Slow image loads?

Hi I am using aperture 2.1.4
I have 15000 raw images on a fast
defragmented hard drive 7200 rpm ect.
I am running on an 8 core system with 8gb memory
when I am scrolling through a project as i view the images in larger size in the upper pane
the loading time can slow to a crawl!
Is this a known problem? Are there any fixes? Is aperture 3 any faster at this?
I love the way aperture organizes my photos but it gets frustrating waiting for images
to load when i have a very fast computer and fast drives

A few thoughts. Others will likely pop in with some more.
radman wrote:
Hi I am using aperture 2.1.4
I have 15000 raw images on a fast
defragmented hard drive 7200 rpm ect.
Internal or external. If external, via what connection?
I am running on an 8 core system with 8gb memory
I have a dual-core Mac with 4 GB RAM and even with Libraries in the 100 GB range I rarely see Aperture max out my RAM (I often wish it would use more). Have you checked Activity Monitor to see if CPU cycles are in any way limiting performance?
when I am scrolling through a project as i view the images in larger size in the upper pane
the loading time can slow to a crawl!
Just for clarity (which is important), the panes (in Ap3 at least) are moveable. The one which shows images "larger" is the Viewer. The other pane is the Browser. There is also a split view which shows both. (Again, in Ap3. I've never seen Ap2, so apologies if this is not applicable.)
Is this a known problem? Are there any fixes? Is aperture 3 any faster at this?
Aperture 3 has a built in method to help: Quick Preview. This displays only JPG previews of all images instead of rendering full-size Versions. If it is available in Ap2, use it.
I love the way aperture organizes my photos but it gets frustrating waiting for images
to load when i have a very fast computer and fast drives
Quick Preview is designed for when you are organizing your photos.

Similar Messages

Slow image loading in Facebook and other sites.

In some sites, especially Facebook, I've a slow image loading. For example, when I search for a person on Facebook, then the profile image of poeple takes 6-7 secons to load.
I've installed Firefox yesterday, so I exclude that I have to delete cookies, etc. With Chrome, Facebook load images much more faster. Re-installing shockwave, the loading is faster, but not enough.
Any suggestions?

After looking around a bit, I found an add-on called FastestFox.
You can find the add-on here: [https://addons.mozilla.org/nl/firefox/addon/fastestfox-browse-faster/ FastestFox].
I haven't done too much research to the actual add-on itself, but after installing it in Firefox myself and using the Facebook person searcher I noticed the images and also other things like websites loading a lot faster.
I hope this add-on helps you.
Edit: The add-on adds some extra options when you right click a website (to download things from the website). You have to decide if you think this is worth the extra speed.

Switching from Comcast DNS servers solve my slow image loading on WiFi devices?

I have a Netgear C3700 N600 WiFi Cable Modem. I have two android devices that were being very laggy when I was connecting to my devices 5g connection when loading pictures. There was no packet loss and signal strength was high. The download tests show very high speeds. But anytime I went to Play Store, Facebook, or tried to surf the internet, pages or images would load in very slowly.
This was happening on both my Android Devices running Android 5.1 and 5.0.1 (Nexus 6 and Galaxy S4). My C3700 allows me to changes the DNS server from the one provided from the cable company (Comcast Xfinity). After setting my modem's DNS to Google DNS servers ( 8.8.8.8 and 8.8.4.4 ) my issues were resolved! Now I'm just trying to figure out why this is the case. Related: http://forums.xfinity.com/t5/Home-Networking-Router-WiFi/Xfinity-Wireless-very-slow-on-mobile-devices-only/td-p/2197456

You may also want to download Namebench. It is a DNS server benchmarking program that will find the closest and fastest DNS server near you. Google's DNS are good but there are probably better and closer ones out there to you.

Slow image load time in web browsers. My images load too slowly.

Hi, My images are loading slowly in my site. They are png and all under 600kb. Should they be jpegs (they are photos) Can anyone advise?

I would do a few tests, I think you might be fine with the High setting, but also try a little lower if you can to conserve load time. It would be good to get your files to around 120kb each.
A .jpeg file is the way to go, as .png files tend to be 20-40% larger.
Here is an image that is set to 730x486- saved as Medium - Quality 50 - jpeg - final size 99 kb

Images load really slow after using Reduce File Size...

After using the "Reduce File Size..." feature in Acrobat 9 on Windows Vista, some of the images load really slow as I page through the document. Is there some kind of compression setting that I should look for to prevent the images from be affected by this?
For some of my documents it will take 30 to 60 seconds to load an image. Sometimes I can't do anything with the document until the graphic loads entirely.

Can you post an example of a file that has this issue? Personally, I recommend using the PDF optimizer, it gives better control of the final pdf file.

