 2012 R2 CU1 which contains the KB2905002 update which supposedly fixed the issue. I have been searching and search all day and I am officially
out of ideas and fixes for this problem. BITS throttling is disabled, there are no rate limits on the DP. No errors in the smsts.log file. I am stumped.
I currently run a Primary Site Server with the DP located on the same server. This is a single box setup, no remote DP's or secondary sites.
I would appreciate if anybody who had similar issues could help me out with this?
I look forward to your response.
Regards,
Kyle.

All existing media (such as stand-alone, boot, or prestaged) that use existing boot images (default or custom) will have to be re-created.
To fully fix the problem in Issue 2, the client side .msp file has to be installed during the "Setup Windows and ConfigMgr task by using the PATCH= command.
For more information about how to update boot images, see the How to Manage Boot Images in Configuration
Manager topic on the Microsoft TechNet website.
But the media it discusses re-creating are boot process that wouldn't normally have access to the boot image from the DP. This media was stuff that was created potentially 1x and now exists outside of the environment. I currently have CU1 applied.
When I recreate the boot image I see that is still seems to be the same OS version (6.3.9600.16384), should this have changed? What version are you seeing in your 2012 R2 environment that you are having speedy WIM downloads with? It looks
like there is a revision to ADK 8.1 that maybe I don't have? It looks like that may take WinPE to 5.1, which is still OS version 6.3 (like I have) but 6.3.9600.17031. http://blogs.technet.com/b/configmgrteam/archive/2014/04/03/understanding-the-adk-for-windows-8-1-update-and-configmgr-osd.aspx .
I wonder if I should have that?
I am also trying to figure out how the PATCH command is supposed to affect WIM download speeds. The Setup Windows and Configmgr step of the task sequence is after the WIM would already be downloaded.

Very slow image operation

Hello,
I have a strange problem.
Some of my images are VERY slow to load, scale... (any image operation).
I have those 2 images :
http://193.252.5.30/tmp/cat1.jpg (25Ko : 295x551 pixels)
http://193.252.5.30/tmp/cat2.jpg (24Ko : 295x551 pixels)
I wrote a little program which load and scale the image.
Here is the result :
cat1.jpg
Time to load image : 171 ms.
Time to scale image : 157 ms.
cat2.jpg
Time to load image : 1157 ms.
Time to scale image : 2578 ms.How can this huge difference explained ?
Thanks for your help.
The program :
public class Test
     private final static BufferedImage scale(BufferedImage source, float scaleFactor)
          int width = Math.round(source.getWidth()*scaleFactor);
          int height = Math.round(source.getHeight()*scaleFactor);
          ColorModel dstCM = source.getColorModel();
          BufferedImage dst = new BufferedImage(dstCM, dstCM.createCompatibleWritableRaster(width, height), dstCM.isAlphaPremultiplied(), null);
          Image scaledImage = source.getScaledInstance(width, height, Image.SCALE_AREA_AVERAGING);
          Graphics2D g = dst.createGraphics();
          g.drawImage(source, 0, 0, width, height, null);
          g.dispose();
          return dst;
     public static void main(String[] args) throws IOException
          String imagePath = "cat1.jpg";
          //String imagePath = "cat2.jpg";
          long t1 = System.currentTimeMillis();
          BufferedImage image = ImageIO.read(new File(imagePath));
          long t2 = System.currentTimeMillis();
          System.out.println("Time to load image : " + (t2-t1) + " ms.");
          t1 = System.currentTimeMillis();
          image = scale(image, 0.2f);
          t2 = System.currentTimeMillis();
          System.out.println("Time to scale image : " + (t2-t1) + " ms.");
}

Hello,
I have a strange problem.
Some of my images are VERY slow to load,
scale... (any image operation).
I have those 2 images :
http://193.252.5.30/tmp/cat1.jpg (25Ko : 295x551
pixels)
http://193.252.5.30/tmp/cat2.jpg (24Ko : 295x551
pixels)
I wrote a little program which load and scale the
image.
Here is the result :
cat1.jpg
Time to load image : 171 ms.
Time to scale image : 157 ms.
cat2.jpg
Time to load image : 1157 ms.
Time to scale image : 2578 ms.How can this huge difference explained ?
Thanks for your help.Using the Netbeans profiler, I can see that for some reason, the cat2.jpg image is resulting in a hot spot where the scale() method ends up performing a color conversion via ColorConvertOp. Placing a debugger breakpoint on this call and debugging the code using cat1.jpg, the method is never called. So, there is something different about the color models of the two images, or there is a bug in the image reading code that is misinterpreting the image data.
This bug may be what you are seeing:
http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=4705399

Exceptional slow batch operation for Azure Table

I have a VM Medium with an Azure Storage.
West Europe
Same Affinity Group
Different storage account for VM and for my application
I noted that today, during the afternoon, my storage became very very slow all of a sudden.
I was happily uploading my batches with the rate of 2 MB/S, and now, suddenly this afternoon, I started to get better than 300KB/S.
I noticed that my network and CPU activity were very low.
I started Fiddler, and seen that my batches of 100 KB approximately took 14 second to upload !
I tested the same program on a VM in a different subscription with different affinity group, the same exact same batch took 200ms approximately.
What can do enjoy my full speed again ? Seems like a mouse is eating the cable of my rack.

Update :
I eventually it the threshold with a new table, my insert on the other table are starting to take more than 2 seconds to process, and it goes up with time.
So, insert is not constant, but depend on partition's size. Is it normal ?
Niranjan Nilakantan of Microsoft said
If the key for your logical data model has more than 1 property, you should default to (multiple partitions, multiple rows for each partition).
If the key for your logical data model has only one property, you would default to (multiple partitions, one row per partition).
We have two columns in the key to separate what defines uniqueness(PartitionKey and RowKey) from what defines scalability(just PartitionKey).
In general, write and query times are less affected by how the table is partitioned. It is affected more by whether you specify the PartitionKey and/or RowKey in the query.
If this is true, there is a real problem with my storage node.

Slow SDO_RELATE operation on a spatial view

Hi Folks,
I need some help to understand what's going on with a spatial query that is taking so long to be executed (about 7 minutes).
I have a spatial view as below:
create or replace view v_lote_fiscal_relac as
select
lf.objectid,lf.numbloco,lf.setor,lf.quarteirao,lf.origem,lf.tipo,lf.nome,lf.superquadra,lf.quadra,lf.area,lf.observacao,lf.motivo,lf.data,lf.matricula,
vlf.idf_lote,vlf.ind_tipo_lote,vlf.num_lote,vlf.num_seq_lote,vlf.num_setor,vlf.num_quarteirao,vlf.mtr_area_real,vlf.des_tipo_categoria,
lf.geom
from
GEOSMFAGP.Lote_Fiscal lf, IMO_VW_LOTE_FISCAL@POAGEO vlf
where
retorna_num_lote(lf.numbloco) = vlf.num_lote AND
retorna_num_seq_lote(lf.numbloco) = vlf.num_seq_lote;
The functions retorna_num_lote and retorna_num_seq_lote just do a substr to extract information from lf.numbloco column
This is the spatial query created by a mapping application
SELECT
OBJECTID
FROM
GEOPONTO.V_LOTE_FISCAL_RELAC T
WHERE
SDO_RELATE(T.GEOM,
SDO_GEOMETRY(2003,1010101,NULL,
SDO_ELEM_INFO_ARRAY(1,1003,1),
SDO_ORDINATE_ARRAY(180514.7833451195,1663508.6932339652,
180514.84948680276,1663504.0633161366,
180517.6274375,1663503.9971744534,
180517.69357918325,1663508.4948089155,
180514.7833451195,1663508.6932339652)), 'mask=ANYINTERACT') = 'TRUE'
Please, correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks like the query will first get all the records that satisfy the where clause and then apply the spatial filter on this resultset.
How can it be improved?
I did some tests using SQL Developer (SQL Profiler) and it was possible to create a better execution plan to this query. The time was reduced to 4 seconds.
But the SQL Profile seems to have effect only to the query analyzed. I mean, if a change the sdo_geometry parameter, the query takes 7 minutes again.
Any ideas?
Regards,
Luis

