TimesTen turns more slowly than Oracle RDBMS

Similar Questions

• Why oracle RAC 11.2.0.2 give more trouble than oracle 11.2.0.1?

  Hi all
  
  I just want to know, why oracle RAC 11.2.0.2 giving more problem than oracle 11.2.0.1?
  The problems here:
  
  1 resolved multicast (multicast open or patch)
  Miladin Modrakovic through. His blog issue-with-oracle-11-2-0-2-new-redundant-interconnect give me a solution to open Multicast 230.0.1.0 on cisco switch
  
  2 DNS problem (PRVF-5636: DNS response for an unreachable node time exceeded "15000" ms)
  Someone has already asked on this forum: runcluvfy failed with PRVF-5636, but still no solution for this problem of PRVF-5636.
  
  
  
  
  Thank you
  
  
  Indra
  
  Published by: indra on Sep 6, 2011 12:00 AM

  Hello

  I just want to know, why oracle RAC 11.2.0.2 give me more problem than oracle 11.2.0.1?

  You can use Oracle Support to fix all bugs on Oracle software. Simply open the SR

  1 resolved multicast (multicast open or patch)

  This bug is documented for the Clusterware installation, find the Bug 9974223:
  http://download.Oracle.com/docs/CD/E11882_01/READMEs.112/e17129/TOC.htm#CHDIEHCH

  * Oracle Grid Infrastructure 11.2.0.2 Installation or upgrade may fail due to the requirement of multicast [1212703.1 ID] *.

  2 DNS problem (PRVF-5636: DNS response for an unreachable node time exceeded "15000" ms)

  This isn't an Oracle problem, but a DNS problem that can cause instability in the clusterware, YES does not proceed without resolving the problem in your nodes.

  Date of arrival:

  /etc/resolv.conf
  /etc/nsswitch.conf
  
  find line hosts:  on file nsswitch.conf
  The order of keywords on this line indicates the order in which your SO references the name services. (dns or host file) 
  

  Kind regards
  Levi Pereira

  Published by: Levi Pereira Sep 5, 2011 14:08

• Insertion of cache imdb timesten takes more time than inserting it into db11g

  Hello
  
  I am very new to Timesten imdb cache. Recently, I installed imdb cache in an application server and then installed oracle 11g on a db server and get to integrate them.
  So, I wanted to test the performance of the imdb cache... I have create an insert scripts that write about 10 k record... I ran into both cache imdb then ran directly in oracle 11g. I have the chance to see the results that Timesten is slower than oracle db...
  
  I followed the steps of installing oracle wesbsite... my question... what else should I consider making imdb cache 10 x faster than writing in oracle db?
  
  I hope you could help.
  
  John

  By direct connection of threads, I meant that you have several threads or processes each with a connection (using the direct ODBC driver rather than the Client/Server driver), all working in parallel to separate the workload and achieve a maximum flow rate. On processor chips multi-core hardware of today, across my addition process/connections/threads is imperative and TimesTen does very well.

• Why run exe file run more slowly than vi format when we build application exe?

  Jin

  We build the file vi drifter but exe file to run slower than the file vi. I check several vi and get the same result, which is slow, why?

  Thank you.

  The executable runs on the same PC that you have developed it, or on another PC when it is running slowly?  (Thinking that if it's on another PC, it hangs on errors for things that cannot be installed on the 2nd PC.)

  Where is the current slowdown?  Is it possible to have errors that happen that you do not see (as in the communication of the database) and which is at the origin of things run slowly because of time-out errors occur?

  I recommend you build your VI with a code debugging in it.  As indicators to show which are the son of the error.  Maybe create a simple Subvi who will save a timestamp and a description to a file and that scatter around your code, then you can connect at run time.

• Web pages load more slowly than normal. Why is this? I did the update to FireFox.

  Pages take a while to load. Firefox is slow. Internet Explore will be charge the same pages in no time. Why is this? I had FireFox for some time and never had any problems. It lasts for months.

  Hello

  The reset Firefox feature can solve a lot of problems in restaurant Firefox to its factory default condition while saving your vital information.
  Note: This will make you lose all the Extensions, open Web sites and preferences.

  To reset Firefox, perform the following steps:

  1. Go to Firefox > help > troubleshooting information.
  2. Click on the button 'Reset Firefox'.
  3. Firefox will close and reset. After Firefox is finished, it will display a window with the imported information. Click Finish.
  4. Firefox opens with all the default settings applied.

  Information can be found in the article Firefox Refresh - reset the settings and Add-ons .

  This solve your problems? Please report to us!

  If you have security software (antivirus, firewall etc.), you can also try to check by disabling it temporarily, turn on the Windows Firewall and browse a few well-known websites without downloading or installing anything. You can also disable (uncheck) Enable Javascript in Firefox Tools (Alt + T) > Options > contentand turn off the Plugins in Tools (Alt + T) > modules before checking it in.

• Computer runs more slowly than before.

  I have a desktop computer. I was looking around and found the "reliability monitor and performance." I ran the test and here are the results:

  Diagnostic warnings!

  SYMPTOM: The Security Center has not declared - virus application... it is not anti virus product or it is not recognized

  CAUSE: Security Center cannot identify an antivirus application

  Solution: 1. check that the anti-virus is installed

  2. If installed, configure Security Center to stop monitoring anti virus status.

  I have not yet tried this solution

  Now, I have little idea of what I'm doing. I thought I read here that the 'Defender' is not available for Vista, that "Essentials" disabled or something like that.

  I know it's on my computer, but when I try to open and turn it on I get an error message. (error "0x800106ba") Usually hidden until I try to close all windows.

  Windows Defender is part of the Vista operating system.

  If you have Microsoft Security Essentials, AVG, McAfee, Norton, etc. installed, they have a conflict with Windows Defender, or turn it off.

  Microsoft Security Essentials has its own integrated version of the defender and should automatically disable the version of Vista in Windows Defender.

  If it's not:

  http://Windows.Microsoft.com/en-us/Windows-Vista/turn-Windows-Defender-on-or-off

  Turn Windows Defender on or off the information on the link above of Microsoft.

  Hope the above explains the common compatibility issues with Windows Defender and other security programs.

  See you soon.

  Mick Murphy - Microsoft partner

• Lightroom more slowly than Lr5 cc and struggling for simple cropping and Pan

  I wonder if there is something wrong here. I have a decent machine (2500 k overclocked to almost 5 GHz, GTX570, 8 GB ram, Lr, installed on a SSD).

  LR5 me served well for a long time, and despite its slowness to certain tasks, it is ok. On the other hand, CRD offers very little new features and a decrease in performance.

  I change some 20mp canon raw files and the task simple or cropping/rotation/Pan became a nightmare. It's slow and something seems to be very bad when I try to recrop a virtual copy of an image. At the top very slowly, moving the clipping rectangle sometimes guard reset its position and "refuses" to stay in the place I put it to.

  When I zoom and pan on library mode, everything is going well, he gets only bad on developer mode. If I zoom 1:1 and have some adjustments with the brush of spotting, it feels like I'm panoramic a gigantic file on a 20 year old computer. Even in a clean image with no adjustment, developer mode fight bad pan with zoom.

  
  

  My catalog has around 40 000 files, but it should not matter when a single photo developing. Once again, the same catalog was LR5 and had many questions.

  Checked the use of computing resources, and nothing is really forced to the limit. Total memory usage never exceeds 5 GB (about 8 GB) and the CPU usage does not raise above 40%. If believes that CCRB does not have good use of the computing power available.

  Just replying to me here, I tried to disable this option in preferences > Performance to use my graphics processor and the performance boosted immediately. It is now at the same level as the Lr5.

  I use the version of 350.12 (later like today) of the Nvidia with a GTX570 driver. Apparently, there is a problem on the way that CCRB uses my video card. I hope that this problem is corrected, but at least now my LRcc is usable.

• First Pro CS5 never uses more than 15% of CPU, so perform much more slowly than first 6.5!

  Hello.

  I make videos of marriage for a while. My material included map DV500DVD and first 6.5 CPU Core 2 Duo E8400, 2 GB of RAM, Windows XP SP1 (DV500 does not work with SP2 or SP3).

  The above system is quite old and absolutely not usable for HD videos. So, I decided to build another machine. The configuration is the following:

  OS: Windows 7 Professional 64 bit.

  M/b: Asus LGA 1155, H67 chipset.

  CPU: Intel Core i7 - 2600K

  RAM: 4 GB DDR3

  HARD drive: 2 x 64 GB SSD, 2 TB SATA (RAID) 4 x (all drives connected to separate the controller PCI-E chipset fault intel isn't a problem here)

  I recently downloaded and installed the first Pro CS5 trial version, to see how he adapts to my needs. And I'm very disappointed. I started the first, chosen preset widescreen DV, inserted two static images on the timeline and made a mix alpha between them. Then put movie export. Not only it took too long to make, but it only used a nucleus, and the CPU usage is only 15%. Just out of curiosity, I installed first 6.5 on the same system, and he did this task about 10 times faster!

  That is, limitation of the trial version, or just first Pro CS5 cannot be used with this modern processor?

  Thanks in advance,

  Alex

  I can understand your experience... After I installed Windows 7 and CS5 Production Premium, adding another 8 Gig of Ram for my PC, dying on the fact that my Nvidia Quadro FX 4600 is not able to use the reading mercury and literally hours of waiting for spending returns, on a hunch, and after reading about someone else who did the same thing.  Finally, I took my old PP CS3 and installed on alongside first CS5. To my surprise, with 64-bit OS, CS3 running and makes exactly the same content about 4 times faster, does not idiosyncratic seizures slow when moving clips in the timeline, no white on the error screen "not responding" messages, etc.etc. I have no problem with After Effects or Photoshop CS5, they work fine, but first CS5 is close not functional as it gets. A: 30 minutes with some effects of magic bullet, even native capture HDV format takes about 10 minutes with PPCS3... and about 45 minutes with CS5. CS3 also reads smoother and barely stutters, so that I have to sit and to return with CS5 because of choking in order to continue working. One post suggested that I don't have enough gas in the machine, dual core AMD Opterons 3.2 GHZ, disks, 16 Gig ram working 7200 and 10 000 rpm... but cannot see how CS5 can maybe make CS3 on the same stage. What I'm missing here? I'm not whining just baffled.

• Turn laptop slower than usual, help

  
  

  My laptop runs slower than usual. I thought that a disk cleanup or defragmentation will improve the beginning upward and and connection to the email. Fix? Or another suggestion? I have Windows 7.

  Wednesday, December 8, 2010, 06:14:12 + 0000, youngalltheway wrote:
   
  > My laptop runs slower than usual. I thought that a disk cleanup or defragmentation will improve the beginning upward and and connection to the email. Fix? Or another suggestion? I have Windows 7.
   
   
   
  First of all, please note that you asked that question you on Windows 7
  in a forum of Windows Vista. In the future, please ask in the right
  place.
   
  But because the version of Windows without doubt whatever here, let me
  to answer your question.
   
  According to what you clean, a 'disk cleanup' * may * help a little.
  but the defragmentation is unlikely to have any effect at all. Nevertheless, it
  does not hurt doing these things.
   
  If the computer is running more slowly than usual, still probably the most
  probable cause is a malware infection. What anti-virus and anti-spyware
  the programs that you are running? If they are updated?
   

  Ken Blake, Microsoft MVP

• I have 2 sticks flash, a 4GB & A 16 GB, my biggest stick flash transfers more slowly, is this normal?

  Hello, my problem is that I bought a bigger stick flash (16 GB) like my old man a (4 GB) was too small for what I used it for. When I bought it, he says he has high transfer but it works more slowly than without a faster transfer.  I know that NTFS is slower but have verified that they are both FAT32 and that you have formatted ensure them!  Here are my results for transfer rates for both if it helps:

  4GB Flash stick = 7.20 MB\s

  18 GB Flash stick = 3,70 MB\s

  For this to be a fair test I did it on the same USB port!

  Please can you tell me if it is normal to happen?

  Yes, it's normal. Different flash drives have different flow rates. This is why it is good to read consumer reviews before you buy a USB. My AData 16 GB drive is certainly a little slower than my old 8 GB Kingston. MS - MVP - Elephant Boy computers - don't panic!

• Paper photo DESKJE F4480 fuels more slowly that it prints.

  Photo paper feeds more slowly than expected to print correctly. If you help in putting pressure on the paper, it helps but not satisfactory.

  Power ok plain paper. Looks like paper slips into the feeder. At startup, it prints on top of the sheet so you don't push it by hand.

  Thanks in advance for any help.

  HI JANDSCOX,

  It seems that the feed tires are getting worn out. I would clean a little more time to see if it improves.

• Flash CS3 Pro CS6: games works more slowly?

  Good, everyone. I will try to explain the problem I encounter as concise as I can:

  I just got a new iMac (10.8.2) and I got all my stuff in CS3 hover over with a transfer system. However, Flash CS3 has this message "error initializing java runtime environment" and I can't get it repaired despite the number of 'solutions' that I found, mainly because the patches are for older versions of Mac and its operating systems. That said, if anyone has found a fix for this problem on the new iMacs and operating systems, please let me know and ignore everything that I'm about to ask questions on below.

  However, I decided to give a whirl CS6 and see if I should go ahead and upgrade to one. The problem that I am running is disconcerting say the least. I was doing a game in Flash CS3 and Actionscript 3 on my old Macbook Pro (2007-2008ish) and I managed to run at a solid 60 frames per second. This is not really surprising, given how little there is in the game so far, but I am concerned that they run slower when running through Flash CS6 on a computer more recent (2.9 Ghz Intel Core i5, 8 GB of RAM, NVIDIA GeForce GT 650 M 512 MB).

  I tested the executable (.app) both the .swf, and both run much slower than they should. Cadence plunges even when there is nothing on the screen except for the character and background. Curiously, if I have the game running in Flash Player 9, it works fine, but everything else (10 and more) runs significantly more bad.

  Anyone know why the game will run more slowly? I even tried to use hardware acceleration, and there was no change whatsoever. If the files that I opened, .as files both .fla, were at the origin of the CS3 files? Creating CS6 files from scratch and then bring the content and code on would fix the problem?

  Any other suggestions would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance,

  Ian

  Never experienced sth. Like this. It should not matter if you are publishing to Flash Player 9 (CS3) or 11 (CS6).

  I even tried to use hardware acceleration

  Hardware acceleration will be most often slow down your fps if you are not using the Stage3D/Starling features, you will need to disable your Flash Player via right click options, too, though. It would be my first guess would default to HwAcc a new installed Flash Player 11.5, so you must manually, turn off when it does.

  If its possible for you: load 2 (CS3 - swf, CS6 - swf) Versions of your game to the top and post the link, then I could test it in Windows to see if his mayba a number Macrelated.

• Why my iMac turns so slowly after the upgrade of the Lion in El Capitan?

  Why my iMac turns so slowly after the upgrade of the Lion in El Capitan?

  Just what do slow down? Rotation beach balls?

  Run and view the results here so that we know more about your configuration.

  http://etrecheck.com/

  EtreCheck

  https://discussions.Apple.com/docs/doc-6172

• Slower than Oracle 11 g

  I ran SQLFire installed locally on a system Win 8 with 12 GB of memory...

  I tried to run the comparison on the database of 5 million ranks test; one Oracle 11g one another 1.1 SQLFire (downloaded for evaluation). Just a simple query SELECT on the code.

  Here are the results of the 3 races:

  lines of 2 members (Locator & server1) 5 M ~ 2.5 GB SELECT statement

  Oracle: 16

  SQLFire: 46

  Oracle: 15

  SQLFire: 45

  Oracle: 15

  SQLFire: 45

  It is said that sqlfire works 30 times faster than Oracle 11 g all the test shows that sqlfire 3 times slower.

  Just curious to know what is missing?

  Hello

  Looked at the code, and here are a few comments:

  • The code is just do an executeQuery() and do not consume all the results. Most DBs, including Oracle and SQLFire, flow results gradually as they are consumed and executeQuery() by itself will probably not do much of the work in this case. For a meaningful comparison, the code should consume all results in Oracle and SQLFire (attention: it can take a lot of time with this large number of results). Please update that the look of numbers like for you code as below:

  long tStart = java.lang.System.currentTimeMillis ();
  RSet = stmt.executeQuery ("SELECT COLUMN1, COLUMN2, Column3 FROM table1");

  int numRows = 0;

  While (rset.next ()) {}

  numRows ++;

  }
  long tend = java.lang.System.currentTimeMillis ();

  System.out.println ("Oracle:" + (trend - tStart) + "for" + numrows + "rows.");

  • The code executes the query "SELECT COLUMN1, COLUMN2, Column3 FROM table1" against Oracle but runs 'SELECT id, data, search FOR app.test where (search = 'aA' OR search = 'aa' OR 'AA' = search OR search = 'Aa')' against SQLFire. Is it wanted, because that it is not a fair comparison? I'm assuming that the code runs the same queries against both, then again once need to consume the results completely for a fair comparison. For the request of the latter, you can optimize a lot if you use case-sensitive index added in SQLFire 1.1: vFabric Documentation Center , then the request can be "SELECT id, data, search FOR app.test where search ="aa"
  • SQLFire itself is not well optimized for queries that return a large number of lines for example > 10000 or more lines. It is better optimized for queries returning small average number of lines which, in our view, are much more likely to run in real-world applications. There are still a few models of complex query for which Oracle can do better, but for current releases, we target the most common query patterns. In future releases, we will close the gaps in other areas. That said, we really wanted more on queries that run evil in SQLFire.
  • Another point of difference in the small benchmarks is that SQLFire is a java engine runs first few queries slower than hotspot JIT comes into play, so in general, you will see the first operations of thousand being slower that a server has just started. Real-world applications will be won't on the first operations bit, so it might be preferable to a cue point ignore first few results in a freshly started cluster (or if it a long run cluster, then it's not bad).
  • Finally, the mentioned comparison is made reference to update the PTAC (the one without any limitation of operations) that contains a mixture of queries during each transaction than most close as possible to the real-world applications and updates. It is in such a mixed load that SQLFire really shines more traditional DBs.

• ORA-00338: 3 log thread 1 is more recent than the control file

  Hello
  
  I met the error ORA-00338 while performing the recovery of incomplete data:
  
  ORA-00283: cool cancelled due to errors
  ORA-00338: 3 log thread 1 is more recent than the control file
  ORA-00312: wire 3 1 online journal: "+ DG_REDO/dbase/onlinelog/group_3.267.814820795".
  Complete recovery manager.
  
  I made this recovery on oracle 10g, database of ASM.
  
  1. What are the possible causes of this error ORA-00338?
  
  2. This error occurs at the beginning of the media recovery, RMAN is applying logs archived. If RMAN does newspapers "Online REDO" after applying "archived" logs required for recovery or in front of them?
  
  3 rman is how this journal in line 3 is more recent than the control file? How can I me SNA of the journal online & file control in my environment?
  
  Here are some details related to checkpoint scn / change # info. I found in my environment:
  Before recovery:
  view
  v$ datafile: 642935
  v$ datafile_header: 642935
  v database $: 642935
  Journal of v$: 640956
  
  After the recovery fails (ORA 338 :()
  v$ datafile: 640917
  v$ datafile_header: 640056
  v$ database: 640906
  Journal of v$: 640906

  You could try the incomplete recovery has to do only the RESTORE DATABASE with RMAN.
  Then, using the SQLPLUS command line, issue a RECOVER database with the HELP of BACKUP CONTROLFILE until CANCEL. See which he records guests for and monitor messages in the alert.log

  Hemant K Collette