Search Results

Search found 35507 results on 1421 pages for 'performance test'.

Page 109/1421 | < Previous Page | 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116  | Next Page >

  • Using hdparm for better performance on Web Servers

    - by Rishav
    I just heard about using hdparams to optimize the Hard Disk Performance of a server ? Is this common practice ? What file systems do you use ? I generally deploy on the second last release of Ubuntu for stability reasons, do you some other filesystems or use distributed file systems from the get go ? Do the hdparam settings change for different File systems ? I haven't tried this yet, so how much difference do changes like this make ?

    Read the article

  • NOQUEUE: SYSERR(root): opendaemonsocket: daemon MTA-v4: cannot bind: Address already in use

    - by Francesco
    I have an issue with sendmail on my server (ubuntu 12.10) with php, mysql,and wordpress installed. Basically I want to create a contact form in my blog to receive emails from visitors directly into my gmail account but it doest work! I created a php file called testmail.php to recall it from the browser: <?php $to = '[email protected]'; $subbject = 'TEST MAIL'; $msg = 'test test test test test test test test test test test test test test test'; $isMailed = mail($to, $subbject, $msg, 'From:me <[email protected]>'); if($isMailed) echo 'mail has been send to: ' . $to; else echo 'mail has NOT been send..'; ?> But I dont receive anything! The /var/log/mail.log says: NOQUEUE: SYSERR(root): opendaemonsocket: daemon MTA-v4: cannot bind: Address already in use What do i do wrong? Where do I need to check? What info do you need more? I checked also into the spam folder, nothing. Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Email test deferred (mail transport unavailable) with ClamAV

    - by dirt
    I'm trying to set up a simple new mail server; when I send a test email to the server the email is getting hung up during delivery (user mapping is found) and the email is never found in /home/user/Maildir/new Here is my maillog after a fresh reboot and test email, there are a few warnings I am unfamiliar with. Can you please point me in the right direction? Oct 25 14:54:57 loki dovecot: master: Dovecot v2.0.9 starting up (core dumps disabled) Oct 25 14:54:58 loki postfix/postfix-script[1369]: starting the Postfix mail system Oct 25 14:54:58 loki postfix/master[1370]: daemon started -- version 2.6.6, configuration /etc/postfix Oct 25 14:56:00 loki postfix/tlsmgr[1457]: warning: request to update table btree:/etc/postfix/smtpd_scache in non-postfix directory /etc/postfix Oct 25 14:56:00 loki postfix/tlsmgr[1457]: warning: redirecting the request to postfix-owned data_directory /var/lib/postfix Oct 25 14:56:00 loki postfix/smtpd[1455]: connect from mail-ob0-f180.google.com[209.85.214.180] Oct 25 14:56:01 loki postfix/smtpd[1455]: 1CF5E20A8B: client=mail-ob0-f180.google.com[209.85.214.180] Oct 25 14:56:01 loki postfix/cleanup[1461]: 1CF5E20A8B: message-id= Oct 25 14:56:01 loki postfix/qmgr[1379]: 1CF5E20A8B: from=, size=1788, nrcpt=1 (queue active) Oct 25 14:56:01 loki postfix/qmgr[1379]: warning: connect to transport private/scan: No such file or directory Oct 25 14:56:01 loki postfix/error[1462]: 1CF5E20A8B: to=, orig_to=, relay=none, delay=0.18, delays=0.15/0.02/0/0.01, dsn=4.3.0, status=deferred (mail transport unavailable) Oct 25 14:56:01 loki postfix/smtpd[1455]: disconnect from mail-ob0-f180.google.com[209.85.214.180] master.cf snippets: # ========================================================================== # service type private unpriv chroot wakeup maxproc command + args # (yes) (yes) (yes) (never) (100) # ========================================================================== smtp inet n - n - - smtpd submission inet n - n - - smtpd -o smtpd_tls_security_level=encrypt # -o smtpd_sasl_auth_enable=yes # -o smtpd_client_restrictions=permit_sasl_authenticated,reject # -o milter_macro_daemon_name=ORIGINATING smtps inet n - n - - smtpd -o smtpd_tls_wrappermode=yes # -o smtpd_sasl_auth_enable=yes # -o smtpd_client_restrictions=permit_sasl_authenticated,reject # -o milter_macro_daemon_name=ORIGINATING scan unix - - n - 16 smtp -o smtp_data_done_timeout=1200 -o smtp_send_xforward_command=yes -o disable_dns_lookups=yes 127.0.0.1:10026 inet n - n - 16 smtpd -o content_filter= -o local_recipient_maps= -o relay_recipient_maps= -o smtpd_restriction_classes= -o smtpd_client_restrictions= -o smtpd_helo_restrictions= -o smtpd_sender_restrictions= -o smtpd_recipient_restrictions=permit_mynetworks,reject -o mynetworks_style=host -o smtpd_authorized_xforward_hosts=127.0.0.0/8

