How To Make Speed 2

[Vespasiano Jilg]

Did this post help you? If so please give it a Like below.

Did this post fix your issue/answer your question? If so please press the 'Accept as Best Answer' button to help others find it.

Still stuck? Ask me a question! (Questions asked in the community will likely receive an answer within 4 hours!)

Did this post not resolve your issue? If so please give us some more information so we can try and help - please remember we cannot see over your shoulder so be as descriptive as possible!

No, there is no limit. It just slows things down initially as there are overheads on checking each file.

I can quite easily upload movies of a few GB here in a couple of minutes, but, thats because everything else is already sync'd and so the overheads are low.

Have a look at -uploads/faster-sync

I was using my Synology NAS with the great Dropbox client in there. It was getting 45MB/sec upstream (I have 840Mb/ upload speed with FIOS).... so that's 360Mb/sec. It uploaded my 740GB collection in about 12 hours or so? I didn't check how long it took but I set it up after getting annoyed that Amazon Drive lost 20 of my videos and paid to go back to Dropbox where I had 30 days file retention -- Amazon Drive completely lost the files and I couldn't get them back otherwise. I set it up at 4am and when I checked around 4pm, it said it was already done.

If there's a cap, it could be on your machine or at your ISP. Maybe if you try uploading via Wifi it goes slower? I wired my PC here with a Cat6 cable into a 7-port switch and then with one cable into the cable modem across the room. Speeds are much faster than with any other provider I've used.

I don't use Google Drive so I can't say if I get the same results. For me, I turn on my Synology NAS, put the files on my drive there, and the system takes care of syncing it to Dropbox. I can have it do 10 files at the same time and each one goes for about 5MB each.... but it does 10 at the same time. Not sure if you're referring to individual upload speed but in terms of syncing a ton of files over, I seem to do OK and pretty much always have. I think sometimes it even matches it up to files in the Deleted files folder and pulls them out to avoid having to use network traffic if it has a match..... When I started to put my files back on Dropbox, it often said "Merged" instead of "Uploaded" as most of those files hadn't changed since I pulled them off 30 days ago.

Yeah, so there are many little things, but a big ah-ha moment for me was establishing a hash index in memory representing historical responses. This makes it possible to lean solely on embeddings to craft a response. Consider that a single embedding can be executed in about 400ms. My process using this cache index involves just two steps:

Many additional ideas come to mind that I have not explored. Imagine the historical cache was based on question popularity and other measures that predict the types of questions that should be cached. The opportunities to build additional performance measures using AI itself are vast.

Lastly, imagine the historical cache is periodically tested against actual new questions to see if the earlier recommendation is as predictable as an actual new inference would have been. Embeddings - once again - make this possible because you can easily perform the look-back and compare that answer to what a new inference would have been had there been no cache to lean on - thus, the snake is eating its tail to get better and better.

Yeah, that makes sense. Have you benchmarked the process to see what in the prompt is taking the most time? Perhaps removing the two additional tasks (what changed and why) to see if either or both of those are causing it to slow down.

You need to alter the time from frame to frame not anything in the settings. If you've set your 1st keyframe at 00:00 and your second keyframe is at 00:01 it's going to be incredibly quick so you need to extend the timeframe on the second or last keyframe as it sets the overall time of the animation.

External Contentwww.youtube.comContent embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.Display all external contentThrough the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.

Hi all! I am actually looking for a quick way to speed up my video. I have about 40 keyframes and changing to time stamp for each key frame is becoming a tedious task to speed up the entire video. Also, manually adjusting the keyframes is leading to non-uniform speed adjustments between multiple key frames. I just saw a tutorial " External Contentwww.youtube.comContent embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.Display all external contentThrough the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy. " where there is an option to increase the camera speed globally for all keyframes at once in revit. I am not able to find the same option under "Capture" tab in sketchup. Please let me know if there is a quicker way to speed up camera movement in the sketchup plugin. Thanks.

In terms of speed, there may be some limitations in how fast the data can actually be written into the database. With large output files it may just be necessary to give it time to perform these operations.

We're going to start altering our working practices to mitigate the problem, including a greater emphasis on the hosted-mode browser, which defers the need to run the GWT compiler until a later time, but that brings its own risks, particularly that of not catching issues with real browsers until much later than we'd like.

Ideally, we'd like to make the GWT compiler itself quicker - a minute to compile a fairly small application is taking the piss. However, we are using the compile if a fairly naive fashion, so I'm hoping we can make some quick and easy gains.

We're currently invoking com.google.gwt.dev.Compiler as a java application from ant Ant target, with 256m max heap and lots of stack space. The compiler is launched by Ant using fork=true and the latest Java 6 JRE, to try and take advantage of Java6's improved performance. We pass our main controller class to the compiler along with the application classpath, and off it goes.

Another option: if you are using several locales, and again using only one for testing, you can comment them all out so that GWT will use the default locale, this shaves off some additional overhead from compile time.

If you run the GWT compiler with the -localWorkers flag, the compiler will compile multiple permutations in parallel. This lets you use all the cores of a multi-core machine, for example -localWorkers 2 will tell the compiler to do compile two permutations in parallel.You won't get order of magnitudes differences (not everything in the compiler is parallelizable) but it is still a noticable speedup if you are compiling multiple permutations.

If you're willing to use the trunk version of GWT, you'll be able to use hosted mode for any browser (out of process hosted mode), which alleviates most of the current issues with hosted mode. That seems to be where the GWT is going - always develop with hosted mode, since compiles aren't likely to get magnitudes faster.

Although this entry is quite old and most of you probably already know, I think it's worth mention that GWT 2.x includes a new compile flag which speeds up compiles by skipping optimizations. You definitely shouldn't deploy JavaScript compiled that way, but it can be a time saver during non-production continuous builds.

to your gwt.xml for development purposes.That will tell the GWT compiler to create a single permutation which covers all locales and browsers. Therefore, you can still test in all browsers and languages, but are still only compiling a single permutation

Another thing that more than doubled the build and hosted mode performance was the use of an SSD disk (now hostedmode works like a charm). It's not an cheap solution, but depending on how much you use GWT and the cost of your time, it may worth it!

The GWT compiler is doing a lot of code analysis so it is going to be difficult to speed it up. This session from Google IO 2008 will give you a good idea of what GWT is doing and why it does take so long.

My recommendation is for development use Hosted Mode as much as possible and then only compile when you want to do your testing. This does sound like the solution you've come to already, but basically that's why Hosted Mode is there (well, that and debugging).

You can speed up the GWT compile but only compiling for some browsers, rather than 5 kinds which GWT does by default. If you want to use Hosted Mode make sure you compile for at least two browsers; if you compile for a single browser then the browser detection code is optimised away and then Hosted Mode doesn't work any more.

However, due to new requirements to the system, I now need to also be able to update the table while the system is running, so I can no longer wipe the table and have to use UPDATE instead of INSERT and update the balances one by one which will be much slower than inserting 20 new records at a time as I'm doing now.

3a8082e126