Search Results

Search found 13757 results on 551 pages for 'performance diagnostics'.

Page 118/551 | < Previous Page | 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125  | Next Page >

• How come my Intel 520 180GB SSD performs extremely poorly?

  - by Willem

  I recently installed a new Intel 520 series 180GB SSD in my brand new MacBook Pro. The system is as follows: Model: MacBook Pro 15-inch, Late 2011 (MacBookPro8,2) Processor: 2.4 GHz Intel Core i7 Memory: 16 GB 1333 MHz DDR3 Graphics: AMD Radeon HD 6770M 1024 MB Software: Mac OS X Lion 10.7.3 Main Drive Bay: Intel 520-series 180GB SATA-3 (6GB/s negotiated link) SSD (Firmware: 400i) [80GB free] Optical Bay: Toshiba 5400 RPM 750GB SATA-2 HDD Trim: Enabled (according to Trim Enabler App) And here are the speeds I'm getting: Read: 412 MB/s Write: 186 MB/s What have I done wrong? Results expected: Read/write both 500MB/s I have seen benchmarks with lesser SSD:s (SATA-2 even) outperform my write-speeds by far. Also, Intel 520 SSD:s are supposed to be the top class of SSD:s. Trim Enabler report: This looks a bit odd compared to screenshots from their site: These is the defined S.M.A.R.T attributes (taken from Intel): And here are my S.M.A.R.T attributes read using smartctl tool from smartmontools: They don't seem very compatible. I'm going to try and look for a S.M.A.R.T attributes reader tool for OS X which might support Intel 520 series.

  Read the article

• Is there an application I can run that will tell me how fast my computer is running?

  - by Robert Hume

  At work I log into a virtual Windows machine. I'm told it runs as fast as a PC, but I'm skeptical. Is there an application I can run on the machine that will tell me how faster the machine is actually running? It would be nice if it ran on Windows and on Mac. Updating with more details -- I was asked "why does it matter" -- here's why: It matters because I'm a programmer and I need as much speed (CPU and memory) as possible to do my work. IMO, the virtual machine is noticeably slower than a basic $800 PC would be, but I need a way a proving it. Websites like Bandwidthtest.com can show me my internet speed, so I'm wondering if there's an app that can test my computer's speed.

  Read the article

• Slow transfer with memory stick (819 kb/s)

  - by Nrew

  What do I do to optimize the file transfer rate of a Memory Stick Duo? The file transfer was not like this when it was still new. Can reformatting give new life to a memory stick? It takes about 20 minutes just to transfer 1Gb of file from computer to memory stick. The computer is decent enough. 2.50Ghz processor, 2Gb ram.

  Read the article

• Computer experiencing slowdowns and lockups despite low cpu useage

  - by user157145

  my setup i5-2300 nvidia gtx 550 ti 6 gigs ram 600 w ocz modular psu recently reformatted and already experiencing drastic slowdown as soon as windows comes up, including repeated lockups with multiple various programs reporting that they are not responsive, then recovering after 10-30 seconds. ive checked memory and hard drive both of which come out fine. despite my plethura of worthless antiviral software im forced to assume that my illicit downloading practices have lead me into some comp trouble that i cant seem to determine. i have used ccleaner, search and destroy and malware bytes, all of which have found nothing to indicate what is causing this massive slowdown. in addition according to my resource manager my computer is operating at a load of only 30-50 percent CPU useage and 60 ram useage but taking 5-10 seconds to load files and open folders, and repeated lockups of multiple programs, especially firefox which seems to go unresponsive every 2-3 minutes. any help would be appreciated, i used a program called OTL by old timer, but cant make any sense of the results i was given. any help or suggestions would be appreciated, thank you for taking the time to read this i have avast but it didnt even find anything when i had it do a full system scan, so im thinking its clueless(also nortons, avg, and ad-aware). i also have mse but it has yet to complete a full scan it takes so long (i left it on last night but when i woke up my computer had a problem and had to restart). my hard drive has 300 gigs out of 1tb open and i already used hd tune pro, which said my harddrive was fine and its not a ssd. also im a noob at comps and only have the hd that is currently inside the computer in addition im not sure if studdering is the issue im suffering. my problem is that during my typing of these responses firefox has gone "not responsive" at least 5 times, each for times of about 5-10 seconds. when i try to control alt delete to bring up windows task manager it took 20 seconds. essentially its that my computer goes super slow at bringing up anything, or taking any action whatsoever that opens a program or file and has repeated incidents where i cant even click on whatever im trying to do because it locks up. the confusing thing about these incidents is that its right after restarting where there are minimal programs running and the computer and memory load is light.

  Read the article

• ft_stopword_file not picked up

  - by Alex Holsgrove

  I have a VPS server with a company called Webfusion. I want to remove some or all of the FULLTEXT stopwords because some specific words needs to be searchable with my DB content. I opened /etc/mysql/my.cnf and added the line ft_stopword_file="". I restarted the mysql service, ran a repair table and then tried my MATCH query with no success. I ran SHOW VARIABLES LIKE 'ft_%' and it simply shows (built-in) next to the stopword file. I am running WAMP on my workstation, and whilst I realise this isn't configured the same as a commercial VPS, the above method worked just fine. Couple someone please offer some guidance?

  Read the article

• Firefox: How to speed up the Smart Location Bar (AwesomeBar)?

  - by Ashwin

  The Firefox AwesomeBar is indeed awesome. But, lately I see that it has become slow. On entering some characters it even freezes for a few seconds (freezing the entire browser). Why does it slow down? Is there a way to speed it up? (The OS is Windows XP.)

  Read the article

• Enabling DMA in pc with windows 7

  - by Mugen

  I was checking my pc settings using AIDA64 (supposed to be the successor for Everest - it basically shows you detailed hardware you currently have). For my ATA hard disk it shows the setting for DMA as "supported, disabled". But when I checked the windows setting I see that it is actually enabled. How can I find out which is correct? And if its disabled what do I do to enable it? Thanks for your help. Here are some screenshots for this:

  Read the article

• Web Service gets unavailable after several concurrent calls

  - by Roman

  We are testing GoDaddy Virtual Data Center and came to a very strange issue when our web site gets unavailable. GoDaddy Support keeps saying the issue is in our web server settings, but looking at the result of our tests I doubt it. TEST ENVIRONMENT Virtual DataCenter with Windows hosted at GoDaddy.com. All servers have Windows Server 2008 R2 Datacenter, IIS 7. Server One with IP address 10.1.0.4 Server Two with IP address 10.1.0.3 Both servers are in private network not visible from outside. Port Forward with IP address 50.62.13.174. Port Forward is assigned to Server One TEST DESCRIPTION JMeter is used as a Client App to simulate 30 concurrent users sending 100 SOAP requests each. Interval between requests is 1 second. Http link used for testing: http://50.62.13.174/v2/webservices.asmx TEST ONE Test is run from a computer in our office. After JMeter starts running test, almost immediately, the link above becomes unavailable in a browser. After test completion, the link is not available in a browser for about 5 more minutes. Remote Desktop is working well, so we can connect to Server One remotely. After about 5 minutes since test completion, the link becomes available in a browser again. TEST TWO Test is run from Server Two (that is part of our virtual data center). Test works very well, no visible delays in processing. The link is available in a browser all the time. TEST THREE Test is run from Server One using localhost. The result is the same as in TEST TWO - no issues. TEST FOUR We repeated TEST ONE from other computers that we have located in different countries, all with the same result as TEST ONE. CONCLUSION As the test works well from Server Two, but does not work from outside our virtual data center, we feel there are issues with the network or its capacity. The whole behaviour looks like out requests from outside get stuck somewhere before reaching our virtual data center. Has anybody had similar issues in the past? Are there chances that something is wrong with our server settings?

  Read the article

• perf tuning for vmfs3 on RAID

  - by maruti

  recommendations for ESX4 OS - VMFS version3: matching: RAID-5 stripe size with VMFS block size? (64K, 128K etc) enabled "adaptive read ahead, write-back" on PERC 6i 90% VMs on server are Windows (2008, 2003, Vista etc, SQL 2005 etc) i have read that smaller stipes are good for writes and larger for reads. Since this is virtual env, not sure whats good.

  Read the article

• How passively monitor for tcp packet loss? (Linux)

  - by nonot1

  How can I passively monitor the packet loss on TCP connections to/from my machine? Basically, I'd like a tool that sits in the background and watches TCP ack/nak/re-transmits to generate a report on which peer IP addresses "seem" to be experiencing heavy loss. Most questions like this that I find of SF suggest using tools like iperf. But, I need to monitor connections to/from a real application on my machine. Is this data just sitting there in the Linux TCP stack?

  Read the article

• High Load - Low IO - Low CPU usage

  - by devup

  I have a system whose load is rather high. As you can see from the top output below, CPU usage and I/O is negligible: top - 17:31:59 up 4 days, 2:34, 2 users, load average: 1.00, 0.99, 1.00 Tasks: 71 total, 1 running, 70 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 2.0%us, 2.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 95.9%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Mem: 960720k total, 707288k used, 253432k free, 67328k buffers Swap: 2811896k total, 2644k used, 2809252k free, 528928k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 15310 root 20 0 2512 1128 888 R 2.1 0.1 0:00.05 top I would appreciate any assistance with isolating the cause(s) of high load for when I/O and CPU are not factors.

  Read the article

• How to test server throughput

  - by embwbam

  I've always used apache benchmark to try to get a rough idea of how many requests/second my server can handle. I read that it was good, and it seemed to work well. Enter node.js, which is fully event-based, so it never blocks. If I run apache benchmark on a simple hello world server it can handle 2500 requests per second or so. However, if I put a timeout in the hello world function, so that it responds after 2 seconds, apache benchmark reports a dramatically reduced throughput: about 50/s. I'm running 100 concurrent connections with ab. If I increase the concurrency, it goes up. This makes sense, because apache benchmark is basically sending out requests in batches of 100, which come back every 2 seconds. 100 requests / 2 seconds = 50 requests / second If I increase the concurrency to about 400 or 500, it starts to crash. I don't think I've hit node.js's limit, I think I'm hitting a wall in my operating system on the number of open file descriptors or sockets or something. Any way I can get a good guess about how many requests my server can handle? I want to make sure the test computer isn't the one causing the problem.

  Read the article

• Vim configuration slow in Terminal & iTerm2 but not in MacVim

  - by Jey Balachandran

  Ideally, I want to use Vim from Terminal or iTerm2. However, it becomes unbearably slow so I had to resort to using MacVim. There is nothing wrong with MacVim, however my workflow would be much smoother if I used only Terminal/iTerm2. When its slow Loading files, in particular Rails files takes about 1 - 1.5s. Removing rails.vim decreases this time to 0.5 - 1s. In MacVim this is instantaneous. Scrolling through the rows and columns via h, j, k, l. It progressively gets slower the longer I hold down the keys. Eventually, it starts jumping rows. I have my Key Repeat set to Fast and Delay Until Repeat set to Short. After 10 - 15 minutes of usage, using plugins such as ctrlp or Command-T gets very laggy. I'd type a letter, wait 2 - 3s, then type the next. My Setup 11" MacBook Air running Mac OS X Version 10.7.3 (1.6 Ghz Intel Core 2 Duo, 4 GB DDR3) My dotfiles. > vim --version VIM - Vi IMproved 7.3 (2010 Aug 15, compiled Nov 16 2011 16:44:23) MacOS X (unix) version Included patches: 1-333 Huge version without GUI. Features included (+) or not (-): +arabic +autocmd -balloon_eval -browse ++builtin_terms +byte_offset +cindent -clientserver +clipboard +cmdline_compl +cmdline_hist +cmdline_info +comments +conceal +cryptv -cscope +cursorbind +cursorshape +dialog_con +diff +digraphs -dnd -ebcdic +emacs_tags +eval +ex_extra +extra_search +farsi +file_in_path +find_in_path +float +folding -footer +fork() -gettext -hangul_input +iconv +insert_expand +jumplist +keymap +langmap +libcall +linebreak +lispindent +listcmds +localmap -lua +menu +mksession +modify_fname +mouse -mouseshape +mouse_dec -mouse_gpm -mouse_jsbterm +mouse_netterm -mouse_sysmouse +mouse_xterm +multi_byte +multi_lang -mzscheme +netbeans_intg +path_extra -perl +persistent_undo +postscript +printer +profile +python -python3 +quickfix +reltime +rightleft +ruby +scrollbind +signs +smartindent -sniff +startuptime +statusline -sun_workshop +syntax +tag_binary +tag_old_static -tag_any_white -tcl +terminfo +termresponse +textobjects +title -toolbar +user_commands +vertsplit +virtualedit +visual +visualextra +viminfo +vreplace +wildignore +wildmenu +windows +writebackup -X11 -xfontset -xim -xsmp -xterm_clipboard -xterm_save system vimrc file: "$VIM/vimrc" user vimrc file: "$HOME/.vimrc" user exrc file: "$HOME/.exrc" fall-back for $VIM: "/usr/local/Cellar/vim/7.3.333/share/vim" Compilation: /usr/bin/llvm-gcc -c -I. -Iproto -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -DMACOS_X_UNIX -no-cpp-precomp -O3 -march=core2 -msse4.1 -w -pipe -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=1 Linking: /usr/bin/llvm-gcc -L. -L/usr/local/lib -o vim -lm -lncurses -liconv -framework Cocoa -framework Python -lruby I've tried running without any plugins or syntax highlighting. It opens files a lot faster but still not as fast as MacVim. But the other two problems still exist. Why is my vim configuration slow? How can I improve the speed of my vim configuration within Terminal or iTerm2?

  Read the article

• Hardware profiling [closed]

  - by mgroves

  I'd like to upgrade my computer so that it's faster when editing/rendering video. I'm thinking of first getting a faster hard drive, but I'd like to be able to run some sort of profiling software to tell me what the bottleneck is when rendering video. Any suggestions about software that can do this for preferably Windows XP and preferably for free?

  Read the article

• Which network management system (NMS) to choose?

  - by QrystaL

  I need to integrate NMS in large enterprise system for data collection purposes. Primary requirements: collection by SNMP great scalability (up to 1,000 devices with 1,000 interfaces each) failover data storage in Oracle DBMS integration API (configuration, data access) Any ideas would be appreciated...

  Read the article

• HD latency measurement using bonnie++ on different machines with different RAM size

  - by j0nes

  Hello, I have run bonnie++ v1.96 on two different servers without any additional load. One server is a "physical" Dell server with 32GB RAM, the other one is a virtual instance with 14GB RAM. I have read in the bonnie manuals that I should use two times the size of RAM in my bonnie runs, so I used 64GB on the physical machine and 28GB on the virtual machine. Now I want to compare the results, and I am wondering whether the results are comparable at all. The most interesting part is the latency part - on the physical machine, the values are about 10 times higher than on the virtual machine! Can I take these results seriously (e.g. the virtual machine HD is much much faster) or does the different RAM size tamper the results? Thanks! Jonas

  Read the article

• Testing for disk write

  - by Montecristo

  I'm writing an application for storing lots of images (size <5MB) on an ext3 filesystem, this is what I have for now. After some searching here on serverfault I have decided for a structure of directories like this: 000/000/000000001.jpg ... 236/519/236519107.jpg This structure will allow me to save up to 1'000'000'000 images as I'll store a max of 1'000 images in each leaf. I've created it, from a theoretical point of view seems ok to me (though I've no experience on this), but I want to find out what will happen when there will be directories full of files in there. A question about creating this structure: is it better to create it all in one go (takes approx 50 minutes on my pc) or should I create directories as they are needed? From a developer point of view I think the first option is better (no extra waiting time for the user), but from a sysadmin point of view, is this ok? I've thought I could do as if the filesystem is already under the running application, I'll make a script that will save images as fast as it can, monitoring things as follows: how much time does it take for an image to be saved when there is no or little space used? how does this change when the space starts to be used up? how much time does it take for an image to be read from a random leaf? Does this change a lot when there are lots of files? Does launching this command sync; echo 3 | sudo tee /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches has any sense at all? Is this the only thing I have to do to have a clean start if I want to start over again with my tests? Do you have any suggestions or corrections?

  Read the article

• svchost.exe @ 100% disk utilization vs. Outlook.ost

  - by Aszurom

  Vista x32 box with Outlook 2007. Outlook is not running. Hasn't been fired up for several reboots. I stopped WMI service and Windows Search service. Machine is mostly quiet, and then servicehost.exe launches an instance and starts banging away at Outlook.ost file. I can't determine what is causing it. I'm watching it in processmon, and trying to investigate it with preocessexplorer. Not having much luck at figuring out why the machine is so interested in that file. NOTHING is running that should be touching it.

  Read the article

• Website has become slower on a VPS, was much fast on a shared host. What's wrong?

  - by Arpit Tambi

  My shared host suspended my website stating system overload, so I moved my website to a VPS which has 4GB RAM. But for some reason the website has become very slow. This is the vmstat output - procs -----------memory---------- ---swap-- -----io---- --system-- -----cpu------ r b swpd free buff cache si so bi bo in cs us sy id wa st 1 0 0 3050500 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 Here's the Apache Benchmark output for a STATIC html page I ran on the server itself - Benchmarking www.ask-oracle.com (be patient)...apr_poll: The timeout specified has expired (70007) Total of 20 requests completed Update: Server Config: List item Centos 5.6 4 cores cpu 4 GB RAM LAMP stack with APC Wordpress Only one website It takes almost double time to load now, same website was much fast on shared hosting. I know I need to tweak some settings but have no clue where to start from? I have already tried to optimize apache, mysql etc. Update 2: CPU usage is low, see uptime output: 11:09:02 up 7 days, 21:26, 1 user, load average: 0.09, 0.11, 0.09 Update 3: When I load any webpage, browser shows "Waiting" for a long time and then page loads quickly. So I suspect server can accept only limited connections and holds extra connections in a waiting state. How to check this? Update 4: Following is the output on executing netperf TCP STREAM TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to localhost.localdomain (127.0.0.1) port 0 AF_INET Recv Send Send Socket Socket Message Elapsed Size Size Size Time Throughput bytes bytes bytes secs. 10^6bits/sec 87380 16384 16384 10.00 9615.40 [root@ip-118-139-177-244 j3ngn5ri6r01t3]# Here are the Apache MPM settings from httpd.conf, do they look okay? <IfModule worker.c> StartServers 5 MaxClients 100 MinSpareThreads 50 MaxSpareThreads 250 ThreadsPerChild 125 MaxRequestsPerChild 10000 ServerLimit 100 </IfModule>

  Read the article

• How do I fix a super slow MacBook?

  - by MakingScienceFictionFact

  I'm running a black MacBook 4.1. Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2.4 GHz, 2 GB RAM, 250 GB hard disk drive, bus speed is 800 MHz. It's about three years old in excellent shape externally. I treat this thing like a baby. It used to run awesome, but now it's super slow at everything. I get the spinning pizza of death constantly. It takes a long time to boot up or load any program, even Safari and iTunes. iPhoto is terribly slow. The Internet doesn't work properly and it reminds me of a buggy PC. I've formatted it and re-installed Mac OS X 10.6 (with all updates), and I've done the disk repairs process. As an iOS developer this is driving me crazy, but luckily I have an iMac to work on in the day which is fast. I'm ready to format it again, but that didn't work last time. After the last format, I copied back files from an external drive so maybe the offending files were hidden in there somewhere. Here are the hard disk drive and RAM specifications. It is upgrade-able to 4 GB of RAM. Hard disk drive: The Fujitsu Mobile MHY2250BH is a 250 GB, standard hard disk drive. Its burst transfer rate is 150 Mbyte/s. This is a 5400 RPM drive and comes with an 8 MB buffer. RAM: two sticks of 1 GB DDR2 SDRAM, speed: 667 MHz.

  Read the article

• Which is faster for read access on EC2; local drive or EBS?

  - by Phillip Oldham

  Which is faster for read access on an EC2 instance; the "local" drive or an attached EBS volume? I have some data that needs to be persisted so have placed this on an EBS volume. I'm using OpenSolaris, so this volume has been attached as a ZFS pool. However, I have a large chunk of EC2 disk space that's going to go unused, so I'm considering re-purposing this as a ZFS cache volume but I don't want to do this if the disk access is going to be slower than that of the EBS volume as it would potentially have a detrimental effect.

  Read the article

• IIS 7.0 - responses throttled to 500ms blocks?

  - by Julia Hayward

  Scenario: ASP.NET MVC wep app sitting on my local machine (Vista Ultimate, IIS 7.0), nothing going on except one user (me) logged in and viewing an index page. The page includes 9 dynamic images drawn from the underlying DB and returned from a controller action. I have got the actual processing time for these images down to 15ms each. Turn on Firebug and watch the page load. What I see is 9 requests for images firing off together – no surprise – but four come back to me almost immediately; two more after 0.5s; another after 1s; then at 1.5s and 2s. Logging on the server side suggests the individual responses are still only taking 15ms. So it appears IIS is queueing things up into 500ms chunks. (Repeating the experiment produces different results, but each time the images return in similar blocks – you might get three in the first group, then three at 0.5s, two at 1s etc, for example – and it’s always at 500ms intervals, not anything else.) It’s also repeatable cross-browser, and it’s not repeatable with other forms of content. I haven't found any particular mention of this problem out there, so I'm sort of assuming it's not an IIS bug, so is it: i) IIS on desktop OSs deliberately does it, to make you use server OSs in production? ii) There is some magical setting that has eluded me for as long as I’ve known IIS? iii) Something peculiar to MVC or SQL Server 2008? or something else?

  Read the article

• Ultra-lightweight web browser?

  - by zildjohn01

  Are there any good super-lightweight graphical web browsers out there? I'd like to be able to browse the web on an old PC, but the mainstream crop of browsers is just too heavy, and I don't want to resort to something like Lynx. There must be something decent out there that'll fit in 16 or 32MB of RAM comfortably. 100% standards compliance isn't necessary, but I'd like something that supports the most widely used parts of CSS and JavaScript. The goal is to get 98% of sites usable in a nice, graphical format.

  Read the article

• Slow filesystem access

  - by danneh3826

  I'm trying to diagnose a slow filesystem issue on a server I look after. It's been ongoing for quite some time, and I've run out of ideas as to what I can try. Here's the thick of it. The server itself is a Dell Poweredge T310. It has 4 SAS hard drives in it, configured at RAID5, and is running Citrix XenServer 5.6. The VM is a (relatively) old Debian 5.0.6 installation. It's given 4 cores, and 4Gb's of RAM. It has 3 volumes. A 10Gb volume (ext3) for the system, 980Gb volume (xfs) for data (~94% full), and another 200Gb volume (xfs) for data (~13% full). Now here's the weird thing. Read/write access to the 980Gb volume is really slow. I might get 5Mb/s out of it if I'm lucky. At first I figured it was actually disk access in the system, or at a hypervisor level, but ruled that out entirely as other VMs on the same host are running perfectly fine (a good couple hundred Mb/s disk r/w access). So then I started to target this particular VM. I started thinking it was XFS, but to prove it I wasn't going to attempt to change the filesystem on the 980Gb drive, with years and years of billions of files on there. So I provisioned the 200Gb drive, and did the same read/write test (basically dd), and got a good couple hundred Mb/s r/w access to it. So that ruled out the VM, the hardware, and the filesystem type. There's also a lot of these in /var/log/kern.log; (sorry, this is quite long) Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564689] httpd: page allocation failure. order:5, mode:0x4020 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564693] Pid: 7318, comm: httpd Not tainted 2.6.32-4-686-bigmem #1 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564696] Call Trace: Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564705] [<c1092a4d>] ? __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x476/0x4e0 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564711] [<c1092ac3>] ? __get_free_pages+0xc/0x17 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564716] [<c10b632e>] ? __kmalloc+0x30/0x128 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564722] [<c11dd774>] ? pskb_expand_head+0x4f/0x157 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564727] [<c11ddbbf>] ? __pskb_pull_tail+0x41/0x1fb Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564732] [<c11e4882>] ? dev_queue_xmit+0xe4/0x38e Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564738] [<c1205902>] ? ip_finish_output+0x0/0x5c Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564742] [<c12058c7>] ? ip_finish_output2+0x187/0x1c2 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564747] [<c1204dc8>] ? ip_local_out+0x15/0x17 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564751] [<c12055a9>] ? ip_queue_xmit+0x31e/0x379 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564758] [<c1279a90>] ? _spin_lock_bh+0x8/0x1e Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564767] [<eda15a8d>] ? __nf_ct_refresh_acct+0x66/0xa4 [nf_conntrack] Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564773] [<c103bf42>] ? _local_bh_enable_ip+0x16/0x6e Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564779] [<c1214593>] ? tcp_transmit_skb+0x595/0x5cc Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564785] [<c1005c4f>] ? xen_restore_fl_direct_end+0x0/0x1 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564791] [<c12165ea>] ? tcp_write_xmit+0x7a3/0x874 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564796] [<c121203a>] ? tcp_ack+0x1611/0x1802 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564801] [<c10055ec>] ? xen_force_evtchn_callback+0xc/0x10 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564806] [<c121392f>] ? tcp_established_options+0x1d/0x8b Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564811] [<c1213be4>] ? tcp_current_mss+0x38/0x53 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564816] [<c1216701>] ? __tcp_push_pending_frames+0x1e/0x50 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564821] [<c1212246>] ? tcp_data_snd_check+0x1b/0xd2 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564825] [<c1212de3>] ? tcp_rcv_established+0x5d0/0x626 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564831] [<c121902c>] ? tcp_v4_do_rcv+0x15f/0x2cf Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564835] [<c1219561>] ? tcp_v4_rcv+0x3c5/0x5c0 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564841] [<c120197e>] ? ip_local_deliver_finish+0x10c/0x18c Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564846] [<c12015a4>] ? ip_rcv_finish+0x2c4/0x2d8 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564852] [<c11e3b71>] ? netif_receive_skb+0x3bb/0x3d6 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564864] [<ed823efc>] ? xennet_poll+0x9b8/0xafc [xen_netfront] Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564869] [<c11e40ee>] ? net_rx_action+0x96/0x194 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564874] [<c103bd4c>] ? __do_softirq+0xaa/0x151 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564878] [<c103be24>] ? do_softirq+0x31/0x3c Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564883] [<c103befa>] ? irq_exit+0x26/0x58 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564890] [<c118ff9f>] ? xen_evtchn_do_upcall+0x12c/0x13e Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564896] [<c1008c3f>] ? xen_do_upcall+0x7/0xc Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564899] Mem-Info: Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564902] DMA per-cpu: Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564905] CPU 0: hi: 0, btch: 1 usd: 0 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564908] CPU 1: hi: 0, btch: 1 usd: 0 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564911] CPU 2: hi: 0, btch: 1 usd: 0 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564914] CPU 3: hi: 0, btch: 1 usd: 0 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564916] Normal