Performance in Reports still poor in comparison to HEM1

Questions and discussion about PokerTracker 4 for Windows

Moderators: WhiteRider, kraada, Flag_Hippo, morny, Moderators

Re: Performance in Reports still poor in comparison to HEM1

Postby kraada » Fri Jul 27, 2012 11:14 am

Try changing it from *.* to just * - *.* does not do subdirectories but * does, and in this case especially we want all subdirectories included.
kraada
Moderator
 
Posts: 54431
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2008 2:32 am
Location: NY

Re: Performance in Reports still poor in comparison to HEM1

Postby ElHive » Fri Jul 27, 2012 11:55 am

Didn't work either

I then excluded every single subdirectory from ESET NOD (which took me half an hour) and it still is slow.

Uploading a new logfile in a bit.

Any more suggestions?
ElHive
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 7:30 pm

Re: Performance in Reports still poor in comparison to HEM1

Postby kraada » Fri Jul 27, 2012 12:15 pm

PM me your ticket number once your new logs are up and I'll make sure this gets looked into for you further.
kraada
Moderator
 
Posts: 54431
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2008 2:32 am
Location: NY

Re: Performance in Reports still poor in comparison to HEM1

Postby ElHive » Fri Jul 27, 2012 12:42 pm

Ok, i got an errorcode now when i chance buy in:

"Unable to load query into control. Reason: Access violation (0) (Flags: 0; Adress: 0x0048e2ae; EIP: 0x0048E2AE"

I try to reproduce that with logging enabled then upload another log file.
ElHive
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 7:30 pm

Re: Performance in Reports still poor in comparison to HEM1

Postby ElHive » Fri Jul 27, 2012 12:50 pm

New logfile added in ticket.
ElHive
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Fri Jun 20, 2008 7:30 pm

Re: Performance in Reports still poor in comparison to HEM1

Postby schlauf » Fri Jul 27, 2012 1:07 pm

Here's my update: PT4 takes a little while to load data when I first start it (after the windows has been shut down or restarted). If I close it and then start it again, the loading takes something like 2 seconds. But whenever I start it for the first time it still takes a little while to load and my guess is that if I had much more hands in the db, it would take much longer.

So exceptions in the antivirus did help (because before I did that, it would take the same amount to load every time). I disabled the indexing service in windows, hoping that will help performance as well. But this running it for the first time still takes some time to load. Maybe something to do with Postgres?

Anyway, I'll keep an eye on this thread and will be testing some things on my own, so please update this thread with any news. :)
schlauf
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2012 12:17 pm

Re: Performance in Reports still poor in comparison to HEM1

Postby kraada » Fri Jul 27, 2012 2:22 pm

PostgreSQL caches data itself so that subsequent runs will be faster than the first run when you're running the same report. That would explain the behavior you're seeing.
kraada
Moderator
 
Posts: 54431
Joined: Wed Mar 05, 2008 2:32 am
Location: NY

Re: Performance in Reports still poor in comparison to HEM1

Postby pt4pt4pt4 » Fri Jul 27, 2012 2:45 pm

kraada wrote:PostgreSQL caches data itself so that subsequent runs will be faster than the first run when you're running the same report. That would explain the behavior you're seeing.


Can you explain this further?

What can i do before starting sessions that will speed up reports while I am playing?
pt4pt4pt4
 
Posts: 1097
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 12:17 am

Re: Performance in Reports still poor in comparison to HEM1

Postby tarix » Fri Jul 27, 2012 2:46 pm

pt4pt4pt4 wrote:
kraada wrote:PostgreSQL caches data itself so that subsequent runs will be faster than the first run when you're running the same report. That would explain the behavior you're seeing.


Can you explain this further?


Windows uses available free memory to cache files. Thus the best thing you can do is to close as many applications as possible, thus freeing up the maximum amount of RAM possible.
tarix
Developer
 
Posts: 3760
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 2:49 pm

Re: Performance in Reports still poor in comparison to HEM1

Postby schlauf » Fri Jul 27, 2012 3:46 pm

tarix wrote:Windows uses available free memory to cache files. Thus the best thing you can do is to close as many applications as possible, thus freeing up the maximum amount of RAM possible.

In my case, I have a clean and fresh install of OS (almost no other programs runnng) and I was looking at the performance monitor and processes while PT4 was doing the first loading. There is a lot more of CPU power and RAM that could be used. I'm not sure that RAM is really the issue here.

What about PostgreSQL 9.1.4? PT4 uses 8.3.9 so are there any performance improvements in newer versions of PostgreSQL?
schlauf
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2012 12:17 pm

PreviousNext

Return to PokerTracker 4

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 69 guests

cron
highfalutin