Skip to main content
  • EN

My colleague and I have both an FME license. We use a workspace to bound pictures (jpg) to trackpoints from a gps (gpx) based on their time.

When he runs the workspace it takes about 10 minutes for 5000 pictures.

When I run the workspace it takes about 10 minutes for 100 pictures.

Our pc's are both very good. Similar cpu's (i7 5930). I have 64gb ram. He has 32 gb ram. I have a nvidia quadro K4200. He has a gtx 1080.

Are you running the exact same FME version?

Does perhaps one of you have an SSD disk, an the other not?

At the end of the execution of the workspace the log window contains a synopsis of memory used etc. Could you please post it here.

We both have FME 2017.1.2.1 and both have SSD's.

my log:

Translation was SUCCESSFUL with 7 warning(s) (0 feature(s) output)
FME Session Duration: 12 minutes 49.8 seconds. (CPU: 261.8s user, 478.3s system)
END - ProcessID: 9340, peak process memory usage: 16702200 kB, current process memory usage: 202956 kB
Translation was SUCCESSFUL

We both have FME 2017.1.2.1 and both have SSD's.

my log:

Translation was SUCCESSFUL with 7 warning(s) (0 feature(s) output)
FME Session Duration: 12 minutes 49.8 seconds. (CPU: 261.8s user, 478.3s system)
END - ProcessID: 9340, peak process memory usage: 16702200 kB, current process memory usage: 202956 kB
Translation was SUCCESSFUL

If you could post the complete FME logs from both PCs running the exact same workspace with the same data, that would make it a lot easier to isolate the problem.

- Make sure both have 64-bit FME installed.

 

- Make sure both use an SSD as temp disk

 

- Make sure the network-connection to the jpeg-files are through the same fast network. Try to copy the files locally and then run the workspace with all files locally to see if it is faster.

- Make sure both have 64-bit FME installed.

 

- Make sure both use an SSD as temp disk

 

- Make sure the network-connection to the jpeg-files are through the same fast network. Try to copy the files locally and then run the workspace with all files locally to see if it is faster.
Yup, all very good points. But I must admit I've never seen any improvements on the 64-bit versions, if anything they were slightly slower than the 32-bit FME. I'd love to know if you've got other observations.

 

SOLVED - thx for the input guys.

It was much easier. I was running my workbench with full inspection and my colleague wasn't.

I guess i'm still a noob :)

SOLVED - thx for the input guys.

It was much easier. I was running my workbench with full inspection and my colleague wasn't.

I guess i'm still a noob :)

I see this often on the screen captures posted here and on customers sites. There should be a more prominent warning in Desktop in my opinion - popup each session with don't show me this again for this session or similar

 

 

SOLVED - thx for the input guys. 

It was much easier. I was running my workbench with full inspection and my colleague wasn't.

I guess i'm still a noob :)

I agree with my @mark_1spatial... and Safe have listened, as they are moving to address the issue in FME 2018 by renaming the 'Full inspection' mode to the far more sensible "Enable Feature Caching", this does provide an indication that lots of data is going to be saved (or cached) somewhere! Also, right at the top of the log you'll now see:

 

 

Feature Caching is ON
The workspace may run slower because features are being recorded on all connections and ports.
Though you'll have to have a keen eye, as it races past as it's on lines 2 and 3 of the log!

 

 

Reply


Community Stats

30,364
Posts
115,373
Replies
38,142
Members
Terms & ConditionsCookie settings
A product of
Safe Software respectfully acknowledges that we live, learn and work on the traditional and unceded territories of the Kwantlen, Katzie, and Semiahmoo First Nations.