per-cpu: Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564919] CPU 0: hi: 186, btch: 31 usd: 175 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564922] CPU 1: hi: 186, btch: 31 usd: 165 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564925] CPU 2: hi: 186, btch: 31 usd: 30 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564928] CPU 3: hi: 186, btch: 31 usd: 140 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564931] HighMem per-cpu: Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564933] CPU 0: hi: 186, btch: 31 usd: 159 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564936] CPU 1: hi: 186, btch: 31 usd: 22 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564939] CPU 2: hi: 186, btch: 31 usd: 24 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564942] CPU 3: hi: 186, btch: 31 usd: 13 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564947] active_anon:485974 inactive_anon:121138 isolated_anon:0 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564948] active_file:75215 inactive_file:79510 isolated_file:0 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564949] unevictable:0 dirty:516 writeback:15 unstable:0 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564950] free:230770 slab_reclaimable:36661 slab_unreclaimable:21249 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564952] mapped:20016 shmem:29450 pagetables:5600 bounce:0 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564958] DMA free:2884kB min:72kB low:88kB high:108kB active_anon:0kB inactive_anon:0kB active_file:5692kB inactive_file:724kB unevictable:0kB isolated(anon):0kB isolated(file):0kB present:15872kB mlocked:0kB dirty:8kB writeback:0kB mapped:0kB shmem:0kB slab_reclaimable:5112kB slab_unreclaimable:156kB kernel_stack:56kB pagetables:0kB unstable:0kB bounce:0kB writeback_tmp:0kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564964] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 698 4143 4143 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564977] Normal free:143468kB min:3344kB low:4180kB high:5016kB active_anon:56kB inactive_anon:2068kB active_file:131812kB inactive_file:131728kB unevictable:0kB isolated(anon):0kB isolated(file):0kB present:715256kB mlocked:0kB dirty:156kB writeback:0kB mapped:308kB shmem:4kB slab_reclaimable:141532kB slab_unreclaimable:84840kB kernel_stack:1928kB pagetables:22400kB unstable:0kB bounce:0kB writeback_tmp:0kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564983] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 27559 27559 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564995] HighMem free:776728kB min:512kB low:4636kB high:8760kB active_anon:1943840kB inactive_anon:482484kB active_file:163356kB inactive_file:185588kB unevictable:0kB isolated(anon):0kB isolated(file):0kB present:3527556kB mlocked:0kB dirty:1900kB writeback:60kB mapped:79756kB shmem:117796kB slab_reclaimable:0kB slab_unreclaimable:0kB kernel_stack:0kB pagetables:0kB unstable:0kB bounce:0kB writeback_tmp:0kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.565001] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0 0 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.565011] DMA: 385*4kB 16*8kB 3*16kB 9*32kB 6*64kB 2*128kB 1*256kB 0*512kB 0*1024kB 0*2048kB 0*4096kB = 2900kB Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.565032] Normal: 21505*4kB 6508*8kB 273*16kB 24*32kB 3*64kB 0*128kB 0*256kB 0*512kB 0*1024kB 0*2048kB 0*4096kB = 143412kB Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.565054] HighMem: 949*4kB 8859*8kB 7063*16kB 6186*32kB 4631*64kB 727*128kB 6*256kB 0*512kB 0*1024kB 0*2048kB 0*4096kB = 776604kB Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.565076] 198980 total pagecache pages Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.565079] 14850 pages in swap cache Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.565082] Swap cache stats: add 2556273, delete 2541423, find 82961339/83153719 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.565085] Free swap = 250592kB Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.565087] Total swap = 385520kB Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.575454] 1073152 pages RAM Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.575458] 888834 pages HighMem Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.575461] 11344 pages reserved Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.575463] 1090481 pages shared Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.575465] 737188 pages non-shared Now, I've no idea what this means. There's plenty of free memory; total used free shared buffers cached Mem: 4247232 3455904 791328 0 5348 736412 -/+ buffers/cache: 2714144 1533088 Swap: 385520 131004 254516 Though now I see the swap is relatively low in size, but would that matter? I've been starting to think about fragmentation, or inode usage on that large partition, but a recent fsck on it showed is as only like 0.5% fragmented. Which leaves me with inode usage, but how much of an effect really would a large inode table or filesystem TOC have? I've love to hear people's opinions on this. It's driving me potty! df -h output; Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/xvda1 9.5G 6.6G 2.4G 74% / tmpfs 2.1G 0 2.1G 0% /lib/init/rw udev 10M 520K 9.5M 6% /dev tmpfs 2.1G 0 2.1G 0% /dev/shm /dev/xvdb 980G 921G 59G 94% /data

  Read the article

• Slow Write Speed on ESXi host

  - by Gregg Leventhal

  I have an ESXi 5.0 free host with an internal datastore of 7.2K 5 disk RAID 5 using a PERC 710 mini RAID controller in a Dell Poweredge R620 Server with 32GB Ram and a 12 Core Xeon. I seem to get slow write speeds in the guests so I checked out ESXTOP and I see 15MB/s write speed there on this host, which is comprable to the guests. What could be causing such horrible write speeds? Is RAID 5 really this slow to write??

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125  | Next Page >