Reason why SQL Max memory expansion seems slow when migrated to newer version of SQL server

We are trying to understand below behavior happening in SQL Server and need some guidance:-

After migrating from older version SQL2012 (running on bare metal P Server) to newer SQL2017 running inside VM with matching Hardware specs we are seeing this interesting behavior:

On SQL2012 Phy server:– For server with 700 GB RAM; MAX memory setting of 500, after any flush of cache/restart activity on sql instance , approx. in 20-30 mins we see SQL server quickly able to reach that MAX memory setting and can be seen using 500 GB instantly

On SQL2017 server (VM): -For server with 700 GB RAM; MAX memory setting of 500, after any flush of cache/restart activity on SQL instance , it is about 4-5 hours and we still see almost 50% of that max memory usage.

Memory reservation on VM is set to 750 GB

Yes we see little slowness in app response and our top 2 waits are generally PAGEIOLATCH and WRITELOG

Please let me know what additional info i can provide to help me understand why allocation of MAX memory between 2 is vastly diff.

Note:- Yes we have same load and database running as we did load test on both Physical and VM’s. Above is one thing we are noticing.

python – How do I automatically replace a large .xml database file from a website with a newer file each month?

I am working on a project right now that uses data from a large xml database file (usually like 8gb) pulled from a website. The website updates this database file monthly, so every month, there’s a newer and more accurate database file.

I started my project about a year ago, so it is using a database file from February 2019. For the sake of people using my program, I would like for the database file to be replaced with the new one from each month when that gets rolled out.

How could I go about implementing this in my project so I don’t have to manually go and replace the file with a newer one each month? Is it something I should write into the program? But, if that’s the case, it would only update when the program is ran. Or, is there a way to have some script do this that automatically checks once a month?

Note: this project is not being used by people yet, it has got a long way to go, but I am trying to figure out how to implement these features earlier on before I get to a point where I can publish it.

ubuntu – Installing a newer KVM guest distro/suite than the host

I have an old Ubuntu KVM (Precise 12.04) host (I know it’s old!) and I want to install a guest which runs a newer distro (Xenial 16.04).

When I run ubuntu-vm-builder it tells me VMBuilder.exception.VMBuilderUserError: Invalid suite: "xenial". Valid suites are: dapper gutsy hardy intrepid jaunty karmic lucid maverick natty oneiric precise quantal.

Is there a way to ‘add’ new suites?

user expectation – Provide functionality from newer system

I have a question about cross-linking or embedding or if there is a more suitable option.

The Requirement

So we’re developing a web app with new functionality, but our older system is still widely used. Now our boss decided that it would be a good idea if the old system could also benefit from the new funtionality, but without the need of implementing it twice. This also includes the UI, which is a bit of a problem for me because the systems look and feel entirely differently.

My approaches

I’m trying to find a way to make certain pages of the new web app usable in the old web app, with as little irritation to the user as possible. So far, I only came up with the “classical” approaches of a) embedding the site or b) placing a link which opens the site in a new tab.

My questions

Is there another, probably better approach? Is it recommended to inform the users about what is going to happen when clicking on a link that leads them somewhere else? What works best with user expectation, as I don’t want to throw them off.

(If it is relevant: people use our systems in a professional context and they have to work with our software. The thing I’m worried about is that users might be irritated and lose focus on their task.)

firmware hacks – Is there a way to get Magic Lantern on my newer model Canon?

The newer your Canon camera model is, the less likely it is that there will be a Magic Lantern build for it (just as with Canon P&S cameras, the less likely it is there will be a CHDK build for it). These things take time to develop. If you have to have these features right now, your best bet is to get a hold of one of the models that is supported. The newest dRebel model that is currently supported is the 700D (which came out in 2013); your 750D came out this year. It may take two years or more from the time the camera’s introduced.

Understand that Magic Lantern isn’t anybody’s job. It’s an open source project developed by volunteers. For them to develop a build for your camera, they need access to a copy of your camera, and enough volunteers willing and capable of a) downloading the firmware, b) adapting ML’s source code for it, c) testing that build, d) and debugging it. These things can all be relatively scarce, as is the spare time for volunteers to do them.

If you need a build for your camera and it doesn’t exist yet, the best thing you can do is to volunteer and contribute to the ML development effort (see: this thread where someone steps up for the 760D) or donate.

But understand that the ML folks get overwhelmed all the time by folks who “need” ML for camera X, don’t want to spend a dime, can’t code, won’t test, and who have no idea of the time, effort, and dedication involved in getting what they want, and who have no intent to help with the process, or any idea just how difficult/impossible the thing they’re asking for can be, let alone the internal culture and accepted practices issues of the ML development community (see: Tragic Lantern fork thread).

So if you go over to the ML forum to beg someone to make a 750D build—or even just for feature X—understand what you’re stepping into. The communication divide gets very frustrating, on both sides.

To put it simply: if you’re not going to be part of the solution, then the only thing you can do is wait and hope someone else steps up and does the work.

lens – Does the Nikon 35-70mm really equal the newer 24-70mm in image quality and sharpness?

I know this is an answer to an old question, but my response may be helpful to others who come here later. I recently picked up a very clean 35-70 f2.8D for the grand sum of $200, which included shipping and the Nikon lens hood. I also at the same time picked up a 24mm f2.8D from Japan, mint in box for $125. My thought was to use the 35-70 on camera, and carry the 24mm in a pocket to use when 35mm isn’t wide enough. This combination is within one ounce of the weight of the 24-70 2.8 Nikon zoom and costs $1,000 less when comparing clean used lenses. At an event, I’m also carrying about ten ounces less around my neck compared to the 24-70.

I’m really happy with this combination on my D700 and my D600 in real picture taking. Honestly, the 24mm wide open is weaker in the corners than the 24mm setting of the 24-70mm zoom wide open that I have borrowed from my friend. Other than that, I can’t see a difference that matters to me. The “push-pull” zoom is not my favorite, but for a thousand bucks saved, I’ll live with it.

In terms of image quality and sharpness, the 24mp sensor of my D600, when I look at 100% and really pixel peep, I see a very slight improvement in favor of the 24-70 in terms of sharpness over the 35-70 in their shared focal length range that has yet to manifest itself in any real way in the photos I take or print, which are usually no larger than 20×30. The 35-70 gets a very, very slight boost in sharpness when stopping down from f2.8 to f4 if you are pixel peeping, but it is excellent at 2.8 and the difference almost isn’t worth mentioning. Stopping down further yields no additional improvement that I can see. There may be some differences on a 36 mp sensor, but I don’t know. Color rendition between the two lenses seems identical. The 35-70 has less distortion than the 24-70 at the wide end, but distortion is usually correctable later on.

Focus speed seems about the same between the 24-70 and the 35-70 to me, although the 24-70 is almost completely silent. Neither is objectionable though, even for quiet environments like a wedding ceremony. Another plus in favor of the 35-70 is that there is not AF-S motor to ever have to replace. On an unrelated note, the 35-70 retains an aperture ring, making it useful for manual focus film cameras. This was a concern for me because I still shoot those.

On the downside, the 35-70 is not at all happy being shot into the sun or a light source, flare is an issue even with a lens hood. Since I use this primarily for indoor events, this is of little concern to me, but may be significant to others. The 24-70 seems better in this regard.

Hope that helps.

Does upgrading FIOS 50/50 to 200/200 Internet Plan and newer router require replacing Coax cable with Ethernet

I have the Verizon Fios 50/50 Internet plan and an ActionTec MI424-WR router with a Coax input. I want to upgrade to THE Verizon 200/200 PLAN and a faster router. Do I need to rewire from Coax to Ethernet to get the higher speed? If so, does Verizon do the rewiring for free?

Is there a good reason not to choose the C-RAW format in newer Canon cameras?

Canon introduces a C-RAW compressed RAW format with its new cameras. The compressed RAW files can be processed on the computer just as flexibly as with uncompressed RAW files.

Apparently the compression ratio is about 1.75: 1, so the space saving is huge. In addition, the camera burst buffer is increased by at least 1.75 times, possibly even more effectively, because the camera flushes the buffer onto the card immediately and not when the buffer is full. The burst speed with full buffer is also increased 1.75 times if the card is limited.

The C-RAW is saved in Canon's new .CR3 file format. This could indicate that C-RAW files cannot necessarily be opened by open source software. However, the latest Canon cameras always use the .CR3 file format, even for uncompressed RAW files, so this counter argument may not be true.

C-RAW appears to be using a lossy compression algorithm. However, Bryan Carnathan examined its quality, and lossy compression doesn't seem to be a problem. The main differences between RAW and C-RAW images seem to be random noise. The dynamic range is not affected as with JPEG.

Since there does not seem to be a RAW -> C-RAW converter that could be run on a computer, the selection of C-RAW (plus JPEG even if no buffer-limited high-speed pictures are taken) seems to be the most sensible choice on the camera.

So my question is: is there a good reason not to choose the C-RAW option on newer Canon cameras?

MAMP From newer sites

I am now using Drupal with MAMP PRO, which now points to Users / david / Sites, before it was Applications / MAMP. I only work with the sites on the Drupal homepage and on other sites it is "not found".
Not quite what should I do?Enter the image description here

Enter the image description here

Not maintained Altcoin – upgrade to newer Bitcoin core code

I am currently involved in a small Altcoin project, the code of which has remained more or less unchanged since 2014.
It is based on the Bitcoin core code and is overdue for an update.

I tried to search for manuals to start this but my search is empty.

What would you suggest to be the best place to start?

  • a side-by-side file comparison and an adaptation of the project files?
  • Reverse engineering bitcoin core 0.19?

Thank you in advance for your suggestions!