Search Results

Search found 21644 results on 866 pages for 'connection speed'.

Page 565/866 | < Previous Page | 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572  | Next Page >

  • Recover badly recorded DVDs

    - by CesarGon
    A few years ago (2003-2005) I bought a Sony USB external DVD recorder for my Dell laptop and I used it to burn a lot of discs. Much later, when I tried to use one of these discs, I realised that I could not read it. The disc behaved as if it was scratched or dirty. I tried on a couple of different DVD drives but got the same effect. Sadly, all the discs that I burnt with that recorder suffer from the same problem. Edit. When I read one of these discs with ImgBurn, I get lots of unrecovered read errors in multiple sectors, even at 1x speed. The sectors that cause read errors seem to be quite random; it's not always the same one. I have no idea what could be wrong with the discs. I doubt that they are scratched or dirty; it would be too much of a coincidence that all the discs that I burnt with that recorder got damaged at the same time. Also, they don't show any physical defects. Is there any way to diagnose what the problem is and, hopefully, recover the contents of the discs? Many thanks.

    Read the article

  • after building in more ram, bios/debian does nothing [closed]

    - by derty
    My private server has 2x1gb Ram working with a 64bit Debian and an Q6600 Intel. This runs 2 virtual mashines on it each one recives 512mb RAM. Which you can immagine is a bit tight for the hole system. Now i got 2x2gb ram from a friend. I'm not sure if thery are clocking at the same speed, but i'm sure my power adaptor is not on his limit and can handle that. So there are 2 ram sockets left at the mainboard. I shuted down the system and build in the 4 gigs and looked what happen. After pressing the start button, everything gets noisy as known BUT the screen shows nothing, not even the bios stuff it usally does. Why isn't the system booting? I can immagine that it does not direkt link between booting debian and the bios not showing a thing. Or is it Grub? I mounted the system disk, and i can see it, switch folders write stuff with "vim" it does not seems like there is a problem.

    Read the article

  • Intel HD Graphics vs NVIDIA Quadro FX 380 PCI-E

    - by Michael
    I recently purchased an Acer Veriton which has an i5-650 processor, Windows 7 Pro (64 bit) and Intel HD Graphics listed as the video card. I also purchased a PNY nVIDIA Quadro FX 380 PCI-E card for improved picture and home video viewing and editing. I have already replaced the original 300 wattt power supply to a 430 watt Antec Truepower I had on hand and boosted the RAM to 8 gigs from the original 4. Question 1) Am I getting any improvement in visual quality or system speed with the Quadro or is it a waste of money and I should just save up to buy a bigger video card? This card was on sale for $115. If I am getting improvement then I need to ask another question. Question 2) Instructions for the Quadro installation are as follows... 1--Uninstall the existing VGA driver. -Remove the existing Display Driver via "Add or Remove Porgrams". -Shut down your computer. 2--Remove your Existing Graphics Board (or Disable Integrated 3D Graphics Controller). skipping instructions on how to remove existing graphics board -Systems with integrated (also know as on-board) 3D graphics may require you to disable the integrated 3D graphics system. Consult the owners or vendor manual that came with your PC on how to properly do this. So is the Intel HD Graphics considered a 3D graphics controller? If so should I just contact Acer or can anyone give me instructions? Thanks in advance for any help.

    Read the article

  • Why does my simple Raid 1 backup storage perform really slow sometimes?

    - by randomguy
    I bought 2x Samsung F3 EcoGreen 2TB hard disks to make a backup storage. I put them in Raid 1 (mirror) mode. Made a single partition and formatted it to NTFS, running Windows 7. For some reason, accessing the drive's contents (simply by navigating folders) is sometimes really slow. Like opening D:/photos/ can sometimes take several seconds before it starts showing any of the folder's contents. Same applies for other folders. What could be causing this and what could I do to improve the performance? I remember that there was an option somewhere inside Windows to choose fast access but less reliable persistence operations (read/write). It was a tick inside some dialog. At the time, it felt like a good idea to take the tick away from the option and get more reliable persistence but slower access, but now I'm regretting. I'm unable to find this dialog.. I've looked hard. I don't know, if it would make any difference. Oh, and I've ran scan disk and defrag on the drive. No errors and speed isn't improved.

    Read the article

  • Backtrack, Wi-Fi not working

    - by hradecek
    I've installed Backtrack 5R3 KDE, and I realized that my wireless is not working, but wired is working fine. Here's the lshw output: *-network description: Ethernet interface product: RTL8101E/RTL8102E PCI Express Fast Ethernet controller vendor: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. physical id: 0 bus info: pci@0000:02:00.0 logical name: eth0 version: 05 serial: 04:7d:7b:b7:46:f8 size: 100MB/s capacity: 100MB/s width: 64 bits clock: 33MHz capabilities: pm msi pciexpress msix vpd bus_master cap_list ethernet physical tp mii 10bt 10bt-fd 100bt 100bt-fd autonegotiation configuration: autonegotiation=on broadcast=yes driver=r8169 driverversion=2.3LK-NAPI duplex=full firmware=rtl_nic/rtl8105e-1.fw ip=192.168.2.2 latency=0 link=yes multicast=yes port=MII speed=100MB/s resources: irq:42 ioport:2000(size=256) memory:f0404000-f0404fff memory:f0400000-f0403fff lspci output: 00:00.0 Host bridge: Intel Corporation 2nd Generation Core Processor Family DRAM Controller (rev 09) 00:02.0 VGA compatible controller: Intel Corporation 2nd Generation Core Processor Family Integrated Graphics Controller (rev 09) 00:14.0 USB Controller: Intel Corporation Panther Point USB xHCI Host Controller (rev 04) 00:16.0 Communication controller: Intel Corporation Panther Point MEI Controller #1 (rev 04) 00:1a.0 USB Controller: Intel Corporation Panther Point USB Enhanced Host Controller #2 (rev 04) 00:1b.0 Audio device: Intel Corporation Panther Point High Definition Audio Controller (rev 04) 00:1c.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation Panther Point PCI Express Root Port 1 (rev c4) 00:1c.1 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation Panther Point PCI Express Root Port 2 (rev c4) 00:1d.0 USB Controller: Intel Corporation Panther Point USB Enhanced Host Controller #1 (rev 04) 00:1f.0 ISA bridge: Intel Corporation Panther Point LPC Controller (rev 04) 00:1f.2 SATA controller: Intel Corporation Panther Point 6 port SATA AHCI Controller (rev 04) 00:1f.3 SMBus: Intel Corporation Panther Point SMBus Controller (rev 04) 02:00.0 Ethernet controller: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTL8101E/RTL8102E PCI Express Fast Ethernet controller (rev 05)

    Read the article

  • Slow, choppy video playback with nVidia 8600GT

    - by user5351
    I have an nVidia 8600GT card (made by EVGA) on a machine with Windows Vista (AMD Athlon X2 processors) and four gigs of ram. It runs pretty good, but I have had some slow/choppy/stuterring video playback issues whenever watching flash videos on Youtube or other sites. The problem is there with both Firefox and IE flash videos, but is maybe worse with Firefox. I also tried Linux with nVidia's binary drivers and it was about the same. I downloaded EVGA precision which allows me to control stuff like the fan and clock speed. The card's temp (in both Vista and Linux) is usually at 66C when idle (not playing a game or watching anything). It goes up a little when watching a video (maybe 68-72C). Any ideas on how to fix this? UPDATE: The issues are both with full screen and embedded flash videos. I have Flash 10.0.32.18 (always make sure I use most recent for security), and the CPU is an AMD Athlon 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 4000+ at 2.11 GHZ. The current GPU driver installed is the most recent GeForce one from last July.

    Read the article

  • How large is the performance loss for a 64-bit VirtualBox guest running on a 32-bit host?

    - by IllvilJa
    I have a 64-bit Virtualbox guest running Gentoo Linux (amd64) and it is currently hosted on a 32-bit Gentoo laptop. I've noticed that the performance of the VM is very slow compared to the performance of the 32-bit host itself. Also when I compare with another 32-bit Linux VM running on the same host, performance is significantly less on the 64-bit VM. I know that running a 64-bit VM on a 32-bit host does incur some performance penalties for the VM, but does anyone have any deeper knowledge of how large a penalty one might expect in this scenario, roughly speaking? Is a 10% slowdown something to expect, or should it be a slowdown in the 90% range (running at 1/10 the normal speed)? Or to phrase it in another way: would it be reasonable to expect that the performance improvement for the 64-bit VM increases so much that it is worth reinstalling the host machine to run 64-bit Gentoo instead? I'm currently seriously considering that upgrade, but am curious about other peoples experience of the current scenario. I am aware that the host OS will require more RAM when running in 64-bit, but that's OK for me. Also, I do know that one usually don't run a 64-bit VM on a 32-bit server (I'm surprised I even got the VM started in the first place) but things turned out that way when I tried to future proof the VM I was setting up and decided to make it 64-bit anyway.

