Search Results

Search found 18148 results on 726 pages for 'performance monitor'.

Page 162/726 | < Previous Page | 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169  | Next Page >

  • Per-machine decentralised DNS caching - nscd/lwresd/etc

    - by Dan Carley
    Preface: We have caching resolvers at each of our geographic network locations. These are clustered for resiliency and their locality reduces the latency of internal requests generated by our servers. This works well. Except that a vast quantity of the requests seen over the wire are lookups for the same records, generated by applications which don't perform any DNS caching of their own. Questions: Is there a significant benefit to running lightweight caching daemons on the individual servers in order to reduce repeated requests from hitting the network? Does anyone have experience of using [u]nscd, lwresd or dnscache to do such a thing? Are there any other packages worth looking at? Any caveats to beware of? Besides the obvious, caching and negative caching stale results.

    Read the article

  • Cause of slow download speed on a particular EC2 instance?

    - by James
    I have a networking issue I'm trying to solve. I have two EC2 instances, same zone, same type. On one of the two EC2 instances (the 'bad' instance), the download speed is really poor (200k/s), while on the other (the 'good' instance), the download speed is fine, comfortable at 30M/s +). To clarify, I'm talking about downloading files to the EC2 instance while ssh'd into the server, e.g running wget with a large file. I've tried different files, including S3 objects and a large linux ISO from elsewhere. Running ethtool eth0 only returns 'Link detected: yes' for both. When running ifconfig, both return the same for most part, aside from how the good instance shows no error packets yet the bad instance shows many: UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:168372370 errors:5075643 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:122116480 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 Both servers are configured the same, at least were supposed to be. How can I go about diagnosing the cause for the slow download speed? Is there anything particular to EC2 instances that could cause this? Having trouble knowing where to start. Thanks for any help!

    Read the article

  • Nginx Slower than Apache??

    - by ichilton
    Hi, I've just setup 2x identical Rackspace Cloud instances and am doing some comparisons and benchmarks to compare Apache and Nginx. I'm testing with a 3.4k png file and initially 512MB server instances but have now moved to 1024MB server instances. I'm very surprised to see that whatever I try, Apache seems to consistently outperform Nginx....what am I doing wrong? Nginx: Server Software: nginx/0.8.54 Server Port: 80 Document Length: 3400 bytes Concurrency Level: 100 Time taken for tests: 2.320 seconds Complete requests: 1000 Failed requests: 0 Write errors: 0 Total transferred: 3612000 bytes HTML transferred: 3400000 bytes Requests per second: 431.01 [#/sec] (mean) Time per request: 232.014 [ms] (mean) Time per request: 2.320 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests) Transfer rate: 1520.31 [Kbytes/sec] received Connection Times (ms) min mean[+/-sd] median max Connect: 0 11 15.7 3 120 Processing: 1 35 76.9 20 1674 Waiting: 1 31 73.0 19 1674 Total: 1 46 79.1 21 1693 Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms) 50% 21 66% 39 75% 40 80% 40 90% 98 95% 136 98% 269 99% 334 100% 1693 (longest request) And Apache: Server Software: Apache/2.2.16 Server Port: 80 Document Length: 3400 bytes Concurrency Level: 100 Time taken for tests: 1.346 seconds Complete requests: 1000 Failed requests: 0 Write errors: 0 Total transferred: 3647000 bytes HTML transferred: 3400000 bytes Requests per second: 742.90 [#/sec] (mean) Time per request: 134.608 [ms] (mean) Time per request: 1.346 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests) Transfer rate: 2645.85 [Kbytes/sec] received Connection Times (ms) min mean[+/-sd] median max Connect: 0 1 3.7 0 27 Processing: 0 3 6.2 1 29 Waiting: 0 2 5.0 1 29 Total: 1 4 7.0 1 29 Percentage of the requests served within a certain time (ms) 50% 1 66% 1 75% 1 80% 1 90% 17 95% 19 98% 26 99% 27 100% 29 (longest request) I'm currently using worker_processes 4; and worker_connections 1024; but i've tried and benchmarked different values and see the same behaviour on all - I just can't get it to perform as well as Apache and from what i've read previously, i'm shocked about this! Can anyone give any advice? Thanks, Ian

    Read the article

  • Samba PDC share slow with LDAP backend

    - by hmart
    The scenario I have a SUSE SLES 11.1 SP1 machine as Samba master PDC with LDAP backend. In one share there are Database files for a Client-Server application. I log XP and Windows 7 machines to the local domain (example.local), the login is a little slow but works. In the client computers have an executable which opens, reads and writes the database files from the server share. The Problem When running Samba with LDAP password backend the client application runs VERY SLOW with a maximum transfer rate of 2500 MBit per second. If disable LDAP the client app speed increases 20x, with transfer rate of 50Mbit/sec and running smoothly. I'm doing test with just two users and two machines, so concurrency, or LDAP size shouldn't be the problem here. The suspect LDAP, Smb.conf [global] section configuration. The Question What can I do? I've googled a lot, but still have no answer. Slow smb.conf WITH LDAP [global] workgroup = zmartsoft.local passdb backend = ldapsam:ldap://127.0.0.1 printing = cups printcap name = cups printcap cache time = 750 cups options = raw map to guest = Bad User logon path = \\%L\profiles\.msprofile logon home = \\%L\%U\.9xprofile logon drive = P: usershare allow guests = Yes add machine script = /usr/sbin/useradd -c Machine -d /var/lib/nobody -s /bin/false %m$ domain logons = Yes domain master = Yes local master = Yes netbios name = server os level = 65 preferred master = Yes security = user wins support = Yes idmap backend = ldap:ldap://127.0.0.1 ldap admin dn = cn=Administrator,dc=zmartsoft,dc=local ldap group suffix = ou=Groups ldap idmap suffix = ou=Idmap ldap machine suffix = ou=Machines ldap passwd sync = Yes ldap ssl = Off ldap suffix = dc=zmartsoft,dc=local ldap user suffix = ou=Users

    Read the article

  • Just to not to be ingnorant.

    - by atch
    Could anyone explain to me why is it that producers of processors claim that their processor can perform so many thousands (or millions) operations per second and yet typical program (Word, VS etc.) on my machine with 4GB, 3500hz starts with no less than 10sek. Have to mention that I've just formatted disk and tick any necessarry boxes to optimize my machine. So if for example outlook starts in 10 sek I wonder how many millions of operations have to be performed to run such program? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Does this prove a network bandwidth bottleneck?

    - by Yuji Tomita
    I've incorrectly assumed that my internal AB testing means my server can handle 1k concurrency @3k hits per second. My theory at at the moment is that the network is the bottleneck. The server can't send enough data fast enough. External testing from blitz.io at 1k concurrency shows my hits/s capping off at 180, with pages taking longer and longer to respond as the server is only able to return 180 per second. I've served a blank file from nginx and benched it: it scales 1:1 with concurrency. Now to rule out IO / memcached bottlenecks (nginx normally pulls from memcached), I serve up a static version of the cached page from the filesystem. The results are very similar to my original test; I'm capped at around 180 RPS. Splitting the HTML page in half gives me double the RPS, so it's definitely limited by the size of the page. If I internally ApacheBench from the local server, I get consistent results of around 4k RPS on both the Full Page and the Half Page, at high transfer rates. Transfer rate: 62586.14 [Kbytes/sec] received If I AB from an external server, I get around 180RPS - same as the blitz.io results. How do I know it's not intentional throttling? If I benchmark from multiple external servers, all results become poor which leads me to believe the problem is in MY servers outbound traffic, not a download speed issue with my benchmarking servers / blitz.io. So I'm back to my conclusion that my server can't send data fast enough. Am I right? Are there other ways to interpret this data? Is the solution/optimization to set up multiple servers + load balancing that can each serve 180 hits per second? I'm quite new to server optimization, so I'd appreciate any confirmation interpreting this data. Outbound traffic Here's more information about the outbound bandwidth: The network graph shows a maximum output of 16 Mb/s: 16 megabits per second. Doesn't sound like much at all. Due to a suggestion about throttling, I looked into this and found that linode has a 50mbps cap (which I'm not even close to hitting, apparently). I had it raised to 100mbps. Since linode caps my traffic, and I'm not even hitting it, does this mean that my server should indeed be capable of outputting up to 100mbps but is limited by some other internal bottleneck? I just don't understand how networks at this large of a scale work; can they literally send data as fast as they can read from the HDD? Is the network pipe that big? In conclusion 1: Based on the above, I'm thinking I can definitely raise my 180RPS by adding an nginx load balancer on top of a multi nginx server setup at exactly 180RPS per server behind the LB. 2: If linode has a 50/100mbit limit that I'm not hitting at all, there must be something I can do to hit that limit with my single server setup. If I can read / transmit data fast enough locally, and linode even bothers to have a 50mbit/100mbit cap, there must be an internal bottleneck that's not allowing me to hit those caps that I'm not sure how to detect. Correct? I realize the question is huge and vague now, but I'm not sure how to condense it. Any input is appreciated on any conclusion I've made.

    Read the article

  • dd oflag=direct 5x fast

    - by César
    I have Centos 6.2 in server with this specs: 2xCPU 16 Core AMD Opteron 6282 SE 64GB RAM Raid controller H700 1GB cache NV - 2HD 74GB SAS 15Krpm RAID1 stripe 16k (OS Centos 6.2) sda - 4HD 146GB SAS 15Krpm RAID10 stripe 16k (ext4 bs 4096, no barriers) sdb -> /vol01 Raid controller H800 1GB cache nv - MD1200 12HD 300GB SAS 15Krpm RAID10 stripe 256k (For DB Postgres 8.3.18) (ext4 bs 4096, stride 64, stripe-width 384, no barriers) sdc -> /vol02 I'm benchmarking IO speed with dd, and view thah if in RAID10 12 disk exec: dd if=/dev/zero of=DD bs=8M count=10000 oflag=direct 10000+0 records in 10000+0 records out 83886080000 bytes (84 GB) copied, 126,03 s, 666 MB/s but if I remove "oflag=direct" option obtain about 80 MB/s. In read benchmark, results are similar: dd of=/dev/null if=DD bs=8M count=10000 iflag=direct 10000+0 records in 10000+0 records out 83886080000 bytes (84 GB) copied, 79,5918 s, 1,1 GB/s If remove iflag=direct obtain 150MB/s... I don't understand this huge differences, on other machines y don't have this behavior. Can I have some kernel parameter misconfigured? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • limit linux background flush (dirty pages)

    - by korkman
    Background flushing in linux happens when either too much written data is pending (adjustable via /proc/sys/vm/dirty_background_ratio) or a timeout for pending writes is reached (/proc/sys/vm/dirty_expire_centisecs). Unless another limit is being hit (/proc/sys/vm/dirty_ratio), more written data may be cached. Further writes will block. In theory, this should create a background process writing out dirty pages without disturbing other processes. In practice, it does disturb any process doing uncached reading or synchronous writing. Badly. This is because the background flush actually writes at 100% device speed and any other device requests at this time will be delayed (because all queues and write-caches on the road are filled). Is there any way to limit the amount of requests per second the flushing process performs, or otherwise effectively prioritize other device I/O?

    Read the article

  • Simple tool to graph memory usage?

    - by dbr
    Is there a script that will show memory usage as a graph, for example as a pie-chart, with each process being being a separate slice? I'm not looking for something like Munin to graph memory usage over time, but rather show the memory usage per-process at a single point in time. To make my request even more obscure, it is for a headless server (so no X applications). The simplest way would be to write a PNG file, or possibly an HTML file (which could use Javascript to allow the filtering of processes, changing between graph-types and so on)

    Read the article

  • How to diagnose very slow pagefile

    - by svick
    Quite often, one of the applications I use freezes (“does not respond”) for a while, in extreme cases for few minutes. This happens especially when when switching apps. During this time, the HDD light flashes constantly and perfmon show that HDD is used 100% of the time (OTOH, CPU isn't) and that pagefile is being read (which is to be expected when switching apps), but at a very slow rate. When I sort the disk table in perfmon by read or write, the file read and wrote the most is the pagefile, but it's still quite low rate (I don't remember the numbers). How can I diagnose what's causing this? I use Windows Vista, and the computer is quite ordinary two years old laptop.

    Read the article

  • Is it reasonable that a random disk seek & read costs ~16ms?

    - by fzhang
    I am frustrated about the latency of random reading from a non-ssd disk. Based on results from following test program, it speeds ~16 ms for a random read of just 512 bytes without help of os cache. I tried changing 512 to larger values, such as 25k, and the latency did not increase as much. I guess it is because the disk seek dominates the time. I understand that random reading is inherently slow, but just want to be sure that ~16ms is reasonable, even for non-ssd disk. #include <sys/stat.h> #include <sys/time.h> #include <sys/types.h> #include <sys/unistd.h> #include <fcntl.h> #include <limits.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <string.h> int main(int argc, char** argv) { int fd = open(argv[1], O_RDONLY); if (fd < 0) { fprintf(stderr, "Failed open %s\n", argv[1]); return -1; } const size_t count = 512; const off_t offset = 25990611 / 2; char buffer[count] = { '\0' }; struct timeval start_time; gettimeofday(&start_time, NULL); off_t ret = lseek(fd, offset, SEEK_SET); if (ret != offset) { perror("lseek error"); close(fd); return -1; } ret = read(fd, buffer, count); if (ret != count) { fprintf(stderr, "Failed reading all: %ld\n", ret); close(fd); return -1; } struct timeval end_time; gettimeofday(&end_time, NULL); printf("tv_sec: %ld, tv_usec: %ld\n", end_time.tv_sec - start_time.tv_sec, end_time.tv_usec - start_time.tv_usec); close(fd); return 0; }

    Read the article

  • MySQL: Load database to memory

    - by Adam Matan
    Hi, Is there a way to load an entire MySQL database to the RAM, especially on en EC2 server? The database is quite small (~500 MegaBytes) I have enough memory Speed issues are crucial - the resulted queries are used to serve a dynamic webpage. Thanks, Adam

    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

  • How to get bearable 2D and 3D performance on AMD Radeon HD 6950?

    - by l0b0
    I have had an AMD Radeon HD 6950 (i.e., Cayman series) for a couple years now, and I have tried a lot of combinations of drivers and settings with terrible results. I'm completely at a loss as to how to proceed. The open source driver has much better 2D performance, but it offloads all OpenGL rendering to the CPU. What I've tried so far: All the latest stable Ubuntu releases in the period, plus one Linux Mint release. All the latest stable AMD Catalyst Proprietary Display Drivers, and currently 13.1. The unofficial wiki installation instructions for every Ubuntu version and the semi-official Ubuntu instructions. All the tips and tweaks I could find for Minecraft (Optifine, reducing settings to minimum), VLC (postprocessing at minimum, rendering at native video size), Catalyst Control Center (flipped every lever in there) and X11 (some binary toggles I can no longer remember). Results: Typically 13-15 FPS in Minecraft, 30 max (100+ in Windows with the same driver version). Around 10 FPS in Team Fortress 2 using the official Steam client. Choppy video playback, in Flash and with VLC. CPU use goes through the roof when rendering video (150% for 1080p on YouTube in Chromium, 100% for 1080p H264 in VLC). glxgears shows 12.5 FPS when maximized. fgl_glxgears shows 10 FPS when maximized. Hardware details from lshw: Motherboard ASUS P6X58D-E CPU Intel Core i7 CPU 950 @ 3.07GHz (never overclocked; 64 bit) 6 GB RAM Video card product "Cayman PRO [Radeon HD 6950]", vendor "Hynix Semiconductor (Hyundai Electronics)" 2 x 1920x1200 monitors, both connected with HDMI. I feel I must be missing something absolutely fundamental here. Is there no accelerated support for anything on 64-bit architectures? Does a dual monitor completely mess up the driver? $ fglrxinfo display: :0 screen: 0 OpenGL vendor string: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. OpenGL renderer string: AMD Radeon HD 6900 Series OpenGL version string: 4.2.11995 Compatibility Profile Context $ glxinfo | grep 'direct rendering' direct rendering: Yes I am currently using the open source driver, with the following results: Full frame rate and low CPU load when playing 1080p video. Black screen (but music in the background) in Team Fortress 2. Similar performance in Minecraft as the Catalyst driver. In hindsight obvious, since both end up offloading the rendering to the CPU. My /var/log/Xorg.0.log after upgrading to AMD Catalyst 13.1. Some possibly important lines: (WW) Falling back to old probe method for fglrx (WW) fglrx: No matching Device section for instance (BusID PCI:0@3:0:1) found The generated xorg.conf. The disabled "monitor" 0-DFP9 is actually an A/V receiver, which sometimes confuses the monitor drivers when turned on/off (but not in Windows). All three "monitor" devices are connected with HDMI. Edit: Chris Carter's suggestion to use the xorg-edgers PPA (Catalyst 13.1) resulted in some improvement, but still pretty bad performance overall: Minecraft stabilizes at 13-17 FPS, but at least the CPU load is "only" at 45-60%. Still 150% CPU use for 1080p video rendering on YouTube in Chromium. Massive improvement for 1080p H264 in VLC: 40-50% CPU use and no visible jitter glxgears performance about doubled to 25-30 FPS when maximized. fgl_glxgears still at ~10 FPS when maximized.

    Read the article

  • nginx+php-fpm help optimize configs

    - by Dmitro
    I have 3 servers. First server (CPU - model name: 06/17, 2.66GHz, 4 cores, 8GB RAM) have nginx as load balancer with next config upstream lb_mydomain { server mydomain.ru:81 weight=2; server 66.0.0.18 weight=6; } server { listen 80; server_name ~(?!mydomain.ru)(.*); client_max_body_size 20m; location / { proxy_pass http://lb_mydomain; proxy_redirect off; proxy_set_header Connection close; proxy_set_header Host $host; proxy_set_header X-Real-IP $remote_addr; proxy_set_header X-Forwarded-For $proxy_add_x_forwarded_for; proxy_pass_header Set-Cookie; proxy_pass_header P3P; proxy_pass_header Content-Type; proxy_pass_header Content-Disposition; proxy_pass_header Content-Length; } } And configs from nginx.conf: user www-data; worker_processes 5; # worker_priority -1; error_log /var/log/nginx/error.log; pid /var/run/nginx.pid; events { worker_connections 5024; # multi_accept on; } http { include /etc/nginx/mime.types; access_log /var/log/nginx/access.log; sendfile on; default_type application/octet-stream; #tcp_nopush on; keepalive_timeout 65; tcp_nodelay on; gzip on; gzip_disable "MSIE [1-6]\.(?!.*SV1)"; # PHP-FPM (backend) upstream php-fpm { server 127.0.0.1:9000; } include /etc/nginx/conf.d/*.conf; include /etc/nginx/sites-enabled/*; } And config php-fpm: listen = 127.0.0.1:9000 ;listen.backlog = -1 ;listen.allowed_clients = 127.0.0.1 ;listen.owner = www-data ;listen.group = www-data ;listen.mode = 0666 user = www-data group = www-data pm = dynamic pm.max_children = 80 ;pm.start_servers = 20 pm.min_spare_servers = 5 pm.max_spare_servers = 35 ;pm.max_requests = 500 pm.status_path = /status ping.path = /ping ;ping.response = pong request_terminate_timeout = 30s request_slowlog_timeout = 10s slowlog = /var/log/php-fpm.log.slow ;rlimit_files = 1024 ;rlimit_core = 0 ;chroot = chdir = /var/www ;catch_workers_output = yes ;env[HOSTNAME] = $HOSTNAME ;env[PATH] = /usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin ;env[TMP] = /tmp ;env[TMPDIR] = /tmp ;env[TEMP] = /tmp ;php_admin_value[sendmail_path] = /usr/sbin/sendmail -t -i -f [email protected] ;php_flag[display_errors] = off ;php_admin_value[error_log] = /var/log/fpm-php.www.log ;php_admin_flag[log_errors] = on ;php_admin_value[memory_limit] = 32M In top I see 20 php-fpm processes which use from 1% - 15% CPU. So it's have high load averadge: top - 15:36:22 up 34 days, 20:54, 1 user, load average: 5.98, 7.75, 8.78 Tasks: 218 total, 1 running, 217 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 34.1%us, 3.2%sy, 0.0%ni, 37.0%id, 24.8%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.9%si, 0.0%st Mem: 8183228k total, 7538584k used, 644644k free, 351136k buffers Swap: 9936892k total, 14636k used, 9922256k free, 990540k cached Second server(CPU - model name: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5504 @ 2.00GHz, 8 cores, 8GB RAM). Nginx configs from nginx.conf: user www-data; worker_processes 5; # worker_priority -1; error_log /var/log/nginx/error.log; pid /var/run/nginx.pid; events { worker_connections 5024; # multi_accept on; } http { include /etc/nginx/mime.types; access_log /var/log/nginx/access.log; sendfile on; default_type application/octet-stream; #tcp_nopush on; keepalive_timeout 65; tcp_nodelay on; gzip on; gzip_disable "MSIE [1-6]\.(?!.*SV1)"; # PHP-FPM (backend) upstream php-fpm { server 127.0.0.1:9000; } include /etc/nginx/conf.d/*.conf; include /etc/nginx/sites-enabled/*; } And config of php-fpm: listen = 127.0.0.1:9000 ;listen.backlog = -1 ;listen.allowed_clients = 127.0.0.1 ;listen.owner = www-data ;listen.group = www-data ;listen.mode = 0666 user = www-data group = www-data pm = dynamic pm.max_children = 50 ;pm.start_servers = 20 pm.min_spare_servers = 5 pm.max_spare_servers = 35 ;pm.max_requests = 500 ;pm.status_path = /status ;ping.path = /ping ;ping.response = pong ;request_terminate_timeout = 0 ;request_slowlog_timeout = 0 ;slowlog = /var/log/php-fpm.log.slow ;rlimit_files = 1024 ;rlimit_core = 0 ;chroot = chdir = /var/www ;catch_workers_output = yes ;env[HOSTNAME] = $HOSTNAME ;env[PATH] = /usr/local/bin:/usr/bin:/bin ;env[TMP] = /tmp ;env[TMPDIR] = /tmp ;env[TEMP] = /tmp ;php_admin_value[sendmail_path] = /usr/sbin/sendmail -t -i -f [email protected] ;php_flag[display_errors] = off ;php_admin_value[error_log] = /var/log/fpm-php.www.log ;php_admin_flag[log_errors] = on ;php_admin_value[memory_limit] = 32M In top I see 50 php-fpm processes which use from 10% - 25% CPU. So it's have high load averadge: top - 15:53:05 up 33 days, 1:15, 1 user, load average: 41.35, 40.28, 39.61 Tasks: 239 total, 40 running, 199 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 96.5%us, 3.1%sy, 0.0%ni, 0.0%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.4%si, 0.0%st Mem: 8185560k total, 7804224k used, 381336k free, 161648k buffers Swap: 19802108k total, 16k used, 19802092k free, 5068112k cached Third server is server with database postgresql. Also i try ab -n 50 -c 5 http://www.mydomain.ru/ And I get next info: Complete requests: 50 Failed requests: 48 (Connect: 0, Receive: 0, Length: 48, Exceptions: 0) Write errors: 0 Total transferred: 9271367 bytes HTML transferred: 9247767 bytes Requests per second: 1.02 [#/sec] (mean) Time per request: 4882.427 [ms] (mean) Time per request: 976.486 [ms] (mean, across all concurrent requests) Transfer rate: 185.44 [Kbytes/sec] received Please advise how can I make lower level of load average?

    Read the article

  • Programs minimized for long time takes long time to "wake up"

    - by bart
    I'm working in Photoshop CS6 and multiple browsers a lot. I'm not using them all at once, so sometimes some applications are minimized to taskbar for hours or days. The problem is, when I try to maximize them from the taskbar - it sometimes takes longer than starting them! Especially Photoshop feels really weird for many seconds after finally showing up, it's slow, unresponsive and even sometimes totally freezes for minute or two. It's not a hardware problem as it's been like that since always on all on my PCs. Would I also notice it after upgrading my HDD to SDD and adding RAM (my main PC holds 4 GB currently)? Could guys with powerful pcs / macs tell me - does it also happen to you? I guess OSes somehow "focus" on active software and move all the resources away from the ones that run, but are not used. Is it possible to somehow set RAM / CPU / HDD priorities or something, for let's say, Photoshop, so it won't slow down after long period of inactivity?

    Read the article

  • Building optimal custom machine for Sql Server

    - by Chad Grant
    Getting the hardware in the mail any day. Hardware related to my question: x10 15.5k RPM SAS Segate Cheetah's x2 Adaptec 5405 PCIe Raid cards Motherboard has integrated SAS raid. Was thinking I would build 2 RAID 10 arrays one for data and one for logs The remaining 2 drives a RAID 0 for TempDB Will probably throw in a drive for OS. Does putting the Sql Server application / exe's on a raid make a difference and is there any impact of leaving the OS on a relatively slow disk compared to the raid arrays? I have 5/6 DBs combined < 50 gigs. With a relatively good / constant load. Estimating 60-7% reads vs writes. Planning on using log shipping as well if that matters. Any advice or suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Extracting one file from archive: 7-zip requires decompressing entire archive?

    - by siikamiika
    I've noticed that when browsing an archive containing multiple files with 7-zip 9.20 Windows GUI, extracting one file for previewing takes significantly longer with .7z than .rar archives. With .7zips it also cycles through the filenames in the archive. To me it looks like decompressing the entire archive and keeping just one file. Is there a setting in 7-zip (current or beta/alpha versions) that allows RAR-like behavior?

    Read the article

  • Zabbix machine is going crazy with HD writes!

    - by gshankar
    I recently installed Zabbix on a Ubuntu box I had sitting around. It's only monitoring 2 servers but I've noticed that it's continuously smashing the HD with writes. I don't remember Zabbix being this resource heavy when I've used it in the past... Any ideas on why this is happening and what I can do about it? Running iotop gives me this: 1710 be/4 mysql 0.00 B/s 102.12 K/s 0.00 % 0.00 % mysqld --basedir=/usr --datadir=/var/lib/mysql --user=mysql --pid-file=/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.pid --socket=/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.sock --port=3306 1723 be/4 mysql 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % mysqld --basedir=/usr --datadir=/var/lib/mysql --user=mysql --pid-file=/var/run/mysqld/mysqld I'm pretty sure it's Zabbix that's causing all that mysql activity as it's the only thing which uses mysql which is running on the box...

    Read the article

  • Centos running Apache Tomcat keep getting "java.net.SocketException: Too many open files"

    - by Gerard Moroney
    We're running Apache Tomcat 7.0.41 on CentOS 6 with java version "1.7.0_21". We were getting a lot of too many open files errors so I did some research. The consensus was that it was to to with the number of open files. So I did the following: Increased max files in /etc/security/limits.conf soft nofile 100000 hard nofile 100000 Rebooted the server Checked the limits were valid for the user which was to run the process [app_admin@xxx ~]$ ulimit -Hn 100000 [app_admin@xxx ~]$ ulimit -Sn 100000 Monitored open files on the server using the lsof command What I observed was when the total open files reached circa 13000 and tomcat had around 4500 open files the error reappeared. I am confused. I thought it would have resolved the problem but clearly I don't fully understand the root cause and also how to set the parameter correctly. To (maybe) help I have not modified the server.xml file for Tomcat (although I'm tempted). I don't want to start fiddling with that and make things worse. I'm more than happy to share any more information if someone can give me some hints on where to start looking.

    Read the article

  • Apache2 BufferedLogs On - anybody using it ?

    - by Qiqi
    Greetings, I am wondering, whether anybody is using BufferedLogs On with Apache2 and found any issues ? Feature is marked as experimental, but for many years now, so I guess it's rather pretty stable. I am running some servers with constrained disk IO capacity at the moment, so I turned it on hoping that even a small benefit could help in the long run ;-) I do have several to several hundreds requests per seconds so by my thoughts there is really no need to write to log after each request, cause honestly I don't think that my filesystem is the best handler for many unnecessary writes. (OCFS2 shared among several DomUs in the Xen)

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169  | Next Page >