    Read the article

  • Can someone explain RAID-0 in plain English?

    - by Edward Tanguay
    I've heard about and read about RAID throughout the years and understand it theoretically as a way to help e.g. server PCs reduce the chance of data loss, but now I am buying a new PC which I want to be as fast as possible and have learned that having two drives can considerably increase the perceived performance of your machine. In the question Recommendations for hard drive performance boost, the author says he is going to RAID-0 two 7200 RPM drives together. What does this mean in practical terms for me with Windows 7 installed, e.g. can I buy two drives, go into the device manager and "raid-0 them together"? I am not a network administrator or a hardware guy, I'm just a developer who is going to have a computer store build me a super fast machine next week. I can read the wikipedia page on RAID but it is just way too many trees and not enough forest to help me build a faster PC: RAID-0: "Striped set without parity" or "Striping". Provides improved performance and additional storage but no redundancy or fault tolerance. Because there is no redundancy, this level is not actually a Redundant Array of Inexpensive Disks, i.e. not true RAID. However, because of the similarities to RAID (especially the need for a controller to distribute data across multiple disks), simple strip sets are normally referred to as RAID 0. Any disk failure destroys the array, which has greater consequences with more disks in the array (at a minimum, catastrophic data loss is twice as severe compared to single drives without RAID). A single disk failure destroys the entire array because when data is written to a RAID 0 drive, the data is broken into fragments. The number of fragments is dictated by the number of disks in the array. The fragments are written to their respective disks simultaneously on the same sector. This allows smaller sections of the entire chunk of data to be read off the drive in parallel, increasing bandwidth. RAID 0 does not implement error checking so any error is unrecoverable. More disks in the array means higher bandwidth, but greater risk of data loss. So in plain English, how can "RAID-0" help me build a faster Windows-7 PC that I am going to order next week?

    Read the article

  • Python Django sites on Apache+mod_wsgi with nginx proxy: highly fluctuating performance

    - by Halfgaar
    I have an Ubuntu 10.04 box running several dozen Python Django sites using mod_wsgi (embedded mode; the faster mode, if properly configured). Performance highly fluctuates. Sometimes fast, sometimes several seconds delay. The smokeping graphs are al over the place. Recently, I also added an nginx proxy for the static content, in the hopes it would cure the highly fluctuating performance. But, even though it reduced the number of requests Apache has to process significantly, it didn't help with the main problem. When clicking around on websites while running htop, it can be seen that sometimes requests are almost instant, whereas sometimes it causes Apache to consume 100% CPU for a few seconds. I really don't understand where this fluctuation comes from. I have configured the mpm_worker for Apache like this: StartServers 1 MinSpareThreads 50 MaxSpareThreads 50 ThreadLimit 64 ThreadsPerChild 50 MaxClients 50 ServerLimit 1 MaxRequestsPerChild 0 MaxMemFree 2048 1 server with 50 threads, max 50 clients. Munin and apache2ctl -t both show a consistent presence of workers; they are not destroyed and created all the time. Yet, it behaves as such. This tells me that once a sub interpreter is created, it should remain in memory, yet it seems sites have to reload all the time. I also have a nginx+gunicorn box, which performs quite well. I would really like to know why Apache is so random. This is a virtual host config: <VirtualHost *:81> ServerAdmin [email protected] ServerName example.com DocumentRoot /srv/http/site/bla Alias /static/ /srv/http/site/static Alias /media/ /srv/http/site/media WSGIScriptAlias / /srv/http/site/passenger_wsgi.py <Directory /> AllowOverride None </Directory> <Directory /srv/http/site> Options -Indexes FollowSymLinks MultiViews AllowOverride None Order allow,deny allow from all </Directory> Ubuntu 10.04 Apache 2.2.14 mod_wsgi 2.8 nginx 0.7.65 Edit: I've put some code in the settings.py file of a site that writes the date to a tmp file whenever it's loaded. I can now see that the site is not randomly reloaded all the time, so Apache must be keeping it in memory. So, that's good, except it doesn't bring me closer to an answer... Edit: I just found an error that might also be related to this: File "/usr/lib/python2.6/subprocess.py", line 633, in __init__ errread, errwrite) File "/usr/lib/python2.6/subprocess.py", line 1049, in _execute_child self.pid = os.fork() OSError: [Errno 12] Cannot allocate memory The server has 600 of 2000 MB free, which should be plenty. Is there a limit that is set on Apache or WSGI somewhere?

    Read the article

  • Nginx + uWSGI + Django performance stuck on 100rq/s

    - by dancio
    I have configured Nginx with uWSGI and Django on CentOS 6 x64 (3.06GHz i3 540, 4GB), which should easily handle 2500 rq/s but when I run ab test ( ab -n 1000 -c 100 ) performance stops at 92 - 100 rq/s. Nginx: user nginx; worker_processes 2; events { worker_connections 2048; use epoll; } uWSGI: Emperor /usr/sbin/uwsgi --master --no-orphans --pythonpath /var/python --emperor /var/python/*/uwsgi.ini [uwsgi] socket = 127.0.0.2:3031 master = true processes = 5 env = DJANGO_SETTINGS_MODULE=x.settings env = HTTPS=on module = django.core.handlers.wsgi:WSGIHandler() disable-logging = true catch-exceptions = false post-buffering = 8192 harakiri = 30 harakiri-verbose = true vacuum = true listen = 500 optimize = 2 sysclt changes: # Increase TCP max buffer size setable using setsockopt() net.ipv4.tcp_rmem = 4096 87380 8388608 net.ipv4.tcp_wmem = 4096 87380 8388608 net.core.rmem_max = 8388608 net.core.wmem_max = 8388608 net.core.netdev_max_backlog = 5000 net.ipv4.tcp_max_syn_backlog = 5000 net.ipv4.tcp_window_scaling = 1 net.core.somaxconn = 2048 # Avoid a smurf attack net.ipv4.icmp_echo_ignore_broadcasts = 1 # Optimization for port usefor LBs # Increase system file descriptor limit fs.file-max = 65535 I did sysctl -p to enable changes. Idle server info: top - 13:34:58 up 102 days, 18:35, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00 Tasks: 118 total, 1 running, 117 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 0.0%us, 0.0%sy, 0.0%ni,100.0%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Mem: 3983068k total, 2125088k used, 1857980k free, 262528k buffers Swap: 2104504k total, 0k used, 2104504k free, 606996k cached free -m total used free shared buffers cached Mem: 3889 2075 1814 0 256 592 -/+ buffers/cache: 1226 2663 Swap: 2055 0 2055 **During the test:** top - 13:45:21 up 102 days, 18:46, 1 user, load average: 3.73, 1.51, 0.58 Tasks: 122 total, 8 running, 114 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 93.5%us, 5.2%sy, 0.0%ni, 0.2%id, 0.0%wa, 0.1%hi, 1.1%si, 0.0%st Mem: 3983068k total, 2127564k used, 1855504k free, 262580k buffers Swap: 2104504k total, 0k used, 2104504k free, 608760k cached free -m total used free shared buffers cached Mem: 3889 2125 1763 0 256 595 -/+ buffers/cache: 1274 2615 Swap: 2055 0 2055 iotop 30141 be/4 nginx 0.00 B/s 7.78 K/s 0.00 % 0.00 % nginx: wo~er process Where is the bottleneck ? Or what am I doing wrong ?

    Read the article

  • Disk IO slow on ESXi, even slower on a VM (freeNAS + iSCSI)

    - by varesa
    I have a server with ESXi 5 and iSCSI attached network storage(4x1Tb Raid-Z on freenas 8.0.4). Those two machines are connected to each other with Gigabit ethernet. The raid-z volume is divided into three parts: two zvols, shared with iscsi, and one directly on top of zfs, shared with nfs and similar. I ssh'd into the freeNAS box, and did some testing on the disks. I used ddto test the third part of the disks (straight on top of ZFS). I copied a 4GB (2x the amount of RAM) block from /dev/zero to the disk, and the speed was 80MB/s. Other of the iSCSI shared zvols is a datastore for the ESXi. I did similar test with time dd .. there. Since the dd there did not give the speed, I divided the amount of data transfered by the time show by time. The result was around 30-40 MB/s. Thats about half of the speed from the freeNAS host! Then I tested the IO on a VM running on the same ESXi host. The VM was a light CentOS 6.0 machine, which was not really doing anything else at that time. There were no other VMs running on the server at the time, and the other two "parts" of the disk array were not used. A similar dd test gave me result of about 15-20 MB/s. That is again about half of the result on a lower level! Of course the is some overhead in raid-z - zfs - zvolume - iSCSI - VMFS - VM, but I don't expect it to be that big. I belive there must be something wrong in my system. I have heard about bad performance of freeNAS's iSCSI, is that it? I have not managed to get any other "big" SAN OS to run on the box (NexentaSTOR, openfiler). Can you see any obvious problems with my setup?

    Read the article

  • My server is slower than the average user's computer, should I still offload Access queries to SQL Server? [closed]

    - by andrewb
    Possible Duplicate: How do you do Load Testing and Capacity Planning for Databases I have a database set up with MS Access 2007 front ends and an SQL Server 2005 back end. At the moment, all the queries are saved in the front end as I've only recently moved to an SQL Server backend. I'm wondering how much of those queries I should save as stored procedures/views on SQL Server. About the system The number of concurrent users is only a handful, though it could be as high as 25 at one time (very unlikely). The average computer has an Intel i3-2120 CPU running at 3.3 GHz, which gets a PassMark score of 3,987, whilst the server has an Intel Xeon E5335 running at 2.0 GHz, which gets a PassMark score of 2,637. Always an awkward situation when an i3 outperforms a Xeon... though the i3 is from Q1 2011 and the Xeon is Q2 2009. There is potential for a server upgrade in the future, though it wouldn't come easy. I'm inclined to move the queries to the back end, as they are beginning to take noticeable time and I figure that is a better way of doing things. I like the idea of throwing everything at the server, then pushing for a server upgrade. It makes more sense in my mind to be upgrading one server rather than 30 PCs. Or am I being overzealous? Why my question isn't a duplicate It seems that my question has been misinterpreted and labelled a duplicate of quite a different question, one about testing and capacity planning. I'll try explain how my question is very different from the linked question. The crux of my question is something like "Even though my server is technically slower, is it better to have it doing more of the queries?" There's two ways that people could have answered this: I agree the server is going to be slower, but the extra benefits of such and such (like the less Access the better) means you should move most to the server anyway. (OR no it doesn't outweigh the benefit, keep them in Access) Actually the server will be faster because of such and such. I'm hoping that people out there could provide some answers like this, and the question in the dupe link doesn't really provide either of these answers. Ok sure, I suppose I could do extensive performance testing to compare Access queries running on a local machine to SQL Server queries running on the server, but that sounds like a very hard task (particularly performance testing of access) compared to someone giving some quick general guidance, and again, my question is looking for a lot more than immediate performance benefit.

