Thunderbolt with Pegasus R4 heavily slows down boot performance of internal SSD

After connecting a Promise Pegasus R4 Raid with a Thunderbolt cable, my Mac Book Pro 2011 (Snow Leopard) needs about 60(!) seconds longer to boot from the internal SSD. Without the Raid connected, my MacBook Pro needs about 20 seconds to boot. When I press the power button, the display of the MBP is more than 20 seconds black before the bootsequece starts. I shorly can hear the CD drive beeing checked after pressing the power button - as usual. The RAID is the only periphal connected via Thunderbolt. No softwareupdates are available. Raid and SSD are pretty fast after the system booted. Is this behavior normal?

Mrvoeg,
I appreciate you posting that information. Here is what I got with my setup.
X Bench 1.3:
Results          485.29
          System Info
                         Xbench Version                    1.3
                          System Version                    10.7.2 (11C74)
                          Physical RAM                    16384 MB
                         Model                    iMac12,2
                         Drive Type                    Promise Pegasus R4, 4TB Raid 10
          Disk Test          485.29
                          Sequential          290.32
                                   Uncached Write          1076.83          661.16 MB/sec [4K blocks]
                                    Uncached Write          534.43          302.38 MB/sec [256K blocks]
                                   Uncached Read          104.64          30.62 MB/sec [4K blocks]
                                   Uncached Read          703.33          353.49 MB/sec [256K blocks]
                          Random          1477.57
                                    Uncached Write          1021.43          108.13 MB/sec [4K blocks]
                                   Uncached Write          970.43          310.67 MB/sec [256K blocks]
        Uncached Read          4465.91          31.65 MB/sec [4K blocks]
                                    Uncached Read          2110.82          391.68 MB/sec [256K blocks]
This is with just over 1.5TB used out of the available 2TB
Thanks again. I will post back again when I have my Lacie Drive up and running as a boot drive.

Similar Messages

Since downloading OS X Yosemite I have been having issues with Netflix. Video slows down which causes the audio to go out of sync. Netflix plays ok on ipad which makes me think it's the software which is the issue. Has anyone else had this issue?

Since downloading OS X Yosemite I have been having issues with Netflix. Video slows down which causes the audio to go out of sync. Netflix plays ok on ipad which makes me think it's the software which is the issue. Has anyone else had this issue?

Try this:
Go to System Preferences - Bluetooth. Delete the keyboard from the list of devices by pressing the "-" button. Take the batteries out of the keyboard and reinsert them. In Bluetooth Preferences press the '+" button to add the new device. If the keyboard begins to pair, click the word "pair" and type in the passcode. Press return. The keyboard is now paired.
If the mouse is not pairing, try this: shut down the computer completely, unplug any USB mice, then turn off the power to the bluetooth mouse. ONce the computer starts up again, wait for the pop-up looking for a mouse. Turn on the power to the bluetooth mouse. It should work normally now.

Why is my 15'' macbook pro Early 2011 slowing down in performance often?

Why is my 15'' macbook pro Early 2011 slowing down in performance often? It's barely got anything in it and it lags alot of times. This is supposedly running on quad-core i7 2.2 yet I have to restart at times to make sure it gets better. Why is that so?
I turn on activity monitor and there aren't even anything taking up power or memory. It just lags out of the blue.

Activity Monitor may still offer a clue. By default, it shows only "My Processes," those related to your user account. To see the real picture, you need to set AM to show "All Processes" as in this view:
Click the header "%CPU" to sort by usage. Most true resource hogs are only apparent in this view.

Tethering with AT&T, any slow down with increased use?

I am between buying a Iphone4 and a DroidX. The tie-breaker likely is going to be tethering. Apparently on a DroidX with Verizon, after 5 gigs, the intenet slows down to a crawl, something I can't live with. I gather there is no slow down with AT&T, you just pay more, $10 per gig. Do I have that right? Does tethering the Iphone4 work as well as a wireless card? Thanks.

It works fine...did I mention it was EXPENSIVE!

