Search Results

Search found 32 results on 2 pages for 'multiprocessor'.

Page 1/2 | 1 2  | Next Page >

  • In a multithreaded app, would a multi-core or multiprocessor arrangement be better?

    - by Michael
    I've read a lot on this topic already both here (e.g., stackoverflow.com/questions/1713554/threads-processes-vs-multithreading-multi-core-multiprocessor-how-they-are or http://stackoverflow.com/questions/680684/multi-cpu-multi-core-and-hyper-thread) and elsewhere (e.g., ixbtlabs.com/articles2/cpu/rmmt-l2-cache.html or software.intel.com/en-us/articles/multi-core-introduction/), but I still am not sure about a couple things that seem very straightforward. So I thought I'd just ask. (1) Is a multi-core processor in which each core has dedicated cache effectively the same as a multiprocessor system (balanced of course for processor speed, cache size, and so on)? (2) Let's say I have some images to analyze (i.e., computer vision), and I have these images loaded into RAM. My app spawns a thread for each image that needs to be analyzed. Will this app on a shared cache multi-core processor run slower than on a dedicated cache multi-core processor, and would the latter run at the same speed as on an equivalent single-core multiprocessor machine? Thank you for the help!

    Read the article

  • Are there deprecated practices for multithread and multiprocessor programming that I should no longer use?

    - by DeveloperDon
    In the early days of FORTRAN and BASIC, essentially all programs were written with GOTO statements. The result was spaghetti code and the solution was structured programming. Similarly, pointers can have difficult to control characteristics in our programs. C++ started with plenty of pointers, but use of references are recommended. Libraries like STL can reduce some of our dependency. There are also idioms to create smart pointers that have better characteristics, and some version of C++ permit references and managed code. Programming practices like inheritance and polymorphism use a lot of pointers behind the scenes (just as for, while, do structured programming generates code filled with branch instructions). Languages like Java eliminate pointers and use garbage collection to manage dynamically allocated data instead of depending on programmers to match all their new and delete statements. In my reading, I have seen examples of multi-process and multi-thread programming that don't seem to use semaphores. Do they use the same thing with different names or do they have new ways of structuring protection of resources from concurrent use? For example, a specific example of a system for multithread programming with multicore processors is OpenMP. It represents a critical region as follows, without the use of semaphores, which seem not to be included in the environment. th_id = omp_get_thread_num(); #pragma omp critical { cout << "Hello World from thread " << th_id << '\n'; } This example is an excerpt from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenMP Alternatively, similar protection of threads from each other using semaphores with functions wait() and signal() might look like this: wait(sem); th_id = get_thread_num(); cout << "Hello World from thread " << th_id << '\n'; signal(sem); In this example, things are pretty simple, and just a simple review is enough to show the wait() and signal() calls are matched and even with a lot of concurrency, thread safety is provided. But other algorithms are more complicated and use multiple semaphores (both binary and counting) spread across multiple functions with complex conditions that can be called by many threads. The consequences of creating deadlock or failing to make things thread safe can be hard to manage. Do these systems like OpenMP eliminate the problems with semaphores? Do they move the problem somewhere else? How do I transform my favorite semaphore using algorithm to not use semaphores anymore?

    Read the article

  • "Work stealing" vs. "Work shrugging (tm)"?

    - by John
    Why is it that I can find lots of information on "work stealing" and nothing on a "work shrugging(tm)" as a load-balancing strategy? I am surprised because work-stealing seems to me to have an inherent weakness when implementating efficient fine-grained load-balancing. Vis:- Relying on consumer processors to implement distribution (by actively stealing) begs the question of what these processors do when they find no work? None of the work-stealing references and implementations I have come across so far address this issue satisfactorarily for me. They either:- 1) Manage not to disclose what they do with idle processors! [Cilk] (?anyone know?) 2) Have all idle processors sleep and wake periodically and scatter messages to the four winds to see if any work has arrived [e.g. JAWS] (= way too latent & inefficient for me). 3) Assume that it is acceptable to have processors "spinning" looking for work ( = non-starter for me!) Unless anyone thinks there is a solution for this I will move on to consider a "Work Shrugging(tm)" strategy. Having the task-producing processor distribute excess load seems to me inherently capable of a much more efficient implementation. However a quick google didn't show up anything under the heading of "Work Shrugging" so any pointers to prior-art would be welcome. tx Tags I would have added if I was allowed to [work-stealing]

    Read the article

  • Best Practise for Stopwatch in multi processors machine?

    - by Ahmed Said
    I found a good question for measuring function performance, and the answers recommend to use Stopwatch as follows Stopwatch sw = new Stopwatch(); sw.Start(); //DoWork sw.Stop(); //take sw.Elapsed But is this valid if you are running under multi processors machine? the thread can be switched to another processor, can it? Also the same thing should be in Enviroment.TickCount. If the answer is yes should I wrap my code inside BeginThreadAffinity as follows Thread.BeginThreadAffinity(); Stopwatch sw = new Stopwatch(); sw.Start(); //DoWork sw.Stop(); //take sw.Elapsed Thread.EndThreadAffinity(); P.S The switching can occur over the thread level not only the processor level, for example if the function is running in another thread so the system can switch it to another processor, if that happens, will the Stopwatch be valid after this switching? I am not using Stopwatch for perfromance measurement only but also to simulate timer function using Thread.Sleep (to prevent call overlapping)

    Read the article

  • "Work stealing" vs. "Work shrugging"?

    - by John
    Why is it that I can find lots of information on "work stealing" and nothing on "work shrugging" as a dynamic load-balancing strategy? By "work-shrugging" I mean busy processors pushing excessive work towards less loaded neighbours rather than idle processors pulling work from busy neighbours ("work-stealing"). I think the general scalability should be the same for both strategies. However I believe that it is much more efficient for busy processors to wake idle processors if and when there is definitely work for them to do than having idle processors spinning or waking periodically to speculatively poll all neighbours for possible work. Anyway a quick google didn't show up anything under the heading of "Work Shrugging" or similar so any pointers to prior-art and the jargon for this strategy would be welcome. Clarification/Confession In more detail:- By "Work Shrugging" I actually envisage the work submitting processor (which may or may not be the target processor) being responsible for looking around the immediate locality of the preferred target processor (based on data/code locality) to decide if a near neighbour should be given the new work instead because they don't have as much work to do. I am talking about an atomic read of the immediate (typically 2 to 4) neighbours' estimated q length here. I do not think this is any more coupling than implied by the thieves polling & stealing from their neighbours - just much less often - or rather - only when it makes economic sense to do so. (I am assuming "lock-free, almost wait-free" queue structures in both strategies). Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Are indivisible operations still indivisible on multiprocessor and multicore systems?

    - by Steve314
    As per the title, plus what are the limitations and gotchas. For example, on x86 processors, alignment for most data types is optional - an optimisation rather than a requirement. That means that a pointer may be stored at an unaligned address, which in turn means that pointer might be split over a cache page boundary. Obviously this could be done if you work hard enough on any processor (picking out particular bytes etc), but not in a way where you'd still expect the write operation to be indivisible. I seriously doubt that a multicore processor can ensure that other cores can guarantee a consistent all-before or all-after view of a written pointer in this unaligned-write-crossing-a-page-boundary situation. Am I right? And are there any similar gotchas I haven't thought of?

    Read the article

  • How to get Windows Server 2008 VM to use multiple cores

    - by David Fraser
    I have a Windows Server 2008 machine running in VirtualBox. On initial installation, only one processor was made available, but now I want to run it as a multiprocessor machine. I have made all four cores available in the VirtualBox settings (as well as enabling VT-x/AMD-V and Nested Paging), but Task Manager still only shows one CPU. However, the four CPU cores are visible in Device Manager under Processors. In the event log on startup, I can see the following relevant events: EventLog.6009 Microsoft (R) Windows (R) 6.00.6002 Service Pack 2 Multiprocessor Free Kernel-Processor-Power.4 Processor 0 exposes the following: 1 idle state(s), 0 performance state(s), 0 throttle state(s) Kernel-Processor-Power.4 Processor 255 exposes the following: 0 idle state(s), 0 performance state(s), 0 throttle state(s) Kernel-Processor-Power.4 Processor 255 exposes the following: 0 idle state(s), 0 performance state(s), 0 throttle state(s) Kernel-Processor-Power.4 Processor 255 exposes the following: 0 idle state(s), 0 performance state(s), 0 throttle state(s) How can I make this system actually boot up as a multiprocessor machine?

    Read the article

  • How to get Windows Server 2008 VM to use multiple cores

    - by David Fraser
    I have a Windows Server 2008 machine running in VirtualBox. On initial installation, only one processor was made available, but now I want to run it as a multiprocessor machine. I have made all four cores available in the VirtualBox settings (as well as enabling VT-x/AMD-V and Nested Paging), but Task Manager still only shows one CPU. However, the four CPU cores are visible in Device Manager under Processors. In the event log on startup, I can see the following relevant events: EventLog.6009 Microsoft (R) Windows (R) 6.00.6002 Service Pack 2 Multiprocessor Free Kernel-Processor-Power.4 Processor 0 exposes the following: 1 idle state(s), 0 performance state(s), 0 throttle state(s) Kernel-Processor-Power.4 Processor 255 exposes the following: 0 idle state(s), 0 performance state(s), 0 throttle state(s) Kernel-Processor-Power.4 Processor 255 exposes the following: 0 idle state(s), 0 performance state(s), 0 throttle state(s) Kernel-Processor-Power.4 Processor 255 exposes the following: 0 idle state(s), 0 performance state(s), 0 throttle state(s) How can I make this system actually boot up as a multiprocessor machine?

    Read the article

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

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

    Read the article

  • Game engine development in C++ [closed]

    - by Chris Cochran
    I am arriving at completion on a multithreaded concurrency framework designed for high-performance computing. Though I am not a gamer, it has occurred to me that this stand-alone software core could be an ideal basis for a multiprocessor game engine (64-bit native C++, 5000+ entry points). Are there any websites I could visit to discuss this technology with programmers and developers who could really benefit from it?

    Read the article

  • Avoiding and Identifying False Sharing Among Threads

    In symmetric multiprocessor (SMP) systems, each processor has a local cache. The memory system must guarantee cache coherence. False sharing occurs when threads on different processors modify variables that reside on the same cache line. Learn methods to detect and correct false sharing.

    Read the article

  • 7-Zip on multi-core computers

    - by Peter Mortensen
    Does 7-Zip take advantage of multiprocessor or multi-core systems? For example, would there be a close to 16 times speed-up on a 16 core system assuming no disk or memory bottlenecks? Or is it is limited to 2 threads (2 times speed-up on systems with more than one CPU or core)?

    Read the article

  • 7-Zip compression on multi-core computers

    - by Peter Mortensen
    Does 7-Zip take advantage of multiprocessor or multi-core systems when compressing? For example, would there be a close to 16 times speed-up on a 16 core system assuming no disk or memory bottlenecks? Or is it is limited to 2 threads (2 times speed-up on systems with more than one CPU or core)?

    Read the article

  • A Method for Reducing Contention and Overhead in Worker Queues for Multithreaded Java Applications

    - by Janice J. Heiss
    A java.net article, rich in practical resources, by IBM India Labs’ Sathiskumar Palaniappan, Kavitha Varadarajan, and Jayashree Viswanathan, explores the challenge of writing code in a way that that effectively makes use of the resources of modern multicore processors and multiprocessor servers.As the article states: “Many server applications, such as Web servers, application servers, database servers, file servers, and mail servers, maintain worker queues and thread pools to handle large numbers of short tasks that arrive from remote sources. In general, a ‘worker queue’ holds all the short tasks that need to be executed, and the threads in the thread pool retrieve the tasks from the worker queue and complete the tasks. Since multiple threads act on the worker queue, adding tasks to and deleting tasks from the worker queue needs to be synchronized, which introduces contention in the worker queue.” The article goes on to explain ways that developers can reduce contention by maintaining one queue per thread. It also demonstrates a work-stealing technique that helps in effectively utilizing the CPU in multicore systems. Read the rest of the article here.

    Read the article

  • how many processors can I get in a block on cuda GPU?

    - by Vickey
    hi all, I have two questions to ask 1) If I create only one block of threads in cuda and execute the my parallel program on it then is it possible that more than one processors would be given to single block so that my program get some benefit of multiprocessor platform ? 2) can I synchronize the threads of different blocks ? if yes please give some hints. Thanks in advance since I know I'll get replies as always I get.

    Read the article

  • lock-free memory reclamation with 64bit pointers

    - by JDonner
    Herlihy and Shavit's book (The Art of Multiprocessor Programming) solution to memory reclamation uses Java's AtomicStampedReference<T>;. To write one in C++ for the x86_64 I imagine requires at least a 12 byte swap operation - 8 for a 64bit pointer and 4 for the int. Is there x86 hardware support for this and if not, any pointers on how to do wait-free memory reclamation without it?

    Read the article

  • Windows xp keeps rebooting itself every morning at 8am?

    - by mark
    Hi, I've got windows xp sp3. It seems to restart itself every morning at 8am (judging by the windows logs, I can see all apps log a startup at 8am every day). Whenever I get to the machine in the morning (around 9 am) I see it's rebooted. I've checked that automatic updates are off, and that the power management settings are set to "always on". I'm not sure what else could be causing the machine to reboot, not sure where to start looking. Any ideas? Thanks ---------- update ---------------- Just looking at the Event Viewer, I see a log message at 8:00:47am every day, which looks like a reboot log statement: Microsoft (R) Windows (R) 5.01.2600 Service Pack 3 Multiprocessor Free. For more information, see Help and Support Center at ...

    Read the article

  • Java Spotlight Episode 150: James Gosling on Java

    - by Roger Brinkley
    Interview with James Gosling, father of Java and Java Champion, on the history of Java, his work at Liquid Robotics, Netbeans, the future of Java and what he sees as the next revolutionary trend in the computer industry. Right-click or Control-click to download this MP3 file. You can also subscribe to the Java Spotlight Podcast Feed to get the latest podcast automatically. If you use iTunes you can open iTunes and subscribe with this link: Java Spotlight Podcast in iTunes. Show Notes Feature Interview James Gosling received a BSc in Computer Science from the University of Calgary, Canada in 1977. He received a PhD in Computer Science from Carnegie-Mellon University in 1983. The title of his thesis was "The Algebraic Manipulation of Constraints". He spent many years as a VP & Fellow at Sun Microsystems. He has built satellite data acquisition systems, a multiprocessor version of Unix, several compilers, mail systems and window managers. He has also built a WYSIWYG text editor, a constraint based drawing editor and a text editor called `Emacs' for Unix systems. At Sun his early activity was as lead engineer of the NeWS window system. He did the original design of the Java programming language and implemented its original compiler and virtual machine. He has been a contributor to the Real-Time Specification for Java, and a researcher at Sun labs where his primary interest was software development tools.     He then was the Chief Technology Officer of Sun's Developer Products Group and the CTO of Sun's Client Software Group. He briefly worked for Oracle after the acquisition of Sun. After a year off, he spent some time at Google and is now the chief software architect at Liquid Robotics where he spends his time writing software for the Waveglider, an autonomous ocean-going robot.

    Read the article

  • Spinlocks, How Much Useful Are They?

    - by unknown
    How often do you find yourself actually using spinlocks in your code? How common is it to come across a situation where using a busy loop actually outperforms the usage of locks? Personally, when I write some sort of code that requires thread safety, I tend to benchmark it with different synchronization primitives, and as far as it goes, it seems like using locks gives better performance than using spinlocks. No matter for how little time I actually hold the lock, the amount of contention I receive when using spinlocks is far greater than the amount I get from using locks (of course, I run my tests on a multiprocessor machine). I realize that it's more likely to come across a spinlock in "low-level" code, but I'm interested to know whether you find it useful in even a more high-level kind of programming?

    Read the article

  • Is there any kind of standard for 8086 multiprocessing?

    - by Earlz
    Back when I made an 8086 emulator I noticed that there was the LOCK prefix intended for synchonization in a multiprocessor environment. Yet the only multitasking I know of for the x86 arch. involves use of the APIC which didn't come around until either the Pentiums or 486s. Was there any kind of standard for 8086 multitasking or was it done by some manufacturer specific extensions to the instruction set and/or special ports? By standard, I mean things like: How do you separate the 2 processors if they both use the same memory? This is impossible without some kind of way to make each processor execute a different piece of code. (or cause an interrupt on only one processor)

    Read the article

  • Simulators for thread scheduling on multicore

    - by shijie xu
    I am seeking a simulator for thread scheduling at multi-core architecture, that is mapping threads to the cores at runtime. During runtime, simulator collects overall cache and IPC statistics. I checked below simulators, but seems there are not sufficient for me: Simplescalar: A simulator only for single core. SESC: multiprocessor simulator with detailed power, thermal, and performance models, QSim: provides instruction-level control of the emulated environment and detailed information about the executing instruction stream. It seems both SESC and QSim supports instructions scheduling instead of thread scheduling on the cores? Anyone can help provide some clues or share experience for this part?

    Read the article

  • Inverted schedctl usage in the JVM

    - by Dave
    The schedctl facility in Solaris allows a thread to request that the kernel defer involuntary preemption for a brief period. The mechanism is strictly advisory - the kernel can opt to ignore the request. Schedctl is typically used to bracket lock critical sections. That, in turn, can avoid convoying -- threads piling up on a critical section behind a preempted lock-holder -- and other lock-related performance pathologies. If you're interested see the man pages for schedctl_start() and schedctl_stop() and the schedctl.h include file. The implementation is very efficient. schedctl_start(), which asks that preemption be deferred, simply stores into a thread-specific structure -- the schedctl block -- that the kernel maps into user-space. Similarly, schedctl_stop() clears the flag set by schedctl_stop() and then checks a "preemption pending" flag in the block. Normally, this will be false, but if set schedctl_stop() will yield to politely grant the CPU to other threads. Note that you can't abuse this facility for long-term preemption avoidance as the deferral is brief. If your thread exceeds the grace period the kernel will preempt it and transiently degrade its effective scheduling priority. Further reading : US05937187 and various papers by Andy Tucker. We'll now switch topics to the implementation of the "synchronized" locking construct in the HotSpot JVM. If a lock is contended then on multiprocessor systems we'll spin briefly to try to avoid context switching. Context switching is wasted work and inflicts various cache and TLB penalties on the threads involved. If context switching were "free" then we'd never spin to avoid switching, but that's not the case. We use an adaptive spin-then-park strategy. One potentially undesirable outcome is that we can be preempted while spinning. When our spinning thread is finally rescheduled the lock may or may not be available. If not, we'll spin and then potentially park (block) again, thus suffering a 2nd context switch. Recall that the reason we spin is to avoid context switching. To avoid this scenario I've found it useful to enable schedctl to request deferral while spinning. But while spinning I've arranged for the code to periodically check or poll the "preemption pending" flag. If that's found set we simply abandon our spinning attempt and park immediately. This avoids the double context-switch scenario above. One annoyance is that the schedctl blocks for the threads in a given process are tightly packed on special pages mapped from kernel space into user-land. As such, writes to the schedctl blocks can cause false sharing on other adjacent blocks. Hopefully the kernel folks will make changes to avoid this by padding and aligning the blocks to ensure that one cache line underlies at most one schedctl block at any one time.

    Read the article

  • How can I make a universal construction more efficient?

    - by VF1
    A "universal construction" is a wrapper class for a sequential object that enables it to be linearized (a strong consistency condition for concurrent objects). For instance, here's an adapted wait-free construction, in Java, from [1], which presumes the existence of a wait-free queue that satisfies the interface WFQ (which only requires one-time consensus between threads) and assumes a Sequential interface: public interface WFQ<T> // "FIFO" iteration { int enqueue(T t); // returns the sequence number of t Iterable<T> iterateUntil(int max); // iterates until sequence max } public interface Sequential { // Apply an invocation (method + arguments) // and get a response (return value + state) Response apply(Invocation i); } public interface Factory<T> { T generate(); } // generate new default object public interface Universal extends Sequential {} public class SlowUniversal implements Universal { Factory<? extends Sequential> generator; WFQ<Invocation> wfq = new WFQ<Invocation>(); Universal(Factory<? extends Sequential> g) { generator = g; } public Response apply(Invocation i) { int max = wfq.enqueue(i); Sequential s = generator.generate(); for(Invocation invoc : wfq.iterateUntil(max)) s.apply(invoc); return s.apply(i); } } This implementation isn't very satisfying, however, since it presumes determinism of a Sequential and is really slow. I attempted to add memory recycling: public interface WFQD<T> extends WFQ<T> { T dequeue(int n); } // dequeues only when n is the tail, else assists other threads public interface CopyableSequential extends Sequential { CopyableSequential copy(); } public class RecyclingUniversal implements Universal { WFQD<CopyableSequential> wfqd = new WFQD<CopyableSequential>(); Universal(CopyableSequential init) { wfqd.enqueue(init); } public Response apply(Invocation i) { int max = wfqd.enqueue(i); CopyableSequential cs = null; int ctr = max; for(CopyableSequential csq : wfq.iterateUntil(max)) if(--max == 0) cs = csq.copy(); wfqd.dequeue(max); return cs.apply(i); } } Here are my specific questions regarding the extension: Does my implementation create a linearizable multi-threaded version of a CopyableSequential? Is it possible extend memory recycling without extending the interface (perhaps my new methods trivialize the problem)? My implementation only reduces memory when a thread returns, so can this be strengthened? [1] provided an implementation for WFQ<T>, not WFQD<T> - one does exist, though, correct? [1] Herlihy and Shavit, The Art of Multiprocessor Programming.

    Read the article

  • 2008 Sever Randomly reboots.

    - by Jeff
    I'm out of ideas here. We have a 2008 Server that keeps rebooting 2-3 times a day at completely random times with an "Unexpected Shutdown" event. There are no Dumps, no events leading to it just like it loses power then comes back online. I ran a Diagnostic of the power supply and it has had continuous power for months. In addition, the temperature of the processors are maxing out at 40 degrees Celsius. Anyone have any ideas how to figure out why this is restarting all the time? This is a DMZed Web server so it doesn't do too much process wise. Here are the specs: Host Name: ~~~ OS Name: Microsoft Windows Server 2008 R2 Standard OS Version: 6.1.7600 N/A Build 7600 OS Manufacturer: Microsoft Corporation OS Configuration: Standalone Server OS Build Type: Multiprocessor Free Registered Owner: Windows User Registered Organization: Product ID: ~~~ Original Install Date: 5/27/2010, 4:25:47 PM System Boot Time: 2/14/2011, 5:35:01 PM System Manufacturer: HP System Model: ProLiant DL380 G6 System Type: x64-based PC Processor(s): 1 Processor(s) Installed. [01]: Intel64 Family 6 Model 26 Stepping 5 GenuineIntel ~1586 Mhz BIOS Version: HP P62, 8/16/2010 Windows Directory: C:\Windows System Directory: C:\Windows\system32 Boot Device: \Device\HarddiskVolume1 System Locale: en-us;English (United States) Input Locale: en-us;English (United States) Time Zone: (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada) Total Physical Memory: 4,086 MB Available Physical Memory: 2,775 MB Virtual Memory: Max Size: 8,170 MB Virtual Memory: Available: 6,691 MB Virtual Memory: In Use: 1,479 MB Page File Location(s): C:\pagefile.sys

    Read the article

  • XP Pro freezes on welcome screen

    - by Peter B
    I have a problem that sounds much the same as http://superuser.com/questions/83101/how-to-diagnose-a-freeze-on-startup-in-windows-xp About every 2nd or 3rd boot, XP-Pro freezes on the Welcome page (the one showing the user name icons). The mouse moves the cursor OK, but clicking on an icon does nothing, and neither does any keystroke. If you press too many keys there is a beep and after that the mouse won't move the cursor anymore. The work-around is always to reboot into Safe mode and request a CHKDSK /R After this, the next boot is fine. There are no related entries in the Event log when the problem occurs. The only two entries are: "Microsoft (R) Windows (R) 5.01. 2600 Service Pack 3 Multiprocessor Free." "The Event log service was started." Update 1: Many thanks for that but I found no problems with any diagnostics I have run. But, I have managed to locate, and code round, the source of the problem - which is with whatever processing goes on behind the XP Welcome (as opposed to "classic") login screen. Unfortunately, having classic login means you don't get the useful Fast User Switching (FUS) login/switch mode. So, to retain this, my fix is: Add a Windows shutdown script (using gpedit.msc) to force "classic" mode for the first logon after next XP startup, by running: reg add "hklm\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Winlogon" /v LogonType /t REG_DWORD /d 0 /f Add a Scheduled Task to run at User Logon that enables Welcome screen (and hence FUS) by running the same command with 1 instead of 0 after the /d flag. The task is run as a privileged user (who can run "reg add").

    Read the article

1 2  | Next Page >