    Read the article

  • Application to test a cluster/grid

    - by Mystic
    Is anyone aware of any application (computation + data) that I can download to test an in-house grid middleware that will run on a local cluster. I hope to compare the performance with other available grid systems.

    Read the article

  • Oracle tuning optimizer index cost adj and optimizer index caching

    - by Darryl Braaten
    What is the correct way to set the optimizer index cost adj parameter for Oracle. As a developer I have observed huge performance improvements as this parameter is lowered. Common queries are reduced from 2 seconds to 200ms. There are lots of warnings on the net that lowering this value will cause dire issues with the database, but no detail is given on what will start going wrong. I am currently only seeing only an upside, much improved application performance and no downside. I need to better understand the possible negative repercussions of adjusting these parameters.

    Read the article

  • Recommendations for USB flash drive fast at writing small files

    - by Andrew Bainbridge
    I want a drive that I can be used as my work drive, storing a Subversion repo and sandbox for a small project. I'd also like it to be able to store a DVD rip. At the moment I've got a Super Talent pico-C 8gb. It's fast at reading and writing DVD rips, but the performance on small files (ie less than 4k) is utterly terrible (we're talking floppy disk speeds here). This Ars review measured a similar Super Talent drive and pretty much confirmed my measurements (take a look at the random write speeds on page 5). So, I'm looking for a 8gb or bigger drive that doesn't suck at read and write of small files and still has acceptable performance for very large files.

    Read the article

  • Application to automate Windows software installation in a test lab

    - by Marc
    I have several test environments (hyper-V) which contain a variety of windows servers. Each machine needs periodically rolling back to a given snapshot and then re-installing with the latest version of our software to test. The software installs are quite complex MSI's with a fair few option screens. I know that the installs can be driven from the command line, passing in parameters to override the wizard options. At the simplest level I suppose I could just write a batch file to kick off each install with the required parameters, however the values that are passed in do need to change from time to time (and environment to environment) so a tool with a config file and simple GUI seems like a better idea. I think what makes it slightly more painful is the multiple environments. For example one environment might contain 4 servers and need a config file with all the server names, service endpoints etc. Another environment might be a 1-box install with all names and endpoints set to localhost. So, ideally I want to be able to store different setup configurations and use them to run all the required installers with the relevant settings against the relevant machines. Before I go off to write the thing, does anyone know of an existing, simple, free tool that will let me achieve this?

    Read the article

  • Is there a "rigorous" method for choosing a database?

    - by Andrew Martin
    I'm not experienced with NoSQL, but one person on my team is calling for its use. I believe our data and its usage isn't optimal for a NoSQL implementation. However, my understanding is based off reading various threads on various websties. I'd like to get some stronger evidence as to who's correct. My question is therefore, "Is there a technique for estimating the performance and requirements of a certain database, that I could use to confirm or modify my intuitions?". Is there, for example, a good book for calculating the performance of equivalent MongoDB/MySQL schema? Is the only really reliable option to build the whole thing and take metrics?

    Read the article

  • subst performance

    - by pihentagy
    Does substing a directory affects the performance creating/reading/updating many small files in the substed volume? (will use svn there) If yes, how serious is the "penalty"?

    Read the article

  • How do you test your porn filter

    - by Zoredache
    For testing antivirus we have EICAR, for SPAM, we have GTUBE. Is there a standard site that is or should be included in blacklists that you can use for testing instead of going to your favorite porn site in front of your boss, the CEO, or someone else who feels that seeing such a site is an excuse for a sexual harassment suit? Update This is less about getting permission for me to test, though that answer is useful. I do have both permission and responsibility to actually make sure the filter is running. I am able test the filter is functioning with a netcat. Instead, I am hoping there is a standard domain name that is blocked by most/all filters for testing. I need to be able to share this with my boss and users. I need to be able to demonstrate what happens when someone go to a filtered page. I need to have a way to quickly prove to others that the filter is working without asking them to go to some site that will not cause grief if for some reason the filter is not working. If there isn't already a good domain for this purpose I may simply have to register a domain myself, and then add the domain to all the filters I am responsible for.

    Read the article

  • Shopping for Fast USB Flash Drives

    - by Jim McKeeth
    I would like to pick up some really fast USB flash drives in the 16 - 64 GB range. When looking at drives they just list their size, their form factor (key chain hook, slider, etc.) and the fact that they are all Hi-Speed USB 2.0. It seems like I have heard that different drives have different performance and life expectancy. The sales guy tells me that they are all the same performance any more, but it wouldn't be the first time a sales guy had the wrong technical details. Our objective is to run Virtual PC images off of them, so good speed and resilience to rewrites it important.

    Read the article

  • Exchange 2007 + mailbox role - performance counters

    - by Ankh2054
    I hve two exchange server in my org. Exchange 2007 - mailbox role Exchange 2007 client access, transport role I am trying to monitor the following performance counter on my exchange 2007 server (mailbox role) MSExchange Database(Information Store)\Database Page Fault Stalls/sec But I cant find the counter anywhere. I have checked the version of exchange an its 8.3.6 I looked on the other server in case I had it mixed up, but its not here either. Can anyone shed some light ?

    Read the article

  • SQL Server 2008 - Performance impact of transactional replication?

    - by cxfx
    I'm planning to set up transactional replication for a 100Gb SQL Server 2008 database. I have the distributor and publisher on the same server, and am using push subscription. Should there be a performance impact on my publisher server when it creates the initial snapshot, and synchronises it with a subscriber? From what I've tried so far on a staging server, it seems to slow right down. Is there a better way to create the initial snapshot without impacting my production publisher server?

    Read the article

  • Recommended Setup

    - by Chris Ryan
    I have been running into issue with my MSSQL Database setup with speed. Here is my scenario. About 100M Rows Average: 1k Updates Per Second Hard Drives: RAID 10 SSD MDF --Active Time: 0 Log Drives: 1 SSD LDF - Simple Recovery --Active Time 99.9 --Queue: 8 I do not need a back up of the log so it is set to simple recovery but my bottleneck is still at my log. I get high WAITLOG times and thus it can not update any faster. I can't do bulk updates/transactions and each update needs to be one at a time. Is my only option to increase write performance of the log drives, add a RAID drives? Any suggestions on increasing the performance?

    Read the article

  • Poor performance of single processor 32bit Windows XP xompared SMP in VBA+Excel

    - by Adam Ryczkowski
    Welcome! On many computers I experienced poor performance of 32 bit guests running on 64 bit Linux host (I used only the Debian family). At last I managed to collect benchmark data. I made the benchmark by running custom VBA macro, (which we use in our company) that generates 284 pages long Word document full of Excel Pie charts, tables and comments. The macro is run as a single task (excluding the standard services) on a set of identically configured Windows XP 32-bit systems. I measured the time (in sec.) needed to perform the test. The computer (i.e. my notebook Asus P53E) supports both VT-d extensions and native Windows XP. It has 2-core processor, each core is hyperthreaded, so in total we have 4 mostly independent execution units. I use the latest VirtualBox 4.2 and VMWare Workstation 9.0 for Linux, installed together on the same host (running Mint 13 Maya) but never run simultaneously. The results (in column Time) are no less accurate than ± 10% Here are the results (sorry for the format, but I couldn't find out a better solution for tables in SO): +---------------+-------------+------------------------------------------------------+---------+------------+----------------+------+ | Host software | # processor | Windows kernel | IO APIC | VT-x/AMD-V | 2D Video Accel | Time | +---------------+-------------+------------------------------------------------------+---------+------------+----------------+------+ | VirtualBox | 1 | Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) PC | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1139 | | VirtualBox | 1 | Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) PC | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1050 | | VirtualBox | 1 | Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) PC | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1644 | | VirtualBox | 4 | ACPI Multiprocessor PC | 1 | 1 | 1 | 6809 | | VMWare | 1 | ACPI Uniprocessor PC | | 1 | 1 | 1175 | | VMWare | 4 | ACPI Multiprocessor PC | | 1 | 1 | 3412 | | Native | 4 | ACPI Multiprocessor PC | | | | 1693 | | Native | 1 | Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (ACPI) PC | | | | 1170 | +---------------+-------------+------------------------------------------------------+---------+------------+----------------+------+ Here are the striking conclusions: Although I've read in the VirtualBox fora about abysmal performance with 32-bit guest on 64-bit host, VMWare also has problems compared to native run, still being twice faster(!) than VBox. Although VBA is inherently single-threaded, the Excel calculations, which take much more than a half of total computation time, supposedly aren't. So one would expect some speed gain when running on 2+ cores ("+" for hyperthreading). What we see is a speed loss. And quite big one too. For the VirtualBox the VT-d extension isn't a big deal. Can anyone shed some light on why the singlethreaded Windows kernel is so much faster than the SMP one?

    Read the article

  • Virtual Machine files on ramdisk doesn't run faster than on physical disk

    - by Landy
    I installed total 36G memory (4x8G + 2x2G) in the host (Windows 7) and I used ImDisk to create a 32G ramdisk and format it to NTFS file system. Then I copied the virtual machine (in VMware Workstation format) folder, including vmx, vmdk, etc... to the new created ram disk. Then I tried to power on it in VMware Workstation. What made me surprised is that the performance is not better than before. It cost almost the same time to power on the Windows 7 VM. I check the Resource Monitor in the Windows 7 host, and the statistics of CPU, disk, network are rather normal. The memory has reported 3000+ hard fault/sec when guest OS boot then drop to 0 after the guest powered on. Any idea about this issue? I had thought the performance of ramdisk will be better than physical disk in this case. Am I wrong? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • iSCSI performance questions

    - by RyanLambert
    Hi everyone, apologies for the long-winded post in advance... Attempting to troubleshoot some iSCSI sluggishness on a brand new vSphere deployment (still in test). Layout is as such: 3 VSphere hosts, each with 2x 10GB NICs plugged into a pair of Nexus 5020s with a 10gig back-to-back between them. NICs are port-channeled in an active/active redundant fashion (using vPC-mac pinning for those of you familiar with N1KV) Both NICs carry service console, vmotion, iSCSI, and guest traffic. iSCSI is on a single subnet/single VLAN that is not routed through our IP network (strictly layer2) Had this been a 1gig deployment, we probably would have split the iSCSI traffic off onto separate NICs, but the price/port gets rather ridiculous when you start throwing 4+ NICs to a server in a 10gigabit infrastructure, and I'm not really convinced it's necessary. Open to dialogue/tech facts re: this, though. At this point even a single VM guest will boot slowly to iSCSI storage (EMC CX4 on the same Nexus 5020 10gig switches), and restores of VMs from iSCSI take about twice as long as we'd expect them to. Our server folks mentioned that if we split the iSCSI off onto its own NIC, performance seems significantly better. From a network perspective, I've run through the variables I can think of (port configuration errors, MTU problems, congestion etc.) and I'm coming up dry. There really is no other traffic on these hosts other than the very specific test being performed at the time. Important thing to note is that guest traffic works just fine... it seems storage is the only thing affected by whatever gremlin exists. Concluding that we're not 'overutilizing' the network infrastructure since we're doing hardly anything, I'm just looking for some helpful tips/ideas we can use to resolve this... preferably without hurling extra 10gig NICs that are going to sit around 10% utilization while we've got 70+% left on our others.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116  | Next Page >