First image always slow to load

I am using PS CS2 on my XP based PC and it has worked fine for a number of years. Recently whenever I start PS is loads fine but then the very first image takes ages to load (>1 minute). All subsequent images load quickly as you'd expect.
It doesn't matter where that first image is saved and the size of the image makes no difference.
Today I tried a re-installation but the problem still exists.
Can anyone shed some light on this?

Thanks for the replies. It does seem to relate to this and I am also having a spot of bother with the printer. If set the default printer to a PDF generator that I have then the problem is solved.
Now, all I have to do is sort the printer issue... (Very slow to get printing from any program). The printer is on my machine but is available through a network to a laptop - both machines suffer this same PS loading problem.

Facebook slow to load images

I am currently running iOS 8.1.3 on VZW iphone 6. When in Facebook app the images are slow to load if they even do. I have rest network settings, forgot the network and reconnected. I have uninstalled the facebook app as well. all other internet usage is fine on the phone. Wifi router is Netgear WNR1000v2 set to WPA2-PSK(AES), auto channel.
Any ideas?

Hi nevr4get911,
Thanks for participating in the Apple Support Communities.
It seems like the Facebook app is not loading images reliably, and you've tried many good steps to troubleshoot the app and your network connection.
Since you have isolated this behavior to the Facebook app, you may want to contact the developer for more help:
If you see this issue again, contact the app developer for help:
Find the app in the App Store.
Tap the app, then tap Reviews.
Tap App Support under App Store Ratings.
From:
If an app you installed unexpectedly quits, stops responding, or won’t open - Apple Support
Best Regards,
Jeremy

Mail Slow to Load Images

I've gotten MOST issues addressed/fixed since Mavericks came out, but one I've noticed that is a bit annoying. Images in emails are slow to load. Not just with Gmail account, other accounts as well. Any others getting this? I'm on a MacBook Pro Retina Late 2013.

I'll try to submit this as a bug report when I get a chance. The desired behavior would be to show as much of the message as possible without blocking the application...the way a web browser normally does when rendering a web page as elements come in.
One other quirk: in the case of the email tracking example I gave, it does not help to disable "display remote images in HTML messages" under Mail...Preferences...Viewing.
Actually, when disabling this feature, it seems like Mail downloads the images, but simply does not display them. It takes a while to display some emails without displaying the remote images when the feature is disabled, then I hit "load images" and the images instantaneously appear. They must have already been downloaded. If true, then this is undesirable behavior indeed, e.g., when trying to minimize bandwidth during travel or when trying not to be tracked by email senders!

Safari is extremely slow to load pages & saving my bookmarks to my folders

why is safari so extremely slow in loading pages? it can just about load my e-mail, if I wait about 5 minutes & I cannot check my t mobile cell phone balance because it gets stuck loading the page.
Also I cannot get it to save bookmarks into my designated named bookmark folders anymore, it only will save to the bookmarks bar

I have also heard about the cover flow feature, but I do not see it in my safari, where is it?
Look at this picture and you'll find it. Just click on the marked area/button.
Image: http://img261.imageshack.us/img261/7103/coverflow1.jpg
If you don't see it: View > Show bookmarks bar
Message was edited by: Thomas Sjöholm

CS4 very slow image linking.

We are having a efficiency issues with CS4.
We have a large IDML document with 80 pages and 1800 images. Each image is about 24kb jpg.
If we open the document and InDesign can find images, it will take hours to open the document. And it is very annoying that InDesign stops responding and doesn't show even a progressbar while opening the document.
If we open the document and InDesign cannot find images, it will open the document in few minutes. Then if we fix the location of images and say "Update all links" or "Relink" broken links, InDesign will start fetching the images but it again takes hours..
It doesn't matter if the images are on the server or local machine.
If we update the links in smaller chunks, it will take a few minutes to update all the links. Little more testing shows that the time the InDesign takes to fetch the images increases exponentially when the amount of images increases. That seems a bug to me.
I'm not sure what InDesign is doing when it fetches images but I know it becomes way too slow and it propably does too much.
Is this fixed in CS5? And if not, please fix this.
We are running CS4 InDesign 6.0.6 in Mac OSX 10.5.8 in Mac pro (2.66GHz with 8Gb memory)

