Search Results

Search found 20904 results on 837 pages for 'disk performance'.

Page 109/837 | < Previous Page | 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116  | Next Page >

  • Defragment / Performance Monitor without Task Scheduler

    - by mjaggard
    My organisation has a policy of disabling Task Scheduler on all servers and workstations (don't ask, I tried once to wrestle the pig). I need to collect performance stats using Data Collector Sets in Windows 7 or Windows 2008 but the Performance Monitor interface requires Task Scheduler to be running. Is this possible because I'm not trying to schedule anything (except the collection of WMI information every 15 seconds but I doubt it hands that task off to the task scheduler)? Is there any way to trick it into thinking Task Scheduler is running? If not, is there any way to temporarily override the group policy to allow Task Scheduler to run? I've found that most group policy can be overridden in this way by an Administrator by editing the registry. On exactly the same vein, I want to defragment a hard disk on one of my workstations, but I can't get it to start because of the dependancy on Task Scheduler - is it possible to overcome this?

    Read the article

  • optimizing file share performance on Win2k8?

    - by Kirk Marple
    We have a case where we're accessing a RAID array (drive E:) on a Windows Server 2008 SP2 x86 box. (Recently installed, nothing other than SQL Server 2005 on the server.) In one scenario, when directly accessing it (E:\folder\file.xxx) we get 45MBps throughput to a video file. If we access the same file on the same array, but through UNC path (\server\folder\file.xxx) we get about 23MBps throughput with the exact same test. Obviously the second test is going through more layers of the stack, but that's a major performance hit. What tuning should we be looking at for making the UNC path be closer in performance to the direct access case? Thanks, Kirk (corrected: it is CIFS not SMB, but generalized title to 'file share'.) (additional info: this happens during the read from a single file, not an issue across multiple connections. the file is on the local machine, but exposed via file share. so client and file server are both same Windows 2008 server.)

    Read the article

  • Windows 7 - Deleted boot files!

    - by RadiantHex
    Hi folks, I am (was) using an install of Win7 on the C Disk Partition, I formatted the D Disk Parition, and now Win7 fails to bootup. I suspect the bootup config files were stored within the D Partition, despite the install residing on the C Partition. Any ideas on how I can fix this? :)

    Read the article

  • Windows 7 - Deleted boot files!

    - by RadiantHex
    Hi folks, I am (was) using an install of Win7 on the C Disk Partition, I formatted the D Disk Parition, and now Win7 fails to bootup. I suspect the bootup config files were stored within the D Partition, despite the install residing on the C Partition. This is the error I'm getting: Reboot and Select proper Boot device Any ideas on how I can fix this? :)

    Read the article

  • What do you use for a RAM disk on Windows Server?

    - by thelsdj
    We currently use AR Soft RAM Disk on some Windows 2003 servers for storing short lived temporary files. Looking forward to a move to 64-bit Windows Server 2008 I'm wondering what options there are for a RAM disk since it appears AR Soft RAM Disk was discontinued in 2005. I'm not looking for any physical disk backing, just a pure RAM disk that appears like a normal drive to Windows. Does anyone have any experience with RAM disks on Windows Server 2008, especially for 64-bit?

    Read the article

  • Any reason not to disable the Windows pagefile given enough physical RAM?

    - by Evgeny
    The question of disabling the Windows pagefile has already been discussed quite a bit, for example here and here and here. People continue to upvote answers that say "you should not disable your pagefile even if you have plenty of RAM", but I have yet to see any concrete, verifiable reasons being given for this advice. As far as I can see, if you never need to read from the pagefile (because you have enough RAM) then performance could only be worse with it enabled due to Windows pre-emptively writing to it. At best, performance would be the same. I can't see how it could possibly be improved by writing data you never need to read. So my question is: Assuming that I have enough physical RAM for everything I do, is there any reason I should not disable the pagefile? Let's say the version of Windows is Windows XP x64 SP2 or Windows Server 2003 x64 SP2 (same thing). If it's different for Windows Server 2008 x64 I'd be interested to hear an answer for that as well. I'm looking for specific, objective reasons from good sources, not just opinions. Something like "here are the benchmarks done with and without a pagefile and the results were better with a pagefile, even with enough RAM" or "according to this MS KB article problem X occurs if you disable the pagefile". So far the only reasons I've seen mentioned are: Even if you think you have enough RAM you might run out. OK, but for the purposes of this question, let's just take it as a given that I have enough. Maybe I only ever read my email and I have 16GB RAM. Or 128GB. Or 1TB. Or whatever - but it's enough for 100% of what I do, 100% of the time. Another way to think of it is: if I have x MB physical RAM and y MB pagefile and I never run out of RAM in that configuration, would I not be better off, performance-wise, with x+y MB physical RAM and no pagefile? Windows is "used to" having a paging file and it might not function as reliably (from Understanding the Impact of RAM on Overall System Performance That's rather vague and I find it hard to believe, given that MS has provided the option to disable the pagefile. Windows knows what it's doing better than you. No - it doesn't know that I won't run more programs or load more data, but I do.

    Read the article

  • Disk IO causing high load on Xen/CentOS guest

    - by Peter Lindqvist
    I'm having serious issues with a xen based server, this is on the guest partition. It's a paravirtualized CentOS 5.5. The following numbers are taken from top while copying a large file over the network. If i copy the file another time the speed decreases in relation to load average. So the second time it's half the speed of the first time. It needs some time to cool off after this. Load average slowly decreases until it's once again usable. ls / takes about 30 seconds. top - 13:26:44 up 13 days, 21:44, 2 users, load average: 7.03, 5.08, 3.15 Tasks: 134 total, 2 running, 132 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 0.0%us, 0.1%sy, 0.0%ni, 25.3%id, 74.5%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.1%st Mem: 1048752k total, 1041460k used, 7292k free, 3116k buffers Swap: 2129912k total, 40k used, 2129872k free, 904740k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 1506 root 10 -5 0 0 0 S 0.3 0.0 0:03.94 cifsd 1 root 15 0 2172 644 556 S 0.0 0.1 0:00.08 init Meanwhile the host is ~0.5 load avg and steady over time. ~50% wait Server hardware is dual xeon, 3gb ram, 170gb scsi 320 10k rpm, and shouldn't have any problems with copying files over the network. disk = [ "tap:aio:/vm/dev01.img,xvda,w" ] I also get these in the log INFO: task syslogd:1350 blocked for more than 120 seconds. "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message. syslogd D 00062E4F 2208 1350 1 1353 1312 (NOTLB) c0ef0ed0 00000286 6e71a411 00062e4f c0ef0f18 00000009 c0f20000 6e738bfd 00062e4f 0001e7ec c0f2010c c181a724 c1abd200 00000000 ffffffff c0ef0ecc c041a180 00000000 c0ef0ed8 c03d6a50 00000000 00000000 c03d6a00 00000000 Call Trace: [<c041a180>] __wake_up+0x2a/0x3d [<ee06a1ea>] log_wait_commit+0x80/0xc7 [jbd] [<c043128b>] autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x2d [<ee065661>] journal_stop+0x195/0x1ba [jbd] [<c0490a32>] __writeback_single_inode+0x1a3/0x2af [<c04568ea>] do_writepages+0x2b/0x32 [<c045239b>] __filemap_fdatawrite_range+0x66/0x72 [<c04910ce>] sync_inode+0x19/0x24 [<ee09b007>] ext3_sync_file+0xaf/0xc4 [ext3] [<c047426f>] do_fsync+0x41/0x83 [<c04742ce>] __do_fsync+0x1d/0x2b [<c0405413>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb ======================= I have tried disabling irqbalanced as suggested here but it does not seem to make any difference.

    Read the article

  • Do I dare clicking Delete Volume instead of Delete Partition?

    - by Olle
    I have a VMWare machine with one VM. That VM has a virtual disk which in windows is configured with two partitions and then a lot of slack space, as illustrated here: http://piclair.com/q8g5s What I want to do is delete the partition of 639 GB. However, since it's a dynamic disk, the right menu item says "Delete Volume" instead of "Delete Partition" (when I right click the 639GB space). My question is weather I dare to use "Delete Volume". I have read doing stuff like this on a dynamic volume can cause other partitions/volumes to go corrupt.

    Read the article

  • Peforming an Audit for SQL Server 2008

    - by Nai
    Hi all, Do you guys have any good step by step type links for performing an SQL Server 2008 Performance Audit? I know Brad McGehee has written extensively on this but for SQL Server 2005 over at http://www.sql-server-performance.com. But are any such articles for SQL Server 2008? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • How can ASP.NET's "Request Wait Time" be 0 when "Requests Queued" is consistently in the hundreds?

    - by ondrej
    I'm curious why Performance Monitor claims I always have a few hundred ASP.NET 3.5 requests "queued". The "Requests Queued" "ASP.NET v2.0.50727" performance counter is hovering in the few-hundred range despite the fact "Request Wait Time" is consistently 0. If each and every request never waits even a fraction of a millisecond, how could it be in the queue? The "ASP.NET Apps v2.0.50727" counters for "Requests In Application Queue" and "Request Wait Time" are always 0.

    Read the article

  • increase performance of virtual machines on the 27" imac

    - by evan
    I'm using a 27" iMac (i7, 8GB RAM) at work and normally run two or three virtual machines at the same time, which hurts the performance of each virtual machine. I've learned on these forums the best way to increase virtual machine performance (aside from RAM) is to have them running on a separate hard drive from the one the OS is on. Of course with the iMac you can only have one hard drive and not even an SAS or solid state drive (well you could probably take it apart and put one in yourself but I wouldn't be permitted to do that). That being said, do you think it would help to run one or more virtual machines from a firewire external drive (or a usb 2.0)? Thanks for your input!

    Read the article

  • MD3200i Slow Performance and Queue Depth

    - by Caleb_S
    Read performance on our SAN is slow under certain workloads. When we compare this to some local storage, we find the local storage performing 2x as fast. The SAN performs well with a high Queue Depth, and poorly with a low queue depth. However, the local storage performs well with a low Queue Depth. I'd like to know the reason for this occurring and find out what the specific limiting factor is in this situation. MD3200i iSCSI SAN ($15,000) 6 x 600GB 15k SAS RAID5 6 x 2TB 7.2k NLS RAID5 XCOPY /j Benchmark: (Slow) 15k Array - 71MB/s (Queue Depth 1) 7.2k Array- 71MB/s (Queue Depth 1) Robycopy /MT:32 Benchmark: (Fast) 15k Array - 171MB/s (Queue Depth ~12) 7.2k Array- 128MB/s (Queue Depth ~12) , , Read Performance on a Local controller is fast under the workload the SAN is slow at. , HighPoint 2230 RAID Controller ($600) 4 x 1TB 7.2k SATA RAID5 XCOPY /j Benchmark: 7.2k Array - 145MB/s (Queue Depth 1) (appears to max out the SATA bus)

    Read the article

  • Tools to monitor guest OS performance in vSphere

    - by Quick Joe Smith
    I am looking for some tool or way to retrieve performance data from guest VMs running under vSphere 4.1. I am currently interested in the 4 basic metrics: CPU(%), Memory(%), Disk availability(%) & Network utilisation(Kb/s). The issue I have is that all of vSphere's performance data is from a ESXi host perspective (active, shared, consumed, overhead, swapped etc.) which is far removed from the data from the VM's own perspective. For instance, I have a Windows server VM idling, using around 410MB (~25% of its allocated 2GB) as reported by Task Manager, and this is the value I'm after. vSphere's metrics seem unable to arrive at this figure by any reliable and repeatable means. Is anyone aware of tools that can obtain this kind of data? The simpler, the better.

    Read the article

  • Enabling quota and doing quotacheck on reboot

    - by nixnotwin
    I have setup quota for home directories on ubuntu 10.04 server. I followed these tutorials: 5 Steps to Setup User and Group Disk Quota and Disk Quota This code I used at fstab file: /dev/sda1 /home ext4 defaults,usrjquota=aquota.user,grpjquota=aquota.grp,jqfmt=vfsv0 1 1 I have doubts about whether following steps are necessary: Adding quotaon -a >/dev/null 2>&1 to /etc/rc.local and adding quotacheck -avug to /etc/cron.daily/quotacheck

    Read the article

  • Cassandra on heterogeneous servers

    - by happy-coding
    I am currently running 4 cassandra nodes with the following hardware in a Apache Cassandra cluster: AMD Athlon 64 X2 6000+ 8G RAM 750G hard disk It shows not such a good writing performance and a really bad read performance with sometimes also timeouts. I was wondering if it makes sense to add 2 nodes with a different hardware (8 CPUs and more RAM) to improve this. Or does a cassandra cluster works best with the same hardware in every node? Thanks & best regards

    Read the article

  • a load balancing scenario using HAProxy and keepalived shows no performance advantage

    - by chakoshi
    Hi, I am trying to setup a load balanced web server scenario, using two HAproxy load balancers and two debian web servers following this guide http://www.howtoforge.com/setting-up-a-high-availability-load-balancer-with-haproxy-keepalived-on-debian-lenny. the setup is working but the results of simple performance benchmarking is not what I expected. I tried apache benchmark tool to send lots of requests to servers (one time directly testing one of the web servers and the other time testing through the load balancer) using the command "ab -n 1000000 -c 500 http://IP/index.html", but the test results shows better performance for the single server without load balancer. can any one tell me if I'm going wrong on some thing?

    Read the article

  • Fedora 11 System - Failed Hard Drive Removed, and Boot gets GRUB Hard Disk Error

    - by Mindful
    Greetings, I have a machine with a 120GB ATA drive that has what I thought to be non-essential data on it. I also have a 320GB SATA hard drive with the OS/Application/Files (good data I want to keep). My 120GB ATA is failing I believe, as my computer kept slowing to a halt. However, when I move the drive from BIOS my computer will not start, says "GRUB Hard Disk Error". I know that my Fedora system has an LVM setup. I am looking to just remove the 120GB drive from "the mix", and just have one hard drive. How do I recover ? Thank you. I have access to a Linux Live CD right now and can make any changes. However, it won't boot into my OS - it fails. UPDATE: here's my Grub.Conf # grub.conf generated by anaconda # # Note that you do not have to rerun grub after making changes to this file # NOTICE: You have a /boot partition. This means that # all kernel and initrd paths are relative to /boot/, eg. # root (hd1,0) # kernel /vmlinuz-version ro root=/dev/VolGroup00/LogVol00 # initrd /initrd-version.img #boot=/dev/sda1 default=0 timeout=5 splashimage=(hd1,0)/grub/splash.xpm.gz hiddenmenu title Fedora (2.6.30.10-105.2.23.fc11.i686.PAE) root (hd1,0) kernel /vmlinuz-2.6.30.10-105.2.23.fc11.i686.PAE ro root=/dev/VolGroup00/LogVol00 rhgb quiet initrd /initrd-2.6.30.10-105.2.23.fc11.i686.PAE.img title Fedora (2.6.30.9-102.fc11.i686.PAE) root (hd1,0) kernel /vmlinuz-2.6.30.9-102.fc11.i686.PAE ro root=/dev/VolGroup00/LogVol00 rhgb quiet initrd /initrd-2.6.30.9-102.fc11.i686.PAE.img title Fedora (2.6.27.24-170.2.68.fc10.i686.PAE) root (hd1,0) kernel /vmlinuz-2.6.27.24-170.2.68.fc10.i686.PAE ro root=/dev/VolGroup00/LogVol00 rhgb quiet initrd /initrd-2.6.27.24-170.2.68.fc10.i686.PAE.img title Fedora (2.6.27.24-170.2.68.fc10.i686) root (hd1,0) kernel /vmlinuz-2.6.27.24-170.2.68.fc10.i686 ro root=/dev/VolGroup00/LogVol00 rhgb quiet initrd /initrd-2.6.27.24-170.2.68.fc10.i686.img title Fedora (2.6.27.21-170.2.56.fc10.i686) root (hd1,0) kernel /vmlinuz-2.6.27.21-170.2.56.fc10.i686 ro root=/dev/VolGroup00/LogVol00 rhgb quiet initrd /initrd-2.6.27.21-170.2.56.fc10.i686.img title Fedora (2.6.27.19-170.2.35.fc10.i686) root (hd1,0) kernel /vmlinuz-2.6.27.19-170.2.35.fc10.i686 ro root=/dev/VolGroup00/LogVol00 rhgb quiet initrd /initrd-2.6.27.19-170.2.35.fc10.i686.img title Upgrade to Fedora 10 (Cambridge) kernel /upgrade/vmlinuz preupgrade repo=hd::/var/cache/yum/preupgrade stage2=http://chi-10g-1-mirror.fastsoft.net/pub/linux/fedora/linux/releases/10/Fedora/i386/os/images/install.img ks=hd:UUID=f11769ba-29bc-46de-8c40-a949720a438e:/upgrade/ks.cfg initrd /upgrade/initrd.img title Win rootnoverify (hd0,0) chainloader +1

    Read the article

  • How much does HDD cache matter with Linux softraid?

