Search Results

Search found 19055 results on 763 pages for 'high performance'.

Page 13/763 | < Previous Page | 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  | Next Page >

• Old CRT screen's high resolution doesn't work anymore on windows 7

  - by Mixxiphoid

  One year ago I decided to switch from Windows XP to Windows 7. I had a 17" CRT monitor with a screen resolution of 1600x1200 which worked fine on Windows XP. While installing Windows 7 everything went well until Windows 7 was going to install the video card its driver. Windows 7 puts the screen to its recommended resolution and my screen became black. I waited a few minutes to be sure the installation was finished. I turned off the computer by hand and restarted the computer on a resolution of 800x640. When windows 7 was done installing I went to screen resolutions and the resolution of 1600x1200 was on the top of the list with '(recommended)' next to it. I tried putting it on 1600x1200 but again my screen went black. I installed all windows 7 updates including the video card driver from the NVidia site (NOT from Windows 7). I tried about everything to make it work on 1600x1200 but with no succes. The highest resolution I got with the crt monitor was 1280x1024. I had a TFT screen which had 1280x1024 as max resolution and had better colors, so I used that one till today. My video card is 9600GT and my power supply is beyond sufficient. I even tried to install the driver I had on XP to see if it worked, but no results. I tried classic mode on windows 7, changed the dpi, the frequentie and the monitor settings, but nothing worked. I really like a vertical resolution of 1200, but it seems today I'm bound to all those standard monitors with a resolution of 1980x1024... Can anybody explain to me what the cause is that it worked on Windows XP but not on Windows 7? And maybe a solution to the problem (I actually gave up on getting it fixed...) Thanks a lot in advance. SOLUTION I downloaded the according monitor driver and installed it. Next I rebooted my computer on low resolution (800x640) and connected the CRT monitor. When Windows 7 booted successfully I went to computer management and 'update the driver' of my monitor. I manually selected 'Generic PnP monitor' and made that one active. I want to advanced settings at 'Screen resolution' and selected the mode '1600x1200 (32-bit) 80 Hertz (95 Hertz did not work). Now I had my resolution on 1600x1200. I repeated the earlier step to select the original monitor again instead of the Generic monitor. Quite a way to solve this problem, but it worked! Thanks a lot you all.

  Read the article

• OpenVPN multiple servers on the same subnet, high availability

  - by andre

  Hey everyone. Let me start by saying that my Linux experience isn't super awesome but I can usually find my way around things easily. Over at work we have an OpenVPN setup that's been due for some improvement for a while now. The main server (tap mode) runs in our office, behind a rather slow DSL connection. The main problem is that, since I'm usually out of the office, every time I want to access something on the virtual network I have to go through that server to get anywhere else. We have two servers up on 100 Mbit connections that we use for development and production purposes, about 3 more servers in the office (one of them behind a different T1 line for VOIP) and about two dozen clients who use the network on a daily basis from various locations. We've had situations where network routing (outside of our control) would not allow people to reach our main OpenVPN server whilst the other locations were connectable. Also any time someone outside the office wants to fetch something from any of the servers (say, a 500 MB code repository), a whopping 20 KB/s download speed is just unacceptable these days (did I mention slow DSL? ok). We had to implement traffic shaping on this server since maxing out this connection was fairly trivial. I had the thought of running two (or more) OpenVPN servers in the network. These would have to have the same subnet though, as our application relies on virtual network's IP addresses for some of its core functionality. The clients would also preferably retain the same IP addresses but that's not vital. For simplicity, lets call the current server office and the second server I'm setting up, cloud. Call the server on the T1 phone. This proved to be rather complex because as soon as I connect to cloud, I cannot see office. Any routes to a server that would go through office also do not work while I'm connected to cloud (no ping, nothing) and vice-versa. There's no rules for iptables that would be blocking the traffic either. Recently I came across this article on linuxjournal but the solution they provide seems to only cover the use of two servers and somewhat outdated (can't even find much documentation, their wiki is offline). They also state that adding more servers would be a complex task. Ideally I would like to keep the existing server office running the virtual network and also run the OpenVPN daemon on the cloud and phone servers (100 Mbit and very reliable connection, respectively) so that we're on safe ground in case of a hardware failure, DSL failure, etc. So, in essence, I'm looking for a highly available OpenVPN solution (fix, patch, hack, tweak, whatever you want to call it) that will accept connections on multiple hosts (2 or more) whilst keeping the same IP address subnet regardless of the server to which you connect to. Thanks for reading and sorry for the long post, I hope it gets the point across :P

  Read the article

• Brand new Seagate HDD has high raw read error rate

  - by kpax

  I've just purchased a brand new Seagate ST31000524AS 1TB HDD. Manufacture date shows as January 2012 (yes that's as new as new can get), so must be one of the new batches from the post-flood Thailand. Anyway, I downloaded a copy of Active Hard Disk Monitor tool to check the S.M.A.R.T. parameters and I find the parameter Raw Read Error Rate is very low. Should I be worried? Will this rectify over time? This hdd is just 7 hours old; what gives? Edit: I meant high raw read error rate - Title updated accordingly

  Read the article

• High availability for databases (DRBD + GFS)?

  - by EvanAlm

  Does it work to have like an MySQL (or any other relational database) on the GFS (with DRBD) and have multiple nodes reading and writing to it? Is that the "best" way of providing a HA database/application setup if so? Is RHEL (cluster suite) a good way to set up this? (or centos)

  Read the article

• SAN/NAS with high availability?

  - by netvope

  I have two servers that I plan to use for storage. Each of them has a few SATA disks directly attached. I want the storage to be available even if one of the storage servers is down (preferably the clients wouldn't even notice that the fail-over, although I'm not sure if this is possible). The clients may access the storage via NFS and samba, but this is not a must; I could use something else if needed. I found this guide, Installing and Configuring Openfiler with DRBD and Heartbeat, which apparently does the thing I want. It relies on three components, Openfiler, DRBