Search Results

Search found 11380 results on 456 pages for 'cpu speed'.

Page 173/456 | < Previous Page | 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180  | Next Page >

  • Is current SATA 6 gb/s equipment simply unreliable?

    - by korkman
    I have a 45-disk array of Seagate Barracuda 3 TB ST3000DM001 (yes these are desktop drives I'm aware of that) in a Supermicro sc847 JBOD, connected via LSI 9285. I have found a solution for the problem description below by reducing speed via MegaCli -PhySetLinkSpeed -phy0 2 -a0; for i in $(seq 48); do MegaCli -PhySetLinkSpeed -phy${i} 2 -a0; done and rebooting. The question remains: Is this typical for current 6 gb/s equipment? Is this the sad state of SATA storage? Or is some of my equipment (the sff-8088 cables come to mind) bad? The Problem was: Synchronizing HW RAID-6, disks kept offlining. Fetching SMART values reveiled that those which offlined did not increase powered-on hours anymore. That is, their firmware (CC4C) seems to crash. Digging into the matter by switching to Software RAID-6, with the disks passed-through, I got tons of kernel messages scattered across all disks, with 6 gb/s: sd 0:0:9:0: [sdb] Sense Key : No Sense [current] Info fld=0x0 sd 0:0:9:0: [sdb] Add. Sense: No additional sense information And finally, when a disk offlines: megasas: [ 5]waiting for 160 commands to complete ... megasas: [35]waiting for 159 commands to complete ... megasas: [155]waiting for 156 commands to complete ... megaraid_sas: pending commands remain after waiting, will reset adapter. Ugly controller reset here, then minutes later: megaraid_sas: Reset successful. sd 0:0:28:0: Device offlined - not ready after error recovery ... sd 0:0:28:0: [sdu] Unhandled error code sd 0:0:28:0: [sdu] Result: hostbyte=DID_ERROR driverbyte=DRIVER_OK sd 0:0:28:0: [sdu] CDB: Read(10): 28 00 23 21 2f 40 00 00 70 00 sd 0:0:28:0: [sdu] killing request Reduced speed to 3 gb/s like written above, all problems vanished.

    Read the article

  • Diagnosing PCI issues

    - by dtsazza
    I'm upgrading a PC for a friend, and have run into a problem with upgrading the motherboard. I've been assembling custom PCs for the best part of a decade now, so I'm happy enough with the basics at the very least. The motherboard, CPU and graphics card were all updated at once - after this was done, the machine POSTs but the PCI wireless card, as well as the PCI-E graphics card, do not seem to be recognised at all by the system. No trace of them anywhere in the BIOS, or the POST output, or in Windows. I booted into Linux and ran an lspci which also showed up no sign of them. What is the best step to go about diagnosing this? Is it likely/feasible that the motherboard's PCI bus is just defective and it needs to be RMAed? Are there any other common gotchas that might cause these symptoms? For reference, the components in question are: CPU: Celeron E1400 Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-G31M-ES2L Graphics card: TBC (a low end card from a couple of years ago; worked flawlessly before the mobo change) PCI WNIC: Edimax 7128G Thanks in advance for any help.

    Read the article

  • Computer resetting semi-randomly

    - by Peter
    Hi, I'm having a problem with my desktop whereby it sometimes resets itself semi-randomly. For example, I'll switch it on, it'll boot an OS and shortly after getting to the desktop it will immediately reset with no warning. The time isn't consistent - sometimes it does it before reaching login. I'm pretty sure it's not an OS thing; have tried Ubuntu and a Windows install and both exhibit it. It also doesn't appear to be heat-related because sometimes it appears to be able to "get past" it and will then run stably even under load; if anything it seems to be worse from a cold start. My gut feeling is some kind of power issue but I'm clutching at straws a little. Any suggestions on how I could go about testing it or trying to narrow the problem down would be appreciated. The machine is four years old now so while I can replace components if needed, it's not worth enough that I'm comfortable buying new parts without being pretty confident that they'll fix the problem. Thanks in advance for any help :) Edit: Okay, the motherboard is a MSI K8N SLI; CPU is an Athlon64 X2 4200+. Has one video card, a GeForce 7800GT. 1GB RAM, not sure of brand; 3 hard drives, two SATA and one PATA. Flashed motherboard to latest BIOS some time ago. Edit the Second: I thought I'd narrowed it down to the PSU for a while, but then it recurred again. I ended up pulling everything out but CPU, RAM and motherboard and it still seems to be stuffed (if anything, it's gotten worse in the last couple of days). I assume it's one of those three components, but the machine is old enough that I don't really want to spend money replacing any of them. So thanks for everyone's suggestions; much appreciated!

    Read the article

  • How would I force Debian to use the physical sector size on a hard disk?

    - by Confused User
    I just purchased a few new 3TB WD drives. These have physical 4k sectors, but there is some sort of layer which is providing 512B logical sectors (see the partition table below). In order to attempt to get some more speed out of my hard drives, I would like to get rid of this logical layer and actually use the physical 4k sectors. However, I can't figure out how to do this (or even if it's possible) from the man pages of fdisk and parted, or from searching Google. Does anybody know how this could be done? As to why this is relevant, this page demonstrates that meerly aligning the sectors properly can already make up to a 25% speed difference for reads, and more than 2500% for writes in some cases! Getting rid of the logical sectors in favor of the physicals ones should improve speeds even more. Thanks! $ parted /dev/sdc GNU Parted 2.3 Using /dev/sdc Welcome to GNU Parted! Type 'help' to view a list of commands. (parted) print Model: ATA WDC WD30EZRX-00M (scsi) Disk /dev/sdc: 3001GB Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/4096B Partition Table: gpt Number Start End Size File system Name Flags 1 1049kB 3001GB 3001GB zfs 9 3001GB 3001GB 8389kB P.S. I don't care about the data on the drives, I was just playing with different file systems. Also, this is my first time posting here, so please let me know if my posts should be formatted differently, etc.

    Read the article

  • How does it hurt to use Linux (Ubuntu) as a guest OS for all my tasks?

    - by sauparna
    I have a machine running Windows, where the disk has two partitions C (50 GB) and D (250GB). I do research in Information Retrieval and need to work with a large corpus (more than 50 GB) and in Linux. So if I want to install Linux on the existing system, keeping the Windows installation intact, will it be fine to run it in a virtual box? (say, QEMU, VMWare, etc.) An alternative is using Wubi. In that case the Linux installation has to be on drive C. Then, if I keep a small Linux installation (say 5GB) on C, and my corpus on D (mounted in Linux), how will it affect the performance of my programs which would be accessing the mounted Windows drive D. Is it feasible to use Linux this way? Which of the above is better if at all they are a way out? Note : Since my post in July 2010, I have been using and have tried several ways of maintaining a disk-image that I can mount in Linux. I had a 100GB qcow2 disk and a 100GB raw disk, both formatted to an EXT3 file system. I was mounting and connecting to the qcow2 disk using qemu-nbd. The problem was that every now and then, the connection to the disk would get lost and the running programs would throw disk I/O errors. The raw disk would mount and work fine as a loop mounted device, but when writing data to it, the mount.ntfs program would hog the CPU and the process would take an enormous amount of time. I was in fact running make on a piece of software located on this raw disk, and after a point of time make was waiting while mount.ntfs would show 100% CPU usage.

    Read the article

  • My linux server "Number of processes created" and "Context switches" are growing incredibly fast

    - by Jorge Fuentes González
    I have a strange behaviour in my server :-/. Is a OpenVZ VPS (I think is OpenVZ, because /proc/user_beancounters exists and df -h returns /dev/simfs drive. Also ifconfig returns venet0). When I do cat /proc/stat, I can see how each second about 50-100 processes are created and happens about 800k-1200k context switches! All that info is with the server completely idle, no traffic nor programs running. Top shows 0 load average and 100% idle CPU. I've closed all non-needed services (httpd, mysqld, sendmail, nagios, named...) and the problem still happens. I do ps -ALf each second too and I don't see any changes, only a new ps process is created each time and the PID is just the same as before + 1, so new processes are not created, so I thought that process growing in cat /proc/stat must be threads (Yes, seems that processes in /proc/stat counts threads creation too as this states: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:8NLgzKEzHQQJ:www.linuxhowtos.org/System/procstat.htm&hl=es&tbo=d&gl=es&strip=1). I've changed to /proc dir and done cat [PID]\status with all PIDs listed with ls (Including kernel ones) and in any process voluntary_ctxt_switches nor nonvoluntary_ctxt_switches are growing at the same speed as cat /proc/stat does (just a few tens/second), Threads keeps the same also. I've done strace -p PID to all process too so I can see if any process is crating threads or something but the only process that has a bit of movement is ssh and that movement is read/write operations because of the data is sending to my terminal. After that, I've done vmstat -s and saw that forks is growing at the same speed processes in /proc/stat does. As http://linux.die.net/man/2/fork says, each fork() creates a new PID but my server PID is not growing! The last thing I can think of is that all process data that proc/stat and vmstat -s show is shared with all the other VPS stored in the same machine, but I don't know if that is correct... If someone can throw some light on this I would be really grateful.

    Read the article

  • finding the best network latency between two countries

    - by Yoav Aner
    I know there are many tools to test for bandwidth and latency, but they all rely on having at least one host from which you can run those tests. I wonder whether there's an online source or some other way to guestimate the latency or speed between two countries (in general). For example, would a customer in Japan get lower latency if the server is located in Singapore or Australia? Is a user in India likely to get higher download speed from a server in the UK or in the US? Are there any online resources or some clever ways to answer those questions with a reasonable degree of accuracy? [UPDATE]: Thanks for the great suggestions from Raffael Luthiger. I didn't know about those looking glass servers. The submarine cable maps were also really cool to discover (Thanks to Jesper Mortensen). Also seems really wise if I could ask those network professional in the area for their experience, but obviously I don't have access to those. At least some of them are on SF :) However, I'm still a little unsure how to combine those resources to give me some measurements. This is the information I have: Two countries (A,B). I do have IP addresses of customers in country A (I can obtain those from the web server log files for example). Presumably I can find some looking glass servers in country B and run a trace to those IPs. What's the best measurements to use? Are there any scripts that help automate at least some of this process?

    Read the article

  • What to look for in a reliable backup hard disk?

    - by Senthil
    I want to buy an internal hard disk and use a docking station along with it for backing up important data. The size will be around 500GB to 1TB. I have a budget and several models fit into it. So far, they only seem to vary in size, speed and brand. These are the only things I can compare from the specs. I guess asking for which brand is best is completely subjective so I won't do that. I want my disk to have long life and be reliable. Doesn't matter if it is somewhat slow. Size: Should I go for the one with highest size within my budget? Will higher density cause problems? Or should I go for a moderately sized one? Does the number of platters have an impact? Speed: I do not want high performance. I want it to be reliable and last long. I am definitely not going to choose the expensive 10,000 rpm ones. Should I go for 5400 or 7200? Do these numbers affect longevity and reliability? Are there any other technical and objective factors that I should look for?

    Read the article

  • Why is my second monitor not working?

    - by StampedeXV
    Since I have my new computer, I have a very weird problem. Facts: New Computer: Motherboard: ASRock Z77 Pro 3 Graphics-card: Asus1GB D5 X EN GTX560 DCII OC/2DI R CPU: Intel i5-3570 Windows 7 64bit 500W beQuiet special edition (92% efficiency) 8GB 1333MHz DDR3 Corsair RAM (CL9) Scythe Mugen 2 2 magnetic HDDs + 1 SDD 1 DVD-R Old Computer: Motherboard: Asus P55 something Graphics-card: Asus1GB D5 X EN GTX560 DCII OC/2DI R CPU: Intel i7-870 Windows 7 64bit 550W Corsair 8GB 1333MHz DDR3 Corsair RAM (CL9) Scythe Mugen 3 2 magnetic HDDs + 1 SDD 1 DVD-R On the old computer it worked fine with two monitors. Moving to the new (I took the same Graphics-card) it only works with one. The weird thing I mentioned is: not matter which one. But if I put both there, only one is available. There is no reaction at the start (where normally (at least if I remember correctly) the monitor shortly went from "standby" to "on"). Windows does not recognize a second monitor in the Device Manager. I have the latest drivers for Motherboard and Graphics-card. I have the latest BIOS drivers. I am out of ideas. Edit: completed computer setup

    Read the article

  • Torrent upload ratio not updated on Synology DS212+

    - by user179271
    I have a Synology DS212+ NAS running DSM 4.2-3211 (current version). I use it for several purposes including torrent download using Download Station and a tracker that needs authentication. My problem is that my download/upload ratio isn't updated, so it constantly falls down. My NAS is behind a router, and I configured the NAT to forward ports 6890 to 6999 to the internal IP address of the NAS. Here are the Download Station settings : TCP port : 6990, Sharing ratio : 900%, Sharing time : infinite, max download speed : 0 (no limit), max upload speed : 0 (no limit), BT protocol encryption : checked, max numbers of peers allowed by torrent file : 4000, DHT : checked, with port 6889. When the DHT option is not checked, the NAS doesn't upload any files. I don't know what is this option for. Can someone help me to solve this problem ? Did I miss any step, or does it come from the NAT ? How is the authentication managed by Dowload Station ? (Sorry for my english) Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Constant crashes in windows 7 64bit when playing games

    - by yx
    I've tried everything I can possibly think of in trying to fix this problem and I'm totally out of ideas, so any help would be appreciated: The problem: whenever I fire up a game, it works for a short while with no problems and then it would crash. Either its a hard crash, forcing me to reboot, or windows would report that the display driver has stopped working and recovered. Here is a list of things I've already tried: Drivers - tried the latest drivers (catalyst 9.12) as well as the stock drivers that came with the video card. Also have the latest BIOS/chipset Memtest - Ran Memtest86+ overnight, had no problems, the windows diagnostic tool also does not find any problems. Overheating - Video card/cpu temperatures are well below peak (42 and 31 Celsius receptively) PSU Voltage - CPUID shows that the voltage levels are all above what they should be. The PSU itself is only roughly 16 months old and is a good model. HDD - No errors when checked GPU - Brand new (replaced previous card since I thought it was the problem, apparently not) Overclocking - Everything is at stock levels, memory voltage is set to manufacturer's standard Specs: Motherboard: ASUS P5Q Pro CPU: Core 2 Duo E8400 3.0 ghz OS: Windows 7 home premium 64 bit Memory: Mushkin Enhanced 4GB DDR2 GPU: Sapphire HD 5850 1GB PSU: SeaSonic M12 600W ATX12V DirectX: DX11 Event Viewer after a crash always has these logged: A fatal hardware error has occurred. Reported by component: Processor Core Error Source: Machine Check Exception Error Type: Bus/Interconnect Error Processor ID: 1 The details view of this entry contains further information. A fatal hardware error has occurred. Reported by component: Processor Core Error Source: Machine Check Exception Error Type: Bus/Interconnect Error Processor ID: 0 The details view of this entry contains further information. A previous card that I had (4850x2) also had these errors, so I changed video cards, but the same thing is happening.

    Read the article

  • Troubleshooting: Monitor never turns on, system fans running, DVD-ROM does not open.

    - by Wesley
    Hi all, Here are my specs beforehand: ECS P4VXASD2+ (V5.0) motherboard FSB 533MHz Intel Pentium 4 2.40A GHz Prescott Socket 478 2x 256MB PC2100 DDR RAM, 2x 256MB PC133 SDRAM CoolMax 350W PSU DVD-ROM - will edit with brand & model 128MB ATi Radeon 9800 Pro AGP No hard drive So, I just put those parts together today and I tried to power it up, with the monitor connected to the Radeon 9800 in the AGP slot (mobo does not have VGA port). After turning it on, the CPU fan, graphics fan and system fan go on. However, the monitor remains in standby mode, despite being plugged in. Also, after pushing the button on the DVD-ROM drive, it does not open. I've used the DVD-ROM drive before with absolutely no issues. The graphics card was slightly buggy when I put it on another machine, which was left outside in winter weather for 3 months. (Still that computer's integrated graphics worked fine.) CMOS battery was replaced and jumpers are all set correctly. Now, I'm wondering whether the motherboard, CPU, PSU or GPU is the problem. What can I do to test which part is the problem? Just to clarify, I don't have a hard drive, so I usually boot Ubuntu from the disc drive. Anyways, thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • No clue for high load average on top

    - by Oz.
    We have several machines on Amazon (ec2) of the type c1.xlarge with 16 cpus, running the Amazon AMI. Details on the machine: 7 GB of memory 20 EC2 Compute Units (8 virtual cores with 2.5 EC2 Compute Units each) 1690 GB of instance storage 64-bit platform I/O Performance: High API name: c1.xlarge One out of the several machines is showing a high load average, since we have run the last yum upgrade a couple of weeks a go. We did not yet update the other machines, and everything looks normal on them. The strange thing is that the top command not showing any hint for the cause of the load. CPUs are 4.8%us, 1.1%sy, 0.0%ni, 94.1%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st(see below). Mem is about 1.5GB free. Any idea what could it be, or where else can we check? Many thanks for the help. # # top # top - 07:57:42 up 4:18, 1 user, load average: 1.36, 1.45, 1.47 Tasks: 131 total, 1 running, 130 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 4.8%us, 1.1%sy, 0.0%ni, 94.1%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Mem: 7120092k total, 5644920k used, 1475172k free, 532888k buffers Swap: 0k total, 0k used, 0k free, 3463936k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 1557 mysql 20 0 1829m 374m 6448 S 14.3 5.4 11:15.09 mysqld 6655 apache 20 0 416m 49m 3744 S 9.3 0.7 0:04.85 httpd 27683 apache 20 0 421m 54m 3708 S 9.0 0.8 0:00.99 httpd 6682 apache 20 0 424m 57m 3788 S 8.3 0.8 0:03.81 httpd 16816 apache 20 0 419m 51m 3760 S 4.3 0.7 0:04.09 httpd 22182 apache 20 0 417m 50m 3756 S 1.7 0.7 0:06.34 httpd 219 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.3 0.0 0:00.34 kworker/7:1 699 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.3 0.0 0:00.40 kworker/3:1 1 root 20 0 19376 1508 1212 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.29 init 2 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 kthreadd 3 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.71 ksoftirqd/0

    Read the article

  • PC can't detect second RAM installed

    - by kulwinder
    I have PC with 512 MB RAM installed (motherboard manufacture MICRO STAR, chipset P4M800), pc was running very slow so I decided to upgrade the ram. I installed CPU-Z and check the ram installed on the machine, also had a look at the stick installed. 512 MB PC 3200 400 MHz DDR but my mother supports 200 MHz and it was working ok. So I bought 2GB which I checked on manual that it support upto 2 GB Ram. So I installed 2GB PC 3200 400 MHz same as the old one, I plugged in both eventhough motherboard only support upto 2 GB but system spec only shows 512 (deducts 64 MB shared vga memory) I checked on CPU-Z, it detects both, slot 1 512 MB, slot 2 2048 MB, comparing screen for both slots, both the same, volt 2.5, frequency 166 MHz and 200MHz, only difference on those is 2gb ram shows under timings table 133MHz 166 MHz and 200MHz but 512 MB shows only 166MHz and 200MHz. I checked on Google and can't seems to figure out whats wrong with it. If I only plug in 2GB. Pc doesn't boot up like ram not working.With only 512 MB plugged in seems ok. Please help.

    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

  • Is the exhaust fan necessary?

    - by Borek
    On my new PC, the component making the most noise is the rear exhaust fan on my case (it is the only exhaust fan in my PC). I tried to disconnect it and watched temperatures in SpeedFan and CPU was usually at about 35C, peaking to about 50C when the system was under load - this doesn't look too bad. So I'm considering that I'll leave the exhaust fan disconnected permanently after which the computer is very quiet - the only noise-making components are Arctic Cooling Freezer 7 Pro Rev.2 (CPU fan) and PSU fan (Enermax Pro 82+), both being quiet enough as far as I can tell. (My GPU has a passive cooler.) Also, those 2 components are moving parts so will provide some air flow in the case and, even better, PSU fan sucks the air out of the case so it kind of is an exhaust fan in itself. Does anyone run with the exhaust fan disconnected? You don't have to tell me that it's always better to have more air flow than less, I know that, but the noise is also a consideration for me and temperatures around 40C should be fine shouldn't they? (I might also consider getting a quieter case fan but I'm specifically interested in your opinion on the no exhaust fan scenario.)

    Read the article

  • Can enabling a RAID controller's writeback cache harm overall performance?

    - by Nathan O'Sullivan
    I have an 8 drive RAID 10 setup connected to an Adaptec 5805Z, running Centos 5.5 and deadline scheduler. A basic dd read test shows 400mb/sec, and a basic dd write test shows about the same. When I run the two simultaneously, I see the read speed drop to ~5mb/sec while the write speed stays at more or less the same 400mb/sec. The output of iostat -x as you would expect, shows that very few read transactions are being executed while the disk is bombarded with writes. If i turn the controller's writeback cache off, I dont see a 50:50 split but I do see a marked improvement, somewhere around 100mb/s reads and 300mb/s writes. I've also found if I lower the nr_requests setting on the drive's queue (somewhere around 8 seems optimal) I can end up with 150mb/sec reads and 150mb/sec writes; ie. a reduction in total throughput but certainly more suitable for my workload. Is this a real phenomenon? Or is my synthetic test too simplistic? The reason this could happen seems clear enough, when the scheduler switches from reads to writes, it can run heaps of write requests because they all just land in the controllers cache but must be carried out at some point. I would guess the actual disk writes are occuring when the scheduler starts trying to perform reads again, resulting in very few read requests being executed. This seems a reasonable explanation, but it also seems like a massive drawback to using writeback cache on an system with non-trivial write loads. I've been searching for discussions around this all afternoon and found nothing. What am I missing?

    Read the article

  • MySQL Config on Large Machine

    - by Jonathon
    We have a Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition server (64bit) running only MySQL 5.1.45 64-bit. It has 16G RAM and 10T of hard-drive space in RAID 10. We are having horrible performance from mysqld (85-100% CPU utilization). We were running a smaller machine with better performance, so I am assuming our my.ini file is not correct for our current machine. The my.ini file is as follows: [client] port=3306 [mysql] default-character-set=latin1 [mysqld] port=3306 basedir="D:/MySQL/" datadir="D:/MySQL/data" default-character-set=latin1 default-storage-engine=MYISAM sql-mode="" skip-innodb skip-locking max_allowed_packet = 1M max_connections=800 myisam_max_sort_file_size=5G myisam_sort_buffer_size=500M table_open_cache = 512 table_cache=8000 tmp_table_size=30M query_cache_size=50M thread_cache_size=128 key_buffer_size=3072M read_buffer_size=2M read_rnd_buffer_size=16M sort_buffer_size=2M #replication settings (this is the master) log-bin=log server-id = 1 Does anyone see anything wrong with this setup? For a machine with this much RAM, why in the world would mysqld eat up so much CPU? I know we can optimize some queries, etc., but it did run okay on a smaller machine, so I am pretty sure it is the config. Thanks in advance for any help.

    Read the article

  • Slow Local Network, Windows 7, Snow Leopard, WiFi/Wired

    - by WerkkreW
    Hello - I am experiencing really poor local network performance in my home. I was recently using a Linksys WRT54G Router with DD-WRT on it, and a couple comparable Linksys-G PCI cards for connectivity but decided to upgrade hoping it would help with my performance issues. The computers in my house are connected as follows: Comcast Business Class Commercial 25mbps/10mbps (Verified with SpeakEasy and Speedtest.net) D-Link DGL-4500 Wireless N Router Windows 7x64 - D-Link DWA-552 Wireless-N Windows 7x64 - D-Link DWA-552 Wireless-N Mac Mini 10.6.2 - AirPort Extreme N Playstation 3, Hard Wired Xbox 360, Hard Wired Essentially the problem is very specific. Web browsing and uploading/downloading files from the internet is fine, more than fine. But if I want to say, Stream a video from one of my Windows 7 computers to my PS3, or copy a large video file between either of the PC's or the Mac, I get a consistent 500-900Kbps throughput at the high end. If I open my network browser, or try to browse my homegroup the response time is horrible. Both of my Windows computers are showing Strong wireless signals with a connection speed of 300Mbps. I know I can never expect to achieve anything near those speeds, but 500Kbps? Here is what I have tried so far: Enabled Single mode N-only and N/G Only on router WPA2 with AES Encrpytion Disabled "Remote Differential Compression" in Windows 7 Disabled TCP "Auto-Tuning" Used other software for file copies such as "Teracopy" I am at the end of my rope. Unfortunately I live in a 75 year old home with plaster walls, so hard-wiring my entire house isn't really an option I can handle right now. Any ideas to help me get decent speed when transferring files across my network would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • AviSynth ChangeFPS: combining videos with different framerates

    - by Daniel Saner
    I have two video recordings of the same scene, but with different framerates, that I would like to combine using an AviSynth script. One video is recorded at 30fps, the other at 120fps. What I would like to do is to keep them temporally synchronised, meaning that for each frame of the 30fps video, the output should display 4 frames from the 120fps video. I would like the final output video to play at 30fps so that the duration is 4 times the original recordings. From AviSynth's documentation, it seems ChangeFPS is the function I'll need, since it removes and duplicates frames, while 'AssumeFPS' just changes the playback speed (and my plan is basically to quadruple every frame of the 30fps clip). However, the filter does not seem to do what it says. If I try: clip30 = AviSource("0326.avi").ChangeFPS(120) clip120 = AviSource("0326-120fps.avi") it doesn't affect the playback speed or frame count of the 30fps clip at all, but removes every fourth frame from the 120fps clip, which is not at all what I want. Unfortunately, appending .ChangeFPS(7.5) to the clip120 instead does not have the same inverse effect—in that case, it does exactly what's to be expected. Alternatively, if I try: clip30 = AviSource("0326.avi").AssumeFPS(7.5) clip120 = AviSource("0326-120fps.avi") there is no effect at all, both clips are played back at 30fps, meaning that only a quarter of the 120fps clip has been shown by the time the 30fps clip is over. So how can I combine these two clips in the manner I want? I was unable to find any other internal or external filters that would help me do that. It seems to me that if ChangeFPS did what the manual says, it would be the right one for the job.

    Read the article

  • Performance degrades for more than 2 threads on Xeon X5355

    - by zoolii
    Hi All, I am writing an application using boost threads and using boost barriers to synchronize the threads. I have two machines to test the application. Machine 1 is a core2 duo (T8300) cpu machine (windows XP professional - 4GB RAM) where I am getting following performance figures : Number of threads :1 , TPS :21 Number of threads :2 , TPS :35 (66 % improvement) further increase in number of threads decreases the TPS but that is understandable as the machine has only two cores. Machine 2 is a 2 quad core ( Xeon X5355) cpu machine (windows 2003 server with 4GB RAM) and has 8 effective cores. Number of threads :1 , TPS :21 Number of threads :2 , TPS :27 (28 % improvement) Number of threads :4 , TPS :25 Number of threads :8 , TPS :24 As you can see, performance is degrading after 2 threads (though it has 8 cores). If the program has some bottle neck , then for 2 thread also it should have degraded. Any idea? , Explanations ? , Does the OS has some role in performance ? - It seems like the Core2duo (2.4GHz) scales better than Xeon X5355 (2.66GHz) though it has better clock speed. Thank you -Zoolii

    Read the article

  • How important is dual-gigabit lan for a super user's home NAS?

    - by Andrew
    Long story short: I'm building my own home server based on Ubuntu with 4 drives in RAID 10. Its primary purpose will be NAS and backup. Would I be making a terrible mistake by building a NAS Server with a single Gigabit NIC? Long story long: I know the absolute max I can get out of a single Gigabit port is 125MB/s, and I want this NAS to be able to handle up to 6 computers accessing files simultaneously, with up to two of them streaming video. With Ubuntu NIC-bonding and the performance of RAID 10, I can theoretically double my throughput and achieve 250MB/s (ok, not really, but it would be faster). The drives have an average read throughput of 83.87MB/s according to Tom's Hardware. The unit itself will be based on the Chenbro ES34069-BK-180 case. With my current hardware choices, it'll have this motherboard with a Core i3 CPU and 8GB of RAM. Overkill, I know, but this server will be doing other things as well (like transcoding video). Unfortunately, the only Mini-ITX boards I can find with dual-gigabit and 6 SATA ports are Intel Atom-based, and I need more processing power than an Atom has to offer. I would love to find a board with 6 SATA ports and two Gigabit LAN ports that supports a Core i3 CPU. So far, my search has come up empty. Thus, my dilemma. Should I hold out for such a board, go with an Atom-based solution, or stick with my current single-gigabit configuration? I know there are consumer NAS units with just one gigabit interface (probably most of them), but I think I will demand a lot more from my server than the average home user. Any advice is appreciated. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • ESXi 5 Guests will not boot

    - by Adrian
    I have a problem with Guests not booting under VMWare ESXi 5.0 on my IBM x3550M3 server. Note: Investigation eventually determined that problem was with the VMware client on a Lenovo Edge laptop, the only Windows box available in a Linux IT shop. vSphere Client v4 and v5 duplicated behavior on the Lenovo Edge. As indicated in the comment to the accepted answer, replacing the workstation with one using different video was the "fix" for this particular issue. The ESXi host boots just fine. The Client connects just fine. Guests can be configured but do not successfully boot. The initial guest memory consumption jumps up to 560MB and drops down to 40MB after a few seconds. Initial CPU usage is 1 full CPU (3000Ghz per the chart) and immediately drops downm to 29Mhz. Guests do not display any output in the Console tab but show a state of 'Powered On'. No errors in the Events tab. Switching Guest from BIOS to EFI makes no difference. VMs are listed as Version 7 and the behavior is duplicated across all availabled Guest OS flavors. Problem also duplicated when server is booted up in Legacy Only mode. Logs do not contain anything particularly suspicious. Edit: No firewalls, routers, or VLANs in between the client and server. Edit 2: We have tried to Boot Guest into BIOS screen at Next Boot checkbox in the Guest Setting. Was not successful. Edit 3: 500GB datastore with 1 40GB VM on it. Plenty of space. Edit 4: Guests copied from my old ESXi 4 server DO NOT boot on the ESXi 5 system. Initially it complains about too little Video RAM being configured for the default 2500x1600, but it still doesn't work properly even after I bump the Video RAM settings or switch it to Auto-Detect.

    Read the article

  • My Computer hangs for a few minutes just after startup, and then is fine.

    - by EvilChookie
    So I just built myself a reasonably beefy computer, and I installed Windows 7 on it. However, I start the machine up each morning and within a few minutes, the computer will semi hang. That is the mouse is responsive, and most of the time I can open task manager, or a new tab in Chrome. Occasionally windows will be labelled as 'Not responding'. Then, the machine will get over it's problem, and will be nice and quick until I turn it off. Here's my specs: CPU: AMD Phenom-II X4 955 Black (Quad Core, 3.2ghz) RAM: 4GB of DDR3 1300 MOBO: ASUS M4A785T-M (Latest BIOS) HARD DRIVES: 2x1TB Western Digital Caviar Blacks in RAID-0. OS: Windows 7 Ultimate x64. GPU: ASUS GT240 1GB. I believe this issue relates to the RAID array, as I didn't have the lockup problem before I created the array. I purchased a second drive and reformatted after creating a RAID array, since the single drive was a little on the pokey side (compared to the rest of the computer). What I have tried: Updated Raid Drivers Malware checks Windows Updates Unecessary Services CPU and Disk activity appears to be low (via Resource Monitor) No strange errors in the error log. Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • SSH tunnel for socks5 proxy is slow with concurrent load

    - by RawwrBag
    I ssh to a remote AWS server using Ubuntu. I use ssh's port forwarding capabilities to do this. I have tried forwarding a dynamic port (ssh -D) or a single port (ssh -L with dante running as a remote socks server). Both are equally slow. I also tried different ciphers (ssh -c). Concurrent TCP connections pretty much do not work. For example, I can go to speedtest.net and start a test (which is fairly fast, probably maxes out my line speed) and if I try and do anything (i.e. load google.com) while the test is still running, all the additional connections seem to hang until the speed test is over. I realize OpenSSH is single-threaded. Is this the problem? It doesn't even show up on my top. Same goes for sshd on the remote server -- no processor hit. Is there anyway to bump ssh performance or should I step up to OpenVPN or something better suited for this?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180  | Next Page >