    - by Jawa
    I'm in a process of renewing/expanding my disk sets, but not quite sure what kind of disks to get, cache-wise. What difference does disk cache amount of 16/32/64MB do, in capacities of, say, 1/1.5/2TB SATA disks? The disks will be used in a webapp server and in a media workstation, with Linux's softraid in raid-1/raid-5 configurations. Note, that as both purposes are purely for a hobby, the pricetag for a dozen of disks is a big issue.

    Read the article

  • TCP/IP performance tuning under KVM/Qemu

    - by vpetersson
    With more and more companies switching to public cloud services, I'm curious what you guys' thoughts are on TCP/IP tuning in the cloud. Is it worth bothering with? Given that you don't have access to the host-server, you're somewhat limited I presume Let's say for the sake of the argument that you're running three MongoDB-servers in a replica-set on FreeBSD or Linux that all sync over an internal network. I'd also be curious if anyone made any actual performance benchmarks to back up their arguments. I benchmarked the various network drivers available for KVM/Qemu here, but I'm curious what the gurus here suggest to tune further. I started playing around a bit with the tuning-recommendations as suggested over here, but interestingly enough I saw a decrease in performance, rather than an increase, but perhaps I didn't fully understand the tweaks. Update: I did a few more benchmarks and posted the result here. Unfortunately the result wasn't really what I expected.

    Read the article

  • iSCSI SAN RAID 10 Performance -- Poor Read, Good Write

    - by Litzner
    I have a EqualLogic PS4000 SAN unit with the latest firmware, setup in RAID 10. I have 3 2TB Volumes on the SAN shared out via iSCSI on 2 eth ports on two different subnets. I have moved a test server over to this newly setup SAN, and my testing is showing me a problem. I am getting dismal read performance in everything except a test with 32 queue depth (see attach image) Write performance seems to be right about where it should be. I have tried MPIO on and off, on was slightly better but not much.

    Read the article

  • Routing and Remote Access Service won't start after full disk

    - by NKCSS
    The HDD of the server was out of disk space, and after a reboot, RRAS won't start anymore on my 2008 R2 server. Error Details: Log Name: System Source: RemoteAccess Date: 2/5/2012 9:39:52 PM Event ID: 20153 Task Category: None Level: Error Keywords: Classic User: N/A Computer: Windows14111.<snip> Description: The currently configured accounting provider failed to load and initialize successfully. The connection was prevented because of a policy configured on your RAS/VPN server. Specifically, the authentication method used by the server to verify your username and password may not match the authentication method configured in your connection profile. Please contact the Administrator of the RAS server and notify them of this error. Event Xml: <Event xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/win/2004/08/events/event"> <System> <Provider Name="RemoteAccess" /> <EventID Qualifiers="0">20153</EventID> <Level>2</Level> <Task>0</Task> <Keywords>0x80000000000000</Keywords> <TimeCreated SystemTime="2012-02-05T20:39:52.000Z" /> <EventRecordID>12148869</EventRecordID> <Channel>System</Channel> <Computer>Windows14111.<snip></Computer> <Security /> </System> <EventData> <Data>The connection was prevented because of a policy configured on your RAS/VPN server. Specifically, the authentication method used by the server to verify your username and password may not match the authentication method configured in your connection profile. Please contact the Administrator of the RAS server and notify them of this error.</Data> <Binary>2C030000</Binary> </EventData> </Event> I think it has something to do with a corrupt config file, but I am unsure of what to do. I Removed the RRAS role, rebooted, and re-added, but it keeps failing with the same error. Thanks in advance. [UPDATE] If i set the accounting provider from 'Windows' to '' the service starts but VPN won't work. Any ideas how this can be repaired?

    Read the article

  • Addons which actually make Firefox run faster?

    - by Zombies
    I would like to know of addons which actually enhance firefox's performance, both intentionally and unintentionally. I find that firefox tends to have major performance issues with certain websites. These websites tend to have a fair amount of javascript and css, and probably a large dom tree which may even be growing dynamically through javascript too. The worse offenders are those with heavy javascript, use heavy facebook integration, websites with non performant javascript, excessive javascript and websites with too many advertisements.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116  | Next Page >