Really stuck with speeding up and slowing down clips

Hi gang,
I have been reading the Final Cut manual for the last hour and fooling around with my clips, but I can't get the effect that I want.
I have a clip (CGI of a star field moving towards the observer) that I want initially to be frozen, then I want the clip to accelerate rapidly, and then end at about double normal speed. I thought I would be able to use keyframes and specify the playback rate at given points, but that option doesn't seem to exist. I have been playing with variable and constant speed settings, but these don't seem to work either.
Ideally, the clip would go like this:
1) first frame of original footage is frozen for 2 seconds.
2) the original footage then begins playing, accelerating rapidly from frozen to double speed over 2 seconds.
3) remainder of original footage plays at double speed until complete.
I feel like I am missing something obvious, but I can't get it to work!
Any suggestions appreciated.
Cheers!

Dude, I have the same problem. I found a picture/text tutorial on how to slow down, speed up and reverse all in one clip w/o chopping it up, but it was for FCP 4. I have 5 and when I ramp the green line down it speeds up, doesn't slow down. Is it just me or is the effect changed from FC4 to FC5.
I'm looking for a great video tutorial for FC5 or similar on how to slow, speed up and reverse a clip using the Time Remap Tool in FC.
If it's a DVD I have to buy so be it.
Thanks everyone.

The Internet connection with WRT54GC V2 is slowing down about time.

I upgraded the router to the newest firmware (1.01.0), but the connection with time still slowing down. I turn the router off and then on, and the connection is fast already. After 1 or 2 days the connection slowing down again. What can I do?

Connect your computer straight to your modem and check if you face the same problem...If you don't face any problems through the modem, hard reset your router...
Press and hold the reset button for 30 seconds...Release the reset button...Unplug the power cable from your router, wait for 30 seconds and re-connect the power cable...Now re-configure your router...If you still face the same problem get your router replaced...

SharePoint with 100 custom Features slow down?

Hi,
i am developing SharePoint features and after i deploy to my local maschine around 100 custom features the sharePoint slow down until timeOuts.
My dev maschine is an i7 2.5 GHz, 16 GB ram, SSD
My SP is an SharePoint 2010 SP2
Why this happened? is this normal?

Typicall depends on what the featuers do. If you enable developer dashboard (
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/office/ff512745(v=office.14).aspx ) you'll find out if there is anything specific causing the slowness.
Kind regards,
Margriet Bruggeman
Lois & Clark IT Services
web site: http://www.loisandclark.eu
blog: http://www.sharepointdragons.com

Optical disk slowing down boot time with z77 gd55

I recently hooked up an optical drive to a gd55 motherboard, after the windows 7 logo is formed now there is a 15 or so second long pause that wasn't there before. If i insert a disk into the drive the pause is gone as well. If anyone knows of a setting to stop this please help,

I found another similar to what Wonkanoby found. Perhaps your problem is you may need the firmware update.
HL-DT-ST GH10L DVD-R/RW
If that doesn't do any good then try a different ODD. If new ODD needed newegg.ca has:
http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827106289 ~ no
LightScribe
or this which is the model I have and it's been just fine for me, bought it at n'egg USA last year:
http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16827106333 ~ with LighScribe

Problem with InDesign server - Server slows down fast

My javascript code iterates the pages of the InDesign Document and searches for the text frames with some special character style.
I found some samples from Jongware :
sourcelist = app.activeDocument.findText()
and
sourcelist = app.activeDocument.pages[p].textFrames[f].findText();
if I use the first variant the memory goes to ca. 1.2GB (the server has 4GB), the search is completed in ca. 2 minutes but InDesign Server works incredibly slow.
The problem is I have to find a page for each text found.
If I use second variant the memory goes high slowly and so each iteration needs more time.
After 300th page InDesign Server needs up to 30-40 seconds to process the page.
(First pages are processed 3-4 per second)
I tried several possible implementations, like
for each page
     var actualPage = pages[i]
     for each frame
          var actualFrame = frames[i]
          var sourceList = searchText(actualFrame)
               parseText(sourceList)
or
var actualPage=null, actualFrame = null, sourceList = null;
for each page
     actualPage = pages[i]
     for each frame
          actualFrame = frames[i]
          sourceList = searchText(actualFrame)
               parseText(sourceList)
I've tried functions with local variables. Nothing changes.
Processing of the first 50 pages is really fast, but the test document has 630 pages.
And I have no ideas how to make InDesign continue to work fast.
Have someone had similar problem? Any ideas?

To clarify my comment on pages:
JavaScript objects referencing a native InDesign object have an internal representation for their "address" in the DOM, a textual form (similar to an XPath) is available via toSpecifier(). The specifier starts at the document and then follows collections (e.g. pages) and collection accessors (e.g. itemByID()) to finally reach the same object.
You can see that the specifier of the document before and after the close/open roundtrip changes in CS5 or later (different document ID), where CS4 used a different specifier form (itemByName() for the document) . The renumbered document ID renders previous references to the same page invalid - see the isValid property. If you want to revive such a stale object reference across close/open, you can remember the page ID and use your reopened document's myDoc.pages.itemByID() method to get to the same object.
Regarding your other performance problem: print the output of the ExtendScript helper function "$.summary()" before and after the code sequence in question, or compute the differences. You may want to precede that with two explicit calls for the garbage collection "$.gc()" - yes, double invokation seems to be more thorough. Sometimes you find memory leaks that way, for example caused by the javascript "closure" design pattern (all those "Workspace" objects).
Dirk

IMac with 4GB - Parallels partition slowing down

I have an iMac mid 2007 with max memory of 4Gb. I run Windows 7 in a Parallels partition. on both sides I do little else than browse and use Office. Since installing Mountain Lion, the Windows system has been runing slower and slower. Advice from Parallels is to clear the temp folder. They don't seem concerned about the size of the partition.
My question is: is there something I can do to get the performance back up to reasonable speed? Put another way, how can I tell whether the hardware I have simple will not support Mountain Lion and Windows 7 together. I have avoided moving to Windows 8, but do have Office 2013, and it drags.

Upgrade the RAM, 4GB is a minimal amount of RAM these days. To see how you RAM is being used, carefully read Apples instructions on Activity Monitor. You can find them by clicking:
Activity Monitor to read System Memory and determine how much RAM is being used

Old house with plaster and lath slowing down airport express?

My airport express worked fine in my previous house. I recently moved and my new (older 1920's) house construction seems "thicker" and the wi-fi drops all the time. The house also may be a bit bigger but it seems like such a radical change from how well everything was working at the previous place. When I play itunes over the wi-fi to the living room surround sound it drops on and off as well. I have to go into the hallway to get a connection for my ipad from the bedroom. This is all driving me nuts! Do I need to get an airport extreme? If so will it really make a difference?

Plaster and metal lathe walls are like steel for a wireless signal.
Unfortunately, this is a "worst case" scenario for wireless in a home. In this type of constuction, you really need to have line-of-sight between your wireless router and wireless devices....or very close to it.
or
You need to run Ethernet cabling to the areas where you need more wireless signal and add AirPorts in those locations to provide more wireless coverage.
If you cannot run the Ethernet cabling, it is possible that Ethernet powerline adapters might be able to send a signal over the existing AC power lines in the home....but I'm not optimistic about this if much of the wiring is "original"
A different router will not help since the signal power of wireless routers is limited by law...they are all about the same.
If it were me, I would call in an IT specialist who can come out to survey the house, take some measurements with test equipment, and propose the right system for your needs.
Otherwise, trial and error can result in a lot more headaches..and more expense as well.

Serious slowing down of performance after updating Flash Player.

Hello guys, after updating today Flash Player i had expirienced severe lagging during playing flash video files from sources like youtube, any advices how can i turn my system back to the previous version of flash player? Or something like patching, because now, every flash video i play is with lagging.
My Flash Player version is now 11.2.202.228
My configuration is an Athlon 2500+; 1GB Ram DDR400; Radeon X1550 256MB
P.S. Please reply me to my e-mail.
Thank you!
Message was edited by: John Smith 1

O/S Windows XP Professional 32Bit + Ati Catalyst Drivers "10-2_legacy_xp32-64_dd_ccc" and I am generally using Firefox up to date.
I made yesterday an experiment, removed the 11th version of Flash Player Plugin & ActiveX, and installed from the archive the 10th version of plugin + 11th activex and then everything worked like it supposed to be - fine.But i have failed to install 10th version of ActiveX, i'ts just telling me that cannot be installed, some kind of error.
P.S. I think i've fixed my issues, i tried to install again from the Adobe Flash Player archive version 10.3.183.18 ActiveX & Plugin and i did it.Now .flv are running like 2 days ago - without any problems.
Maybe the thing is that my configuration is slow for the new version of the player,my CPU isn't multicore, but still it is not bad for the Adobe programmers to optimize the new version better for slower pc's.
Cheers!
Message was edited by: John Smith 1

Adding indexes to a table is slowing down query performance.

I am running a query against a table which contains approx. 4 million records in it. So I created 4 indexes on the table and noticed that the performance on my query drastically decreased. I went back and began remove and creating the indexes in different combinations. It turns out that whenever two of four indexes are created the performance worsens. The strange thing about this problem is when I do an explain plan on the query the cost is greater when the performance is better and the cost is less when the performance is worse. Also Oracle only uses one out of the four indexes on the table for this query.
I'd like to try to understand what is going on with the Oracle optimizer to try to fix this problem.

Mark,
Below is the information you requested.
DATABASE: 10.2.0.3.0
QUERY:
select distinct object, object_access from betweb_objects
where instr(object_access,'RES\') = 0
and object_access_type = 'ADM'
and object in (select distinct object
from betweb_objects
where instr(object_access,'RES\') = 0
and object_access_type = 'NTK'
and object not like '%.%'
and substr(object_access,instr(object_access,'\')+1) in (select distinct substr(object_access,instr(object_access,'\')+1)
from betweb_objects
where object_access_type = 'NTK'
and instr(object_access,'RES\') = 0
minus
select distinct upper(id)
from uamp.ad_users
where status = 'A'))
TABLE:
BETWEB_OBJECTS
OBJECT                VARCHAR2
OBJECT_ACCESS           VARCHAR2
OBJECT_ACCESS_TYPE      VARCHAR2
INDEXES ON BETWEB_OBJECTS:
BETWEB_OBJECTS_IDX1
OBJECT
BETWEB_OBJECTS_IDX2
OBJECT_ACCESS
BETWEB_OBJECTS_IDX3
OBJECT_ACCESS_TYPE
BETWEB_OBJECTS_IDX4
OBJECT_ACCESS
OBJECT_ACCESS_TYPE
TABLE:
AD_USERS
ID                VARCHAR2
DOMAIN           VARCHAR2
FNAME           VARCHAR2
LNAME           VARCHAR2
INITIALS           VARCHAR2
TITLE           VARCHAR2
DN                VARCHAR2
COMPANY           VARCHAR2
DEPARTMENT      VARCHAR2
PHONE           VARCHAR2
MANAGER           VARCHAR2
STATUS           VARCHAR2
DISPLAY_NAME      VARCHAR2
EXPLAIN PLAN when performance is better:
SELECT STATEMENT      Rows=13,414      Time=643,641      Cost=53,636,676      Bytes=6,948,452
HASH UNIQUE           Rows=13,414      Time=643,641      Cost=53,636,676      Bytes=6,948,452
HASH JOIN           Rows=694,646,835      Time=428           Cost=35,620      Bytes=359,827,060,530
VIEW VW_NSO_1           Rows=542           Time=42           Cost=3,491           Bytes=163,684
MINUS
SORT UNIQUE           Rows=542                               Bytes=9,756
INDEX FAST FULL SCAN BETWEB_OBJECTS_IDX4 Rows=26,427      Time=40           Cost=3,302           Bytes=475,686
SORT UNIQUE           Rows=16,228                          Bytes=178,508
TABLE ACCESS FULL AD_USERS Rows=16,360      Time=2           Cost=113           Bytes=179,960
HASH JOIN                Rows=128,163,623      Time=322           Cost=26,805      Bytes=27,683,342,568
TABLE ACCESS FULL BETWEB_OBJECTS Rows=9,161           Time=154           Cost=12,805      Bytes=989,388
TABLE ACCESS FULL BETWEB_OBJECTS Rows=25,106      Time=154           Cost=12,822          Bytes=2,711,448
EXPLAIN PLAN when performance is worse:
SELECT STATEMENT      Rows=13,414      Time=22,614      Cost=1,884,484      Bytes=2,897,424
HASH UNIQUE           Rows=13,414      Time=22,614      Cost=1,884,484      Bytes=2,897,424
HASH JOIN                Rows=128,163,623      Time=322           Cost=26,805      Bytes=27,683,342,568
TABLE ACCESS FULL BETWEB_OBJECTS Rows=9,161           Time=154           Cost=12,805      Bytes=989,388
TABLE ACCESS FULL BETWEB_OBJECTS Rows=25,106      Time=154           Cost=12,822      Bytes=2,711,448
MINUS
SORT UNIQUE NOSORT      Rows=209           Time=40           Cost=3,305           Bytes=3,762
INDEX FAST FULL SCAN BETWEB_OBJECTS_IDX4 Rows=264           Time=40           Cost=3,304           Bytes=4,752
SORT UNIQUE NOSORT      Rows=164           Time=2           Cost=115           Bytes=1,804
TABLE ACCESS FULL AD_USERS Rows=164           Time=2           Cost=114           Bytes=1,804

Creating a view may casue slow down the performance

Hi,
I would like to know if i create a view for a table (resb), the program , includes update/inserts statement to this table, will be be affected. I do not want to affect standard SAP program's running time. Tnanks.

Hi Rich,
Thank you for your reply. I understand creating index will affect performance.
Regards,
Furong

Recording with audio playback slowed down 65% what speed do I need to speed the video back up to to get it into real time?

Ive recorded a test video with audio/music playback slowed down 65% what speed do I need to speed the video back up to to get it into "real" time?
If I'd slowed the audio playback down 50% I would make the video 100% faster.
If I'd slowed the audio playback down 100% I would make the video 200% faster.
So its obviously somewhere inbetween speeding up by 100-200%
Sorry but its melting my brain today and I cant remember the calculation.
thanks

hey all
Thanks for the advise on this. I will explain a little more what am have/am intending to do.
I have used Audacity to slow the song down (Effect>Change Tempo)
Audacity will allow me slow the original song down by up to 99% (Or anything in-between up to 3 decimal places)
Unfortunately I am working to a time restraint of 12 minutes per clip (as my DSLR will only allow up to a 12 minute clip).
The song at normal speed is 4 minutes long.
Originally I slowed the audio down by 50% (Making the audio 8 minutes long), lip synced to it using a rasta blaster and recorded the video using my DSLR at 720p 50fps.
I then imported the video and audio I had been lip syncing to into FCPX.
I sped up the video by x2 (equivalent to speeding it up 200%)
Retime>Fast 2X
Layered the PROPER normal speed audio back over the top and all was fine.
Test video complete.
(You can ignore the 65% slowed down audio I mentioned earlier if you like, that was just an example of a slower than 50% audio test)
Firstly what I really want to do is to be able to slow the AUDIO down as much as possible (But still within the restraints of only being able to adjust FCPX retiming within a whole 1 percentage in the final video edit), but have the AUDIO of the song as near to/under 12 minutes as possible.
I will then re-record the video again to this new slowed down audio.
Secondly I will speed up the video from 12 minutes to 4 minutes.
Thirdly I will layer the correct 100% Normal AUDIO on top.
The FINISHED video should then look like everyone is wizzing around at high speed but the guitar playing/lyrics look like they are being played/sung at the normal speed.
Whatever happens (due to the constraints of FCPX) I need the calculations to work so that FCPX is retimed exactly to a whole 1% for the final video to sync up correctly.
So what I need to know in a nut shell is:-
What calculation do I use to work out the percentage to slow a 4 minute song down to a 12 minute song?
What calculation do I use to work out the percentage of how much I need to then speed the 12 minute video up to turn it back into a 4 minute video?
My mind is melting

Thunderbolt with Pegasus R4 heavily slows down boot performance of internal SSD

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for