Hi Stefan,
Please, see below the Explain Plan that I mentioned and the SQL Profiler command that makes the query be executed very fast.
*1- Original*
Plan hash value: 2780585567
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time | Inst |IN-OUT|
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 4808 | 1596K | 25 (0)| 00:00:01 | | |
| 1 | NESTED LOOPS | | 4808 | 1596K| 25 (0)| 00:00:01 | | |
| 2 | REMOTE | IMO_VW_LOTE_FISCAL | 25553 | 648K | 25 (0)| 00:00:01 | POAGEO | R->S |
|* 3 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| LOTE_FISCAL | 1 | 314 | 25 (0)| 00:00:01 | | |
|* 4 | DOMAIN INDEX | XSPLOTE_FISCAL_GEO | | | 0 (0)| 00:00:01 | | |
uery Block Name / Object Alias (identified by operation id):
1 - SEL$F5BB74E1
2 - SEL$F5BB74E1 / VLF@SEL$2
3 - SEL$F5BB74E1 / LF@SEL$2
4 - SEL$F5BB74E1 / LF@SEL$2
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
3 - filter("VLF"."NUM_LOTE"="RETORNA_NUM_LOTE"("LF"."NUMBLOCO") AND
"VLF"."NUM_SEQ_LOTE"="RETORNA_NUM_SEQ_LOTE"("LF"."NUMBLOCO"))
4 - access("MDSYS"."SDO_RELATE"("LF"."GEOM","MDSYS"."SDO_GEOMETRY"(2003,1010101,NULL,"SDO_ELEM_INFO_ARRA
Y"(1,1003,1),"SDO_ORDINATE_ARRAY"(180514.7833451195,1663508.6932339652,180514.84948680276,1663504.063316136
6,180517.6274375,1663503.9971744534,180517.69357918325,1663508.4948089155,180514.7833451195,1663508.6932339
652)),'mask=ANYINTERACT')='TRUE')
*2- Using SQL Profile*
Plan hash value: 3617866586
| Id | Operation | Name | Rows | Bytes | Cost (%CPU)| Time | Inst |IN-OUT|
| 0 | SELECT STATEMENT | | 4808 | 1596K| 485 (1) | 00:00:06 | | |
|* 1 | HASH JOIN | | 4808 | 1596K| 485 (1) | 00:00:06 | | |
| 2 | TABLE ACCESS BY INDEX ROWID| LOTE_FISCAL | 1882 | 577K| 459 (1) | 00:00:06 | | |
|* 3 | DOMAIN INDEX | XSPLOTE_FISCAL_GEO | | | 0 (0) | 00:00:01 | | |
| 4 | REMOTE | IMO_VW_LOTE_FISCAL | 25553 | 648K| 25 (0) | 00:00:01 | POAGEO | R->S |
uery Block Name / Object Alias (identified by operation id):
1 - SEL$F5BB74E1
2 - SEL$F5BB74E1 / LF@SEL$2
3 - SEL$F5BB74E1 / LF@SEL$2
4 - SEL$F5BB74E1 / VLF@SEL$2
Predicate Information (identified by operation id):
1 - access("VLF"."NUM_LOTE"="RETORNA_NUM_LOTE"("LF"."NUMBLOCO") AND
"VLF"."NUM_SEQ_LOTE"="RETORNA_NUM_SEQ_LOTE"("LF"."NUMBLOCO"))
3 - access("MDSYS"."SDO_RELATE"("LF"."GEOM","MDSYS"."SDO_GEOMETRY"(2003,1010101,NULL,"SDO_ELEM_INFO_ARRA
Y"(1,1003,1),"SDO_ORDINATE_ARRAY"(180514.7833451195,1663508.6932339652,180514.84948680276,1663504.063316136
6,180517.6274375,1663503.9971744534,180517.69357918325,1663508.4948089155,180514.7833451195,1663508.6932339
652)),'mask=ANYINTERACT')='TRUE')
Recommendation (estimated benefit: 99.96%)
- Consider this SQL Profile:.
execute dbms_sqltune.accept_sql_profile(task_name => 'staName68255',
task_owner => 'GEOPONTO', replace => TRUE);
After the execution o the command above, the same query is executed in 3 seconds.
P.S: I Cannot change the view, the column is indexed and SDO_FILTER will not work for me, because I need an exact match.
Regards,
Luis

KDE: Awfully slow file operations

So I don't know what the deal is, but it's been moving ~118mb (two folders with an iconset each) for 3 minutes now, and is only about 30% done. Both source and destination being an ext4 formatted SSD.
I can see a few kio-file processes running and my CPU is capped at 100% on each core. What in seven hells is dolphin doing? A move operation to the same drive should be near instantaneous.
Extracting the same two archives directly to the destination takes a few seconds at most, as expected. Moving the same files via console is as fast as extracting from the 7z archive.

It turns out I forgot that folder is mounted on my HDD, not the SSD, so it was an actual copy to destination -> delete source operation.
Preview is off, and I disabled the indexer (it wasn't producing any CPU activity anyway), still same problem.
Dolphin is by far the slowest file manager according to my tests:
Setup:
copy 13k icons ext4 SSD -> ext4 HDD, destination folder deleted between runs. Each file manager tested 3 times
Results:
dolphin: 1:23
thunar: 1:17
nautilus: 0:26
windows exlorer: 0:14
pcmanfm: 0:10
command line: 0:02
Double the numbers for move (I guess that's because it has to delete the files as well). Here's hoping they can figure out how to speed it up with the KDE5 dolphin port...
edit: added windows explorer for comparison. It does quite well, surprisingly.
Last edited by Soukyuu (2015-02-05 12:30:44)

Contacts freezing and slowing down Operation

Anyone else having this issue with their contacts? the Contacts app fails, and then I have to restart my phone.

Hmm. That's certainly odd, Mickey1Note3! How long has this been occurring? Have you downloaded in recent applications that have access to your contact app. I would suggest placing the device in Safe Mode and testing. http://vz.to/1kOSTSH
YosefT_VZW
Follow us on Twitter @VZWSupport

Slow copyArea Operation

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for