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

Fast Image - Slow Image

Hi
In my game I load a 2D landscape from a gif image. The image consists of mostly two colors. If I use this image in my game, the game runs fast. as it should.
But to make the graphics nicer, I have drawn a second, small image with lots of colors and details. The idea is to replace one of the colors in the image (the ground) with this image. This method do that:
     public static BufferedImage changeColor (Image image, Color fromColor, Image toImage) {
           BufferedImage ri = new BufferedImage (image.getWidth(null), image.getHeight(null),BufferedImage.TYPE_4BYTE_ABGR);
           BufferedImage bImage = new BufferedImage (toImage.getWidth(null), toImage.getHeight(null),BufferedImage.TYPE_4BYTE_ABGR);
           bImage.getGraphics().drawImage(toImage,0,0,null);
           if (toImage.getWidth(null)<2 || toImage.getHeight(null)<2) return null;
           Graphics g = ri.getGraphics();
           int fromRGB = fromColor.getRGB();
            g.drawImage (image, 0, 0, null);
           for (int a=0; a < image.getWidth(null); a++)
              for (int b=0; b < image.getHeight(null); b++)
                 if (ri.getRGB(a,b)==fromRGB) {
                      int x=a, y=b;
                      while (x<0 || x>=toImage.getWidth(null) || y <0 || y>= toImage.getHeight(null)) {
                           if (x<0) x+=toImage.getWidth(null);
                           if (x>=toImage.getWidth(null)) x-=toImage.getWidth(null);
                           if (y<0) y+=toImage.getHeight(null);
                           if (y>=toImage.getHeight(null)) y-=toImage.getHeight(null);
                        ri.setRGB(a,b,bImage.getRGB(x,y));
          return ri;
    }This method returns a BufferedImage. But when I use this BufferedImage in the game, the game becomes really slow.
So, I don't know why this happens. Is it always slower to draw an image whith many colors than an image with few colors? Or is BufferedImages always slower than images returned from Toolkit.getImage()? Or do I use the wrong type of BufferedImage?
cccB

new BufferedImage(....) are not managed (cached in vram)
Images loaded from toolkit.getImage() are managed.
Also, the color model BufferedImage.TYPE_4BYTE_ABGR is not an efficient colormodel.
It will require conversion to the displays colormodel (which is probably TYPE_INT_RGB/ARGB/BGR)
Change your BufferedImage creation so it uses graphicsConfiguration.createCompatibleImage(...)
The BufferedImage returned will be a colormodel compatible with the display, and will be managed (cachable in vram)

Official Safari 4 Release Is Extremely Slow to Load Pages

Just installed the new Safari 4.0 (non-beta). Almost every page I bring up takes considerably longer to load. Graphics and audio are especially slow to load.
Apple just touted how much faster this browser is supposed to be at WWDC. ???
Anyone else experiencing these issues?

Besides audio and video, pages with multiple images take up to 20 seconds to fully load the graphics.
I originally experienced these issues on a MacBook Pro. Now I just installed on an iMac C2D 2.66GHz and I get the exact same experience.
On Beta 4.0, the same pages loaded in about 2 seconds, even after emptying cache and doing a shift-reload.

Mac bookpro (brand new)with ML, safari slow to load pagesd, mac bookpro (brand new)with ML, safari slow to load pagesd

Brand spanking new Macbook pro with ML upgrade, safari way slower to load pages than my 4 yr old toshiba windows laptop???? So frustrating. Ancestry is especially poor. Please help, I am so disappointed with Apple. My iphone is quick on wifi at home nad so is my lenovo tablet!

try changing your dns settings: enter the numbers you see in the image and see if that helps...
go to system preferences - network - advanced - dns - see image:

Slow first loading of webpages

I have a problem which I am trying to combat with, but I no longer manage to.
Archlinux. Firefox (in Opera the same, in Chromium better, but according to what I've read, it has additional cache, or something like this - anyway, it gets this problem somehow round).
I am opening a webpage, let's say bbs.archlinux.org, for the first time after a longer break. That means, I was surfing through different websites, portals, etc. and I want to enter this forum. It refers, of course, to all the domains. Wikipedia, Google, whatever - doesn't matter.
What happens? The webpage is loading terribly slow. It can take a half of a minute to open it. Then, after I enter a server, the next subpages open quite normally. The problem is with getting into for the first time.
I have a few other computers at home - with Windows - connected to the same gateway (Linksys WAG54G2, ones connected via wifi go additionaly through Linksys WRT54GC, which works only as an AP, the DHCP server is turned off in it and NAT is got round by connecting the other Linksys via not WAN but LAN port - anyway, it doesn't matter here). And everything works right there. The webpages load at once, there are some issues with YouTube, but it's understandable with my ISP (Polish Telecom), which is saving money on international links and is pushing all the international traffic through a crowded router in Frankfurt.
Following sugestions from the web, i turned off IPv6 at all - by means of kernel parameters in the bootloader - but it doesn't help.
Proxy is, of course, turned off.
This doesn't seem to be an issue with DNS, because for example I have Wikipedia put into /etc/hosts and it's also loading that slow.
/etc/resolv.conf:
cat /etc/resolv.conf
# Generated by resolvconf
nameserver 194.201.159.1
nameserver 194.204.152.34
(these are DNS servers of my ISP)
/etc/hosts:
# /etc/hosts: static lookup table for host names
#<ip-address> <hostname.domain.org> <hostname>
127.0.0.1 localhost.localdomain localhost kacper-archlinux
91.198.174.192 pl.wikipedia.org
91.198.174.192 en.wikipedia.org
# End of file
ip link:
1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 65536 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN mode DEFAULT group default
link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00
2: eth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc fq_codel state UP mode DEFAULT group default qlen 1000
link/ether 00:19:66:b7:51:ef brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
ip addr:
1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 65536 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN group default
link/loopback 00:00:00:00:00:00 brd 00:00:00:00:00:00
inet 127.0.0.1/8 scope host lo
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
2: eth0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc fq_codel state UP group default qlen 1000
link/ether 00:19:66:b7:51:ef brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff
inet 192.168.1.100/24 brd 192.168.1.255 scope global eth0
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
In terms of ping, for me it looks OK - but the answers appear slowly.
Ping to a Polish portal (to avoid some issues on international links):
PING www.dobreprogramy.pl (194.0.171.152) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from nlb-dobreprogramy.xenium.pl (194.0.171.152): icmp_seq=1 ttl=122 time=42.9 ms
64 bytes from nlb-dobreprogramy.xenium.pl (194.0.171.152): icmp_seq=2 ttl=122 time=43.3 ms
64 bytes from nlb-dobreprogramy.xenium.pl (194.0.171.152): icmp_seq=3 ttl=122 time=43.4 ms
64 bytes from nlb-dobreprogramy.xenium.pl (194.0.171.152): icmp_seq=4 ttl=122 time=44.3 ms
64 bytes from nlb-dobreprogramy.xenium.pl (194.0.171.152): icmp_seq=5 ttl=122 time=52.7 ms
64 bytes from nlb-dobreprogramy.xenium.pl (194.0.171.152): icmp_seq=6 ttl=122 time=43.1 ms
^C64 bytes from 194.0.171.152: icmp_seq=7 ttl=122 time=42.1 ms
--- www.dobreprogramy.pl ping statistics ---
7 packets transmitted, 7 received, 0% packet loss, time 30493ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 42.191/44.590/52.731/3.378 ms
tracert:
traceroute to www.dobreprogramy.pl (194.0.171.152), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
1 gateway (192.168.1.1) 0.599 ms 1.229 ms 11.185 ms
2 lodz-bng1.tpnet.pl (80.50.118.230) 34.494 ms 35.410 ms 36.101 ms
3 lodz-r1.tpnet.pl (80.50.118.229) 37.147 ms 38.292 ms 39.002 ms
4 war-ar3.tpnet.pl (195.117.0.210) 48.200 ms 48.799 ms 49.510 ms
5 80.50.129.46 (80.50.129.46) 50.786 ms 51.448 ms 52.653 ms
6 do-atman-tpnet.xenium.pl (193.111.36.118) 53.949 ms 42.522 ms 41.890 ms
7 * * *
8 * * *
9 * * *
(and asterisks only on)
Flood ping to servers in the Internet looks OK - the number of dots doesn't grow.
ping to the DNS servers:
PING 194.204.159.1 (194.204.159.1) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 194.204.159.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=251 time=33.6 ms
64 bytes from 194.204.159.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=251 time=33.8 ms
64 bytes from 194.204.159.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=251 time=33.2 ms
64 bytes from 194.204.159.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=251 time=33.2 ms
64 bytes from 194.204.159.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=251 time=33.4 ms
^C
--- 194.204.159.1 ping statistics ---
5 packets transmitted, 5 received, 0% packet loss, time 4006ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 33.213/33.481/33.867/0.317 ms
PING 194.204.152.34 (194.204.152.34) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 194.204.152.34: icmp_seq=1 ttl=60 time=33.8 ms
64 bytes from 194.204.152.34: icmp_seq=2 ttl=60 time=33.2 ms
64 bytes from 194.204.152.34: icmp_seq=3 ttl=60 time=33.9 ms
64 bytes from 194.204.152.34: icmp_seq=4 ttl=60 time=32.9 ms
64 bytes from 194.204.152.34: icmp_seq=5 ttl=60 time=33.4 ms
64 bytes from 194.204.152.34: icmp_seq=6 ttl=60 time=32.7 ms
^C
--- 194.204.152.34 ping statistics ---
6 packets transmitted, 6 received, 0% packet loss, time 5006ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 32.737/33.360/33.955/0.471 ms
Basically, it looks as if the query to DNS servers about IP took too much time, but, as for me, nothing confirms this. Moreover, the other PCs use the same DNS addresses and it's OK there.
Any ideas, suggestions, what can be wrong?
Last edited by kpc21 (2015-05-03 11:48:53)

I tried Ubuntu 10.10 live CD on 2 PCs - mine and another one (where normally Windows 8.1 is used and there is no such problems on it), connected to the same local network via Ethernet cables. Of a different length and connected to different ports of the switch built-in into my home "router" (as I've already mentioned - Linksys WAG54G2) - but I don't think it's possible that it really matters As for me - the only possible problem might be some issues with this Linksys.
The situation on both PCs with this Ubuntu is exactly the same as with my Arch. It is strange taking into account that I am testing it on a very old Ubuntu version (from the times before I even started using Linux as the main OS ) and I haven't noticed these problems before.
Here is the tcpdump on the same webpage as before, taken on the computer that with Windows works correctly :
ubuntu@ubuntu:~$ sudo tcpdump -lvv
tcpdump: listening on eth0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 65535 bytes
14:39:22.075219 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 6305, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 512)
192.168.1.104.1900 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 484
14:39:22.075381 IP6 (hlim 1, next-header UDP (17) payload length: 499) fe80::e5ad:e153:34b:2129.1900 > ff02::c.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 491
14:39:22.076396 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 45026, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 74)
ubuntu.33821 > 194.201.159.1.domain: [udp sum ok] 37903+ PTR? 250.255.255.239.in-addr.arpa. (46)
14:39:22.771655 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 6306, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 460)
192.168.1.104.1900 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 432
14:39:22.771669 IP6 (hlim 1, next-header UDP (17) payload length: 447) fe80::e5ad:e153:34b:2129.1900 > ff02::c.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 439
14:39:23.981110 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 6307, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 524)
192.168.1.104.1900 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 496
14:39:23.981245 IP6 (hlim 1, next-header UDP (17) payload length: 511) fe80::e5ad:e153:34b:2129.1900 > ff02::c.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 503
14:39:24.080393 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 6308, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 540)
192.168.1.104.1900 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 512
14:39:24.080528 IP6 (hlim 1, next-header UDP (17) payload length: 527) fe80::e5ad:e153:34b:2129.1900 > ff02::c.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 519
14:39:24.292516 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 6309, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 469)
192.168.1.104.1900 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 441
14:39:24.292630 IP6 (hlim 1, next-header UDP (17) payload length: 456) fe80::e5ad:e153:34b:2129.1900 > ff02::c.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 448
14:39:24.567042 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 6310, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 526)
192.168.1.104.1900 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 498
14:39:24.567054 IP6 (hlim 1, next-header UDP (17) payload length: 513) fe80::e5ad:e153:34b:2129.1900 > ff02::c.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 505
14:39:24.736360 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len 4), Request who-has ubuntu tell 192.168.1.1, length 46
14:39:24.736374 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len 4), Reply ubuntu is-at 00:1a:4d:55:3f:74 (oui Unknown), length 28
14:39:26.051227 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 1018, offset 0, flags [none], proto IGMP (2), length 32)
192.168.1.254 > all-systems.mcast.net: igmp query v3
14:39:26.569204 IP (tos 0xd8, ttl 1, id 28928, offset 0, flags [none], proto IGMP (2), length 32, options (RA))
BRN008092B5990A.local > 224.0.0.251: igmp v2 report 224.0.0.251
14:39:26.969204 IP (tos 0xd8, ttl 1, id 28929, offset 0, flags [none], proto IGMP (2), length 32, options (RA))
BRN008092B5990A.local > 224.0.0.252: igmp v2 report 224.0.0.252
14:39:27.079462 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 46277, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 74)
ubuntu.46731 > dns2.tpsa.pl.domain: [udp sum ok] 37903+ PTR? 250.255.255.239.in-addr.arpa. (46)
14:39:27.123575 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 251, id 63860, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 131)
dns2.tpsa.pl.domain > ubuntu.46731: [udp sum ok] 37903 NXDomain q: PTR? 250.255.255.239.in-addr.arpa. 0/1/0 ns: 239.in-addr.arpa. SOA sns.dns.icann.org. noc.dns.icann.org. 2015051127 7200 3600 604800 3600 (103)
14:39:27.224347 IP6 (hlim 255, next-header UDP (17) payload length: 54) fe80::21a:4dff:fe55:3f74.mdns > ff02::fb.mdns: [udp sum ok] 0 PTR (QM)? 250.255.255.239.in-addr.arpa. (46)
14:39:27.224417 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 255, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 74)
ubuntu.mdns > 224.0.0.251.mdns: [udp sum ok] 0 PTR (QM)? 250.255.255.239.in-addr.arpa. (46)
14:39:28.225833 IP6 (hlim 255, next-header UDP (17) payload length: 54) fe80::21a:4dff:fe55:3f74.mdns > ff02::fb.mdns: [udp sum ok] 0 PTR (QM)? 250.255.255.239.in-addr.arpa. (46)
14:39:28.225900 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 255, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 74)
ubuntu.mdns > 224.0.0.251.mdns: [udp sum ok] 0 PTR (QM)? 250.255.255.239.in-addr.arpa. (46)
14:39:28.586889 IP (tos 0xc0, ttl 1, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto IGMP (2), length 40, options (RA))
ubuntu > igmp.mcast.net: igmp v3 report, 1 group record(s) [gaddr 224.0.0.251 is_ex { }]
14:39:29.646180 IP (tos 0xc0, ttl 1, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto IGMP (2), length 40, options (RA))
192.168.1.1 > igmp.mcast.net: igmp v3 report, 1 group record(s) [gaddr 239.255.255.250 is_ex { }]
14:39:30.228267 IP6 (hlim 255, next-header UDP (17) payload length: 54) fe80::21a:4dff:fe55:3f74.mdns > ff02::fb.mdns: [udp sum ok] 0 PTR (QM)? 250.255.255.239.in-addr.arpa. (46)
14:39:30.228336 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 255, id 0, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 74)
ubuntu.mdns > 224.0.0.251.mdns: [udp sum ok] 0 PTR (QM)? 250.255.255.239.in-addr.arpa. (46)
14:39:31.179272 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 28933, offset 0, flags [none], proto IGMP (2), length 32, options (RA))
BRN008092B5990A.local > 239.255.255.250: igmp v2 report 239.255.255.250
14:39:32.126733 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 47538, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 72)
ubuntu.34487 > 194.201.159.1.domain: [udp sum ok] 49761+ PTR? 104.1.168.192.in-addr.arpa. (44)
14:39:35.689564 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 4, id 1020, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 308)
192.168.1.254.1900 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 280
14:39:42.165090 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 50048, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 118)
ubuntu.47088 > 194.201.159.1.domain: [udp sum ok] 8745+ PTR? c.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.2.0.f.f.ip6.arpa. (90)
14:39:52.244316 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 52568, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 72)
ubuntu.36308 > 194.201.159.1.domain: [udp sum ok] 23562+ PTR? 1.159.201.194.in-addr.arpa. (44)
14:40:02.286355 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 55078, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 70)
ubuntu.36783 > 194.201.159.1.domain: [udp sum ok] 17414+ PTR? 1.1.168.192.in-addr.arpa. (42)
14:40:06.728060 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 56189, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 66)
ubuntu.35083 > dns2.tpsa.pl.domain: [udp sum ok] 24319+ A? www.dobreprogramy.pl. (38)
14:40:06.762242 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 251, id 63874, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 82)
dns2.tpsa.pl.domain > ubuntu.35083: [udp sum ok] 24319 q: A? www.dobreprogramy.pl. 1/0/0 www.dobreprogramy.pl. A 194.0.171.152 (54)
14:40:06.762437 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 2853, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 60)
ubuntu.54491 > nlb-dobreprogramy.xenium.pl.www: Flags [S], cksum 0xf77f (correct), seq 2293289120, win 5840, options [mss 1460,sackOK,TS val 252805 ecr 0,nop,wscale 6], length 0
14:40:06.804859 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 122, id 15685, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 60)
nlb-dobreprogramy.xenium.pl.www > ubuntu.54491: Flags [S.], cksum 0x5e12 (correct), seq 74505457, ack 2293289121, win 8192, options [mss 1460,nop,wscale 8,sackOK,TS val 21409154 ecr 252805], length 0
14:40:06.804891 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 2854, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 52)
ubuntu.54491 > nlb-dobreprogramy.xenium.pl.www: Flags [.], cksum 0xac78 (correct), seq 1, ack 1, win 92, options [nop,nop,TS val 252816 ecr 21409154], length 0
14:40:06.804979 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 2855, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 550)
ubuntu.54491 > nlb-dobreprogramy.xenium.pl.www: Flags [P.], cksum 0xbc61 (correct), seq 1:499, ack 1, win 92, options [nop,nop,TS val 252816 ecr 21409154], length 498
14:40:06.887145 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 122, id 15686, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 52)
nlb-dobreprogramy.xenium.pl.www > ubuntu.54491: Flags [.], cksum 0xa8d8 (correct), seq 1, ack 499, win 514, options [nop,nop,TS val 21409162 ecr 252816], length 0
14:40:06.936917 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 122, id 15687, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 1500)
nlb-dobreprogramy.xenium.pl.www > ubuntu.54491: Flags [.], cksum 0xc61b (correct), seq 1:1449, ack 499, win 514, options [nop,nop,TS val 21409167 ecr 252816], length 1448
14:40:06.936941 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 2856, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 52)
ubuntu.54491 > nlb-dobreprogramy.xenium.pl.www: Flags [.], cksum 0xa483 (correct), seq 499, ack 1449, win 137, options [nop,nop,TS val 252849 ecr 21409167], length 0
14:40:06.938906 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 122, id 15688, offset 0, flags [DF], proto TCP (6), length 1500)
nlb-dobreprogramy.xenium.pl.www > ubuntu.54491: Flags [.], cksum 0xdc15 (correct), seq 1449:2897, ack 499, win 514, options [nop,nop,TS val 21409167 ecr 252816], length 1448
14:40:12.323526 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 57588, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 68)
ubuntu.55366 > 194.201.159.1.domain: [udp sum ok] 9359+ PTR? 1.0.0.224.in-addr.arpa. (40)
14:40:12.833909 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len 4), Request who-has 192.168.1.100 tell 192.168.1.1, length 46
14:40:27.403771 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 61358, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 70)
ubuntu.37794 > 194.201.159.1.domain: [udp sum ok] 5258+ PTR? 251.0.0.224.in-addr.arpa. (42)
14:40:42.481114 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 65127, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 70)
ubuntu.39400 > 194.201.159.1.domain: [udp sum ok] 55991+ PTR? 252.0.0.224.in-addr.arpa. (42)
14:40:52.522722 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 2101, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 73)
ubuntu.36851 > 194.201.159.1.domain: [udp sum ok] 47118+ PTR? 34.152.204.194.in-addr.arpa. (45)
14:40:57.561459 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 3361, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 118)
ubuntu.34172 > 194.201.159.1.domain: [udp sum ok] 4109+ PTR? b.f.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.2.0.f.f.ip6.arpa. (90)
14:40:58.264486 ARP, Ethernet (len 6), IPv4 (len 4), Request who-has 192.168.1.254 tell 192.168.1.112, length 46
14:41:07.638054 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 5880, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 69)
ubuntu.55860 > 194.201.159.1.domain: [udp sum ok] 38516+ PTR? 22.0.0.224.in-addr.arpa. (41)
14:41:08.151527 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 19736, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 288)
192.168.1.1.3074 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 260
14:41:08.151906 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 19737, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 358)
192.168.1.1.3074 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 330
14:41:08.152212 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 19738, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 297)
192.168.1.1.3074 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 269
14:41:12.676851 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 7140, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 72)
ubuntu.48789 > 194.201.159.1.domain: [udp sum ok] 33823+ PTR? 152.171.0.194.in-addr.arpa. (44)
14:41:12.724912 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 28966, offset 0, flags [none], proto IGMP (2), length 32, options (RA))
BRN008092B5990A.local > 224.0.0.251: igmp v2 report 224.0.0.251
14:41:13.824829 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 28967, offset 0, flags [none], proto IGMP (2), length 32, options (RA))
BRN008092B5990A.local > 239.255.255.250: igmp v2 report 239.255.255.250
14:41:14.944806 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 7707, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 62)
ubuntu.58329 > dns2.tpsa.pl.domain: [udp sum ok] 10891+ A? www.facebook.com. (34)
14:41:14.954648 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 7709, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 61)
ubuntu.40574 > dns2.tpsa.pl.domain: [udp sum ok] 56455+ AAAA? plus.google.com. (33)
14:41:14.974726 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 28968, offset 0, flags [none], proto IGMP (2), length 32, options (RA))
BRN008092B5990A.local > 224.0.0.252: igmp v2 report 224.0.0.252
14:41:14.978513 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 251, id 63952, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 102)
dns2.tpsa.pl.domain > ubuntu.58329: [udp sum ok] 10891 q: A? www.facebook.com. 2/0/0 www.facebook.com. CNAME star.c10r.facebook.com., star.c10r.facebook.com. A 31.13.93.3 (74)
14:41:14.978841 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 7715, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 54)
ubuntu.39399 > 194.201.159.1.domain: [udp sum ok] 3714+ AAAA? vyos.net. (26)
14:41:15.015442 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 7725, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 61)
ubuntu.36936 > dns2.tpsa.pl.domain: [udp sum ok] 30801+ A? www.twitter.com. (33)
14:41:15.026076 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 251, id 63953, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 89)
dns2.tpsa.pl.domain > ubuntu.40574: [udp sum ok] 56455 q: AAAA? plus.google.com. 1/0/0 plus.google.com. AAAA 2a00:1450:4001:80e::1007 (61)
14:41:15.026209 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 7727, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 61)
ubuntu.58621 > 194.201.159.1.domain: [udp sum ok] 28378+ A? plus.google.com. (33)
14:41:15.049496 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 251, id 63954, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 139)
dns2.tpsa.pl.domain > ubuntu.36936: [udp sum ok] 30801 q: A? www.twitter.com. 5/0/0 www.twitter.com. CNAME twitter.com., twitter.com. A 199.16.156.102, twitter.com. A 199.16.156.70, twitter.com. A 199.16.156.230, twitter.com. A 199.16.156.6 (111)
14:41:17.834458 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 8429, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 72)
ubuntu.58976 > 194.201.159.1.domain: [udp sum ok] 53962+ PTR? 100.1.168.192.in-addr.arpa. (44)
14:41:19.643417 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 4, id 1071, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 308)
192.168.1.254.1900 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 280
14:41:19.644881 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 4, id 1072, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 364)
192.168.1.254.1900 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 336
14:41:19.646190 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 4, id 1073, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 292)
192.168.1.254.1900 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 264
14:41:19.709045 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 4, id 1074, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 284)
192.168.1.254.1900 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 256
14:41:19.710430 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 4, id 1075, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 328)
192.168.1.254.1900 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 300
14:41:19.834054 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 4, id 1076, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 304)
192.168.1.254.1900 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 276
14:41:19.835476 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 4, id 1077, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 358)
192.168.1.254.1900 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 330
14:41:19.898349 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 4, id 1078, offset 0, flags [none], proto UDP (17), length 356)
192.168.1.254.1900 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 328
14:41:27.875973 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 10940, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 72)
ubuntu.54569 > 194.201.159.1.domain: [udp sum ok] 15980+ PTR? 112.1.168.192.in-addr.arpa. (44)
14:41:30.105841 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 11497, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 66)
ubuntu.52224 > dns2.tpsa.pl.domain: [udp sum ok] 17605+ AAAA? feeds.feedburner.com. (38)
14:41:30.105887 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 11497, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 61)
ubuntu.57293 > dns2.tpsa.pl.domain: [udp sum ok] 564+ AAAA? www.synology.pl. (33)
14:41:30.139512 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 251, id 4823, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 122)
dns2.tpsa.pl.domain > ubuntu.52224: [udp sum ok] 17605 q: AAAA? feeds.feedburner.com. 2/0/0 feeds.feedburner.com. CNAME www4.l.google.com., www4.l.google.com. AAAA 2a00:1450:4001:80e::1008 (94)
14:41:30.139611 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 11506, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 66)
ubuntu.44427 > 194.201.159.1.domain: [udp sum ok] 28309+ A? feeds.feedburner.com. (38)
14:41:38.161397 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 19748, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 288)
192.168.1.1.3074 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 260
14:41:38.161777 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 19749, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 358)
192.168.1.1.3074 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 330
14:41:38.162718 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 19750, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 297)
192.168.1.1.3074 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 269
14:41:38.163087 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 19751, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 354)
192.168.1.1.3074 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 326
14:41:38.164541 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 19752, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 297)
192.168.1.1.3074 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 269
14:41:38.164868 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 19753, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 334)
192.168.1.1.3074 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 306
14:41:38.165175 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 19754, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 297)
192.168.1.1.3074 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 269
14:41:38.165503 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 19755, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 334)
192.168.1.1.3074 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 306
14:41:38.166506 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 19756, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 297)
192.168.1.1.3074 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 269
14:41:38.166814 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 19757, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 366)
192.168.1.1.3074 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 338
14:41:38.168268 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 19758, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 350)
192.168.1.1.3074 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 322
14:41:38.168637 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 1, id 19759, offset 0, flags [DF], proto UDP (17), length 350)
192.168.1.1.3074 > 239.255.255.250.1900: [udp sum ok] UDP, length 322
14:41:40.009478 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 250, id 54349, offset 0, flags [none], proto TCP (6), length 40)
^C dot.wp.pl.www > ubuntu.52703: Flags [R], cksum 0xd6c3 (correct), seq 521332457, win 4380, length 0
94 packets captured
572 packets received by filter
473 packets dropped by kernel
The moment when the webpage appeared in the browser window is 14:40:25.
I've measured the time of opening the same webpage in the Windows I've mentioned and it's about 5 secs there. In Linuxes - a few tens of seconds (at my Arch - 25 secs until the images load totally). And it's more or less like this with all the possible webpages.
Last edited by kpc21 (2015-05-16 14:58:31)

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

Slow image loads?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for