    Read the article

  • Cannot install windows. Compaq Presario CQ62

    - by Matthew
    I bought a used Compaq Presario CQ62 for cheap, and went to install windows on it. I formatted the partition and went to install when I got this error.... Windows cannot install required files. The file may be corrupt or missing. Make sure all files required for installation are available and restart the installation. Error code: 0x80070017 I have used this disk before with no problems, but internet searching suggested I burn one at 2x speed because that helps for some reason... I'm burning one now, but my question is, why would I get this error, OTHER than the disc being bad? I'm pretty certain this one isn't as I have used it before... (ok so the slowly burned cd (using imgburn) didn't work either so it's DEFINITELY not the disc) Thanks in advanced for any answers Also I took one stick of ram out because internet searching also suggested that, but it didn't make a difference. Also I ran memory and hard drive checks and they passed fine. Also I reset the motherboard options to default What could it be!? Help I'm completely stumped...

    Read the article

  • Ram configuration 4x4 or 2x8?

    - by Carl B
    I am looking to upgrade my Ram to 16gigs and I am wondering if there is any distinct advantage of the way I do it. That being a 4x4 or 2x8 set up. In all my searching there have been a number of pros for each profile. I can find no benchmarck results for either setup as a compaison. So, if there are 2 profiles of the same speed, same voltage, same timing and same cas what would perform better or have a better over all benafit? A few examples from my search - a 4x4 set would lend a benafit in that if one stick failed, you only lose 25% of your Ram vs 50% in a 2x8 set up. a 2x8 set up would have less strain on the memory controler and motherboard. a 2x8 would generate less heat. a 2x8 set up is easier to over clock (not part of my need, but alot of the comparisons circled around the overclocability ease of the 2 stick set up). There is one outstanding benafit that I have found in at least the target company I have looked at and that is price. The 2x8 is nearly half the cost. My motherboard supports a max of 16 gigs and I have a 64 bit OS. Has anyone seen any performance comparisons or is 16 gb just 16 gb no matter how you slice it? And is there any merit to the above pros? Edit: as per the mobo specs - Main Memory • Supports four unbuffered DIMM of 1.5 Volt DDR3 800/1066/1333/1600*/1800*/2133* (OC) DRAM, 16GB Max

    Read the article

  • file read performance degrades as number of files increases

    - by bfallik-bamboom
    We're observing poor file read IO results that we'd like to better understand. We can use fio to write 100 files with a sustained aggregate throughput of ~700MB/s. When we switch the test to read instead of write, the aggregate throughput is only ~55MB/s. The drop seems related to the number of files since the throughput for read and write are comparable for a single file then diverge proportionally as we increase the number of files. The test server has 24 CPU cores, 48GB of memory, and is running CentOS 6.0. The disk hardware is a RAID 6 array with 12 disks and a Dell H800 controller. This device is partitioned with ext4 using the default settings. Increasing the readahead (using blockdev) improves the read throughput significantly but it still doesn't match write speed. For instance, increasing the readahead from 128KB to 1M improved the read throughput to ~145MB/s. Is this a known performance issue in our OS/disk/filesystem configuration? If so, how can we tell? If not, what tools or tests can we use to further isolate the issue? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Can I charge USB devices from a powered hub that isn't connected to a PC?

    - by Anodyne
    This will probably sound familiar to most of you... In my home, we have a whole bunch of devices that can be charged via USB (two iPhones, a BlackBerry, an iPod Touch, etc ad nauseam). We also have a bunch of USB chargers, each of which has a single USB port on it. I'd like to have something permanently connected to AC power with at least 4 USB ports on it, so we can just plug devices in and don't need to go looking for a free outlet. So here's the question: if I buy a powered USB hub, will that do the job even if I don't connect it to a PC? Ideally if you have a hub that you can personally verify will be suitable, let me know the manufacturer and model :-) Thanks in advance! EDIT: The solution I eventually went for was this: Kensington 4-Port USB Charger for Mobile Devices (Europe) There's also a US version here: Kensington 4-Port USB Charger for Mobile Devices (USA) It arrived yesterday, so I used it to charge the following devices, all at the same time, overnight last night: 32GB iPhone 3GS 16GB iPhone 3G First-generation iPod Touch Kensington Portable Power Pack for Mobile Devices I can't say anything about the charging speed (as I left it overnight) but all devices were fully charged this morning.

    Read the article

  • Why am I unable to mount my USB drive (unknown partition table)?

    - by Pat
    I'm a real newbie to linux. Anyway the problem is that my USB doesn't get recognized anymore which is really annoying because I need information from it. I've read like a zillion threads how to manually mount it but I really can't it to work. I hope it's just some easy, stupid problem where any of you could help me out quickly.. Here is the syslog: kernel: [ 6872.420125] usb 2-2: new high-speed USB device number 11 using ehci_hcd mtp-probe: checking bus 2, device 11: "/sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:1d.7/usb2/2-2" kernel: [ 6872.556295] scsi8 : usb-storage 2-2:1.0 mtp-probe: bus: 2, device: 11 was not an MTP device kernel: [ 6873.558081] scsi 8:0:0:0: Direct-Access SanDisk Cruzer 8.01 PQ: 0 ANSI: 0 CCS kernel: [ 6873.559964] sd 8:0:0:0: Attached scsi generic sg3 type 0 kernel: [ 6873.562833] sd 8:0:0:0: [sdc] 15682559 512-byte logical blocks: (8.02 GB/7.47 GiB) kernel: [ 6873.564867] sd 8:0:0:0: [sdc] Write Protect is off kernel: [ 6873.564878] sd 8:0:0:0: [sdc] Mode Sense: 45 00 00 08 kernel: [ 6873.565485] sd 8:0:0:0: [sdc] No Caching mode page present kernel: [ 6873.565495] sd 8:0:0:0: [sdc] Assuming drive cache: write through kernel: [ 6873.568377] sd 8:0:0:0: [sdc] No Caching mode page present kernel: [ 6873.568387] sd 8:0:0:0: [sdc] Assuming drive cache: write through kernel: [ 6873.574330] sdc: unknown partition table kernel: [ 6873.576853] sd 8:0:0:0: [sdc] No Caching mode page present kernel: [ 6873.576863] sd 8:0:0:0: [sdc] Assuming drive cache: write through kernel: [ 6873.576871] sd 8:0:0:0: [sdc] Attached SCSI removable disk Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • What does the 'Burst Rate' stat mean in HDTune?

    - by UpTheCreek
    I recently upgraded my laptop's v slow hard drive to a seagate momentus 7200. Everything is working fine, but I'm a bit confused by these benchmark results: The burst rate is significantly less than the Maximim transfer rate, and not much higher than the normal minimum (if you ignore the spikes). What's going on here? On the HDtune website it defines Burst Rate as: ...the highest speed (in megabytes per second) at which data can be transferred from the drive interface (IDE or SCSI for example) to the operating system. Which begs some questions... e.g. if this is the highest, then how did the bechmarking tool record the 103MB/sec maximum? And if this really is the true maximum, then where is the bottleneck? The laptops SATA interface is on an Intel 82801GBM southbridge controller. When I check in hardware manager, I see that it's driver is iaStor.sys from 2005. Maybe that's the issue? I'll look for a newever version, but any insights would be appreciated. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Connecting PC to TV via HDMI/DVI: Windows XP doesn't allow the appropriate screen resolution

    - by Jørgen
    I have a computer that is connected to the living room TV (a Panasonic) via HDMI. There is no other monitor connected. My problem is that the computer, which is running Windows XP, does not allow me to set the proper resolution for the TV. Both the graphics adapter and the TV should support the 1280x720 resolution, but it cannot be selected - the only available options are 1280x600 and 800x600, both in the "native" Windows dialog box and the custom Intel graphics options dialog box. Do anyone have a suggestion for a solution for this? Things I've thought of: Setting the resolution directly in the registry (where?) Installing some "custom" monitor driver (the TV manufacturer does not appear to provide any, currently the "generic" one is used) Details on the setup: Connection: DVI output on the computer via a passive DVI-HDMI adapter to the HDMI input on the TV, audio is run on a separate link, the TV is able to combine video and audio without any problem, the problem is there regardless of whether or not the audio is connected. The connection is several meters long through some walls, for this reason using a VGA cable instead is not an option. Note that the report explicitly says that the TV supports 1280x720. Still, I am not allowed to select it in Graphics Options, only 1280x600 and 800x600 is available. For 800x600, there's a lot of black around the edges; for 1280x600, the screen is "zoomed" so the edges of the monitor image (like the taskbar) is not visible. Other: The computer is running Windows XP. More recent versions of Windows are not an option (I have no licence). Linux is probably not an option (some of the video streaming sites I plan to use do not support it, I think) I wrote the rest of the details below. Thanks for any help!! TV: Panasonic TX-L32X10Y, European version; a 720p 32" quite "regular" LCD TV. Allowed resolutions according to manual: Signal name: 640x480 @60HZ Horizontal frequency: 31.47 kHz Vertical frequency: 60Hz Signal name: 750/720) /60p Horizontal frequency: 45.00 kHz Vertical frequency: 60Hz Signal name: 1,125 (1,080) / 60p Horizontal frequency: 67.50 kHz Vertical frequency: 60Hz (this is exactly how the manual presents it. PC via D-SUB (VGA cable) and "regular" HDMI have more alternatives.) Messing with the "zoom" settings on the TV does not affect the available resolution options on the computer. Computer: The following is a printout from one of the graphics adapter option pages. I think it covers most of it. The computer is a Dell. INTEL(R) EXTREME GRAPHICS 2 REPORT Report Date: 04/17/2011 Report Time[hr:mm:ss]: 20:18:02 Driver Version: 6.14.10.4396 Operating System: Windows XP* Professional, Service Pack 3 (5.1.2600) Default Language: English DirectX* Version: 9.0 Physical Memory: 1021 MB Minimum Graphics Memory: 1 MB Maximum Graphics Memory: 96 MB Graphics Memory in Use: 6 MB Processor: x86 Processor Speed: 2593 MHZ Vendor ID: 8086 Device ID: 2572 Device Revision: 02 * Accelerator Information * Accelerator in Use: Intel(R) 82865G Graphics Controller Video BIOS: 2972 Current Graphics Mode: 1280 by 600 True Color (60 Hz) * Devices Connected to the Graphics Accelerator * Active Digital Displays: 1 * Digital Display * Monitor Name: Plug and Play Monitor Display Type: Digital Gamma Value: 2.20 DDC2 Protocol: Supported Maximum Image Size: Horizontal: Not Available Vertical: Not Available Monitor Supported Modes: 1280 by 720 (50 Hz) 1280 by 720 (60 Hz) Display Power Management Support: Standby Mode: Not Supported Suspend Mode: Not Supported Active Off Mode: Not Supported (disclaimer: this question was also asked at the Wikipedia Reference Desk some time ago and might show up in a Google search. I got no useful answers there.)

    Read the article

  • Two network adapters in one WindowsXP PC, how to make them work?

    - by Deele
    I have a need to set up network so I can use two ethernet cards inside one Windows (Windows XP SP2) based PC, one for internet connection, second, for internal LAN. How should I configure each NIC, with what IP's, subnet masks and gateways, so I can use inernet on my PC and get in touch with devices on my LAN? I have found that there are some sort of re routing nessesary inside my PC, but how does it work? I have already set up some configuration already, but I can't use it together with PC #1 NIC #1 connected. I need to disconnect, to access NIC WEB interface. Current configuration: Switch #1 and PC #1 NAS #2 are gigabit one's, so I could access NAS with gigabit speed. PC #1 NIC #1 IP XX.XXX.162.106 SN 255.255.255.248 GW XX.XXX.162.105 PC #1 NIC #2 IP 10.0.0.1 SN 255.255.0.0 GW 0.0.0.0 NAS #1 NIC #1 IP 10.0.0.12 SN 255.255.0.0 GW 0.0.0.0 My question is - what exact configuration should I do for every NIC in this LAN, so it would work? Is it possible to achieve internet access for Laptop, that is inside that NIC #2 LAN (should I just set up basic ICS)?

    Read the article

  • Slow manipulation of netfilter rules

    - by Ole Martin Eide
    I have a script maintaining gre tunnels and firewall rules using the "ip" and "iptables" tools. Setting up hundreds of tunnels, and adresses per interface runs just fine. Takes less than 0.1 second per interface, however when I get around to do the firewall rules everything slows down spending 0.5 per insertion. Why is it running so slow? What can I do to improve the speed? It seems like I could try ipset instead, but I really feel there is something wrong with the kernel or something. The interesting thing is that the first 10 rules runs fast, then it slows down.. mybox(root) foo# iptables -V iptables v1.3.5 mybox(root) foo# uname -a Linux foo 2.6.18-164.el5 #1 SMP Tue Aug 18 15:51:48 EDT 2009 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux mybox(root) foo# cat test.sh #!/bin/sh for n in {1..100} do /sbin/iptables -A OUTPUT -s ${n} -j ACCEPT /sbin/iptables -D OUTPUT -s ${n} -j ACCEPT done mybox(root) foo# time ./test.sh real 1m38.839s user 0m0.100s sys 1m38.724s Appriciate any help. Cheers!

    Read the article

  • Windows 8 install from USB freezes

    - by Rafael Almeida
    I'm trying to install Windows 8 from an 8GB Kingston Data Traveler. I'm currently using the Windows 7 USB DVD Download Tool to put the iso into the flash drive. It copies the files, but in the end it says it 'had a problem with bootsect' and could not make the flash drive bootable. This seems to be because my current system is Windows 7 32bits, and the bootsect.exe in the ISO is a 64-bit executable. Then I downloaded the 32-bit bootsect.exe and made the drive bootable by running: bootsect /nt60 E: /mbr Then I restarted and managed to boot via the flash drive, but now everything is very slow. It takes about two minutes for the initial black screen with the Windows logo and the spinner go away, then it goes to a purple-ish blank screen that stays on for about five more minutes and then it finally shows a dialog asking for the installation, date/time and keyboard languages. I input then, click "Install Now" and it takes about three more minutes with a "Setup is starting" screen. After that, the PC apparently reboots, the CPU fan speeds up considerably, and there's no video and nothing more happens even after more than ten minutes. What is happening? I already tried using another USB port and even installing from a Samsung G3 Station 2TB external hard disk, but the same thing happens. The file transfer speed to the Kingston drive was about only 3 megabytes per second.

    Read the article

  • Fake demostration software for command line

    - by Joe
    I'm looking for some software that would be useful for giving demonstrations. I regularly have to show the effects of scrips ect to classes while talking about their effects, and equaly regularly I have finger trouble and have to rewrite various commands - wasting class time and general energy. I'd like to be able to record a sequence of commands in advance, and then play them back at the speed of my choosing. So I might have a file that containes the commands: echo "hello world!" ls ls -l ls -l | sort I'd like to be able to play these commands back by typing similar ones in. So I'd have a blinking command prompt and if I typed 'echo "hxxx' the command prompt would read home$echo "hell and if I typed any other letters the terminal would fill up with the remainder of the command until I press enter, when it executes the command. The point is that even if I screw up the command when typing it, the command that I'd prepared in advance would be executed. My question is - does similar software exist for giving demonstrations? or even, is this an easy thing to script up...? EDIT - two quick things first of all I'm on osx - but it would be nice to get a general solution for other people who arrive here from google. and second a lot of the comments/answers are concentrating on, in effect, making it fast and easy to enter long commands by means of hotkeys and the like. Actually I'd like it to at least look like I'm typing live - that's why I put in the bit about the one-to-one keymapping, but I don't think I explained that quite as well as I could have...

    Read the article

  • Throughput and why do ISPs sell too much bandwidth?

    - by jonescb
    I hope the question made sense how I worded it. :) I've been wondering, maximum theoretical bandwidth is measured as RWIN/RTT (Window size / round trip time) Source 1 and Souce 2 So if a major city only 100 miles away gives me a ping of 50ms, and I have the default 64kb TCP window size then my maximum throughput will be 12.5Mb/s. Everything further away would give me a higher ping and therefore a lower throughput. Is there any reason to buy something like FiOS with a 50Mb/s or greater connection? Will you ever be able to reach that kind of speed? I know you can increase the TCP window size to increase throughput, but it has to be at both ends which is a deal breaker because you can't control the server. I'm assuming other network protocols like UDP aren't quite as affected by latency as TCP is, but how much of overall network traffic does non-TCP make up vs TCP. Am I just misguided about how throughput works? But if the above is correct, then why should a consumer like me buy way more bandwidth than can be realistically used. Maybe the only reason is for downloading multiple things at once, or one thing from multiple servers/peers?

    Read the article

  • Using a degrading corrupted hard disk with a brand new one. Is this ok?

    - by EApubs
    My old 500 GB hard drive started to give bad sectors. Its slowly going down. So, I bought a new 1TB Seagate drive. I first attached the 500GB drive as the first primary drive and installed Windows. I want Windows boot loader to be placed in the old drive so it won't conflict with the Linux system. But the actual Windows system (Including the C drive) is placed on my new hard drive. After this, I attached the new drive as the primary and installed Linux. Now if I want to re install windows, I can do it without any issues by simply setting the old drive as the primary. So the Linux system will be untouched. But is it a good idea to set things like this? Will the old degrading drive have an impact on the new one? The old drive is slower than the new one. Won't I be able to get the maximum speed out of the new drive even when its used to install everything (including the OS)? PS : When I ran the Windows Experience Index, I was using the old drive as the primary. Did it got the hard drive ratings from the old drive? What if I run it now with the new drive as the primary?

    Read the article

  • File server share access intermittent/slow/machine unstable: win2kr2

    - by Jack B.
    I have a file server running Win2k8R2 on an older HP DL380G4. It has nothing set up on it other than file sharing. All drivers/firmware/updates installed. The file server is used as a dump for a bunch of test machines - so essentially a lot of small files are being written to it. It was working fine until it started showing the following symptoms: Shares became either very slow/intermittent or could not access them at all. Logging in the the server, you could use it like normal but windows would start freezing and eventually you had to hard reboot it because nothing was responsive. After rebooting, it would work fine for 20min-2hours and then degrade into this broken state again. Some info after investigation: HP Raid Config utility shows the Raid array as functioning properly (RAID5 btw). Event log shows a bunch of DoS attacks from the test machines, saying it has disconnected the connection a. AFAIK (not part of my job) the test machines haven't changed the way they log information to this server or the amount of them hasn't increased. b. Nothing is infected, this server was scanned fully, and the test machines are re-imaged almost daily. Nothing in performance monitor shows as anything being pegged at maximum (CPU/HD/Network/RAM) I installed MS Network Monitor and it is showing a lot of traffic The server was using one gigabit Ethernet connection, I connected the second one as well with the same results. Forgot to add - one of the commonly written to dirs on the share has over 16k subdirs in it, with a crapton of small files within those dirs. Some of the OS instability was slow access to the drive which has this directory - perfmon doesn't show much activity on the HD though so I'm not sure if this crowded dir is the cause. Here is one important fact: I ran into this issue 2-3 months ago, couldn't figure it out, but I had a spare identical machine so I swapped them out (thought it was related to the machine), and now I have the same issue. Also, the computer will be stable if I turn off file sharing. So is the server just getting DoS'd by the test machines? I've never dealt with such an issue. Is instability in the server's OS common when getting DoS'd? Is there anything I can do to confirm this before telling the owners of the test machines to optimize their traffic? (I'm not sure what they'll be able to do). Is there something within Win2k8R2 that can balance the traffic across the two NICs? Any help would be appreciated. Update: Another thought - the drive with the share is RAID5 across 6 SCSI320 300GB HDs. They are near full capacity about 100GB from 1TB left. Could the amount of tiny files could be causing some weirdness with the parity in this array? I think I've read something about this in the past but I'm no expert on RAID.

    Read the article

  • File server share access intermittent/slow/machine unstable: win2k8r2

    - by Jack B.
    I have a file server running Win2k8R2 on an older HP DL380G4. It has nothing set up on it other than file sharing. All drivers/firmware/updates installed. The file server is used as a dump for a bunch of test machines - so essentially a lot of small files are being written to it. It was working fine until it started showing the following symptoms: Shares became either very slow/intermittent or could not access them at all. Logging in the the server, you could use it like normal but windows would start freezing and eventually you had to hard reboot it because nothing was responsive. After rebooting, it would work fine for 20min-2hours and then degrade into this broken state again. Some info after investigation: HP Raid Config utility shows the Raid array as functioning properly (RAID5 btw). Event log shows a bunch of DoS attacks from the test machines, saying it has disconnected the connection a. AFAIK (not part of my job) the test machines haven't changed the way they log information to this server or the amount of them hasn't increased. b. Nothing is infected, this server was scanned fully, and the test machines are re-imaged almost daily. Nothing in performance monitor shows as anything being pegged at maximum (CPU/HD/Network/RAM) I installed MS Network Monitor and it is showing a lot of traffic The server was using one gigabit Ethernet connection, I connected the second one as well with the same results. Forgot to add - one of the commonly written to dirs on the share has over 16k subdirs in it, with a crapton of small files within those dirs. Some of the OS instability was slow access to the drive which has this directory - perfmon doesn't show much activity on the HD though so I'm not sure if this crowded dir is the cause. Here is one important fact: I ran into this issue 2-3 months ago, couldn't figure it out, but I had a spare identical machine so I swapped them out (thought it was related to the machine), and now I have the same issue. Also, the computer will be stable if I turn off file sharing. So is the server just getting DoS'd by the test machines? I've never dealt with such an issue. Is instability in the server's OS common when getting DoS'd? Is there anything I can do to confirm this before telling the owners of the test machines to optimize their traffic? (I'm not sure what they'll be able to do). Is there something within Win2k8R2 that can balance the traffic across the two NICs? Any help would be appreciated. Update: Another thought - the drive with the share is RAID5 across 6 SCSI320 300GB HDs. They are near full capacity about 100GB from 1TB left. Could the amount of tiny files could be causing some weirdness with the parity in this array? I think I've read something about this in the past but I'm no expert on RAID.

    Read the article

  • Computer freezes after watching Youtube videos

    - by Roberts
    I had Windows 7 installed all september. But I installed Windows XP Professional back because my computer couldn't handle the new OS. After first boot I tried to install newest flash player (from Adobe website), but it failed. I had my old setup on USB drive and it worked. I don't know is it important or not. I am watching Youtube videos in my free time (almost every hour). After few days the computer started to freeze when I open a page with the video or close the page with video, not while I watch a video. No BSODs. Nothing in Event viewer. I use Firefox only. When computer freezes the sound wont. If iTunes is playing a radio station or is it another video playing in background, the sound wont freeze. Last few days the mouse wont freeze. Its a strange symptom. If I click few times then the cursor will actually freeze. I just want to know where does this problem come from (hardware - graphics card, old motherboard or it's just some glitch in setups). If it's not graphics card then I will be happy. The graphics card is ATI Radeon HD 4650 - brand new. Catalyst 11.8 installed. Things I have tried: Installed newest flash player after a week (the setup didn't fail this time) Installed latest video drivers Deleting cookies Defragmenting hard drive Using TuneUp utilities for computer cleenup Installed latest Mozilla Firefox Cleaned the PC Changed CPU Fan speed almost to max (just to be sure) Things I haven't tried yet: Didn't try playing videos on other browsers What can I do now?

    Read the article

  • Servers - Buying New vs Buying Second-hand

    - by Django Reinhardt
    We're currently in the process of adding additional servers to our website. We have a pretty simple topology planned: A Firewall/Router Server infront of a Web Application Server and Database Server. Here's a simple (and technically incorrect) diagram that I used in a previous question to illustrate what I mean: We're now wondering about the specs of our two new machines (the Web App and Firewall servers) and whether we can get away with buying a couple of old servers. (Note: Both machines will be running Windows Server 2008 R2.) We're not too concerned about our Firewall/Router server as we're pretty sure it won't be taxed too heavily, but we are interested in our Web App server. I realise that answering this type of question is really difficult without a ton of specifics on users, bandwidth, concurrent sessions, etc, etc., so I just want to focus on the general wisdom on buying old versus new. I had originally specced a new Dell PowerEdge R300 (1U Rack) for our company. In short, because we're going to be caching as much data as possible, I focussed on Processor Speed and Memory: Quad-Core Intel Xeon X3323 2.5Ghz (2x3M Cache) 1333Mhz FSB 16GB DDR2 667Mhz But when I was looking for a cheap second-hand machine for our Firewall/Router, I came across several machines that made our engineer ask a very reasonable question: If we stuck a boat load of RAM in this thing, wouldn't it do for the Web App Server and save us a ton of money in the process? For example, what about a second-hand machine with the following specs: 2x Dual-Core AMD Opteron 2218 2.6Ghz (2MB Cache) 1000Mhz HT 16GB DDR2 667Mhz Would it really be comparable with the more expensive (new) server above? Our engineer postulated that the reason companies upgrade their servers to newer processors is often because they want to reduce their power costs, and that a 2.6Ghz processor was still a 2.6Ghz processor, no matter when it was made. Benchmarks on various sites don't really support this theory, but I was wondering what server admin thought. Thanks for any advice.

    Read the article

  • Upgrade to Q9550 or i7 920 on a budget?

    - by evan
    I'm planning to upgrade my computer and torn between maxing out the system I have or investing in the X58 architecture. I'm currently using a E6600 Core 2 Duo with 4GB of RAM (800mhz) on an Asus PK5-E motherboard which I built two years ago. My original plan was that one day I'd upgrade machine to 8GB (1066mhz, the max the PK5-E allows) and to the Core 2 QuadQ9550 to give the machine a good four years of life. However, that was before the i7 came out. I use my computer mainly for software development , which I do inside Virtual Machines, and the i7 seems ideal for that because it no longer is limited by the speed of the FSB? And when I looked into it, getting 8GB DDR3 RAM isn't much more expensive than the 8GB of DDR2 and the i7 920 is comparable in price to the Q9550, which doesn't make much sense to me? So the question is it worth swapping the motherboard out for around $250 and upgrading all three components or using that money on SSD or 10rpm drive for the existing system's OS/Apps/Virtual Machine drive? Or just put the $250 towards a completely new machine in a year or two? Would the i7 really give that much of boost compared to the Q9550 for what I'd be using it for? Thanks in advance for your input!!!

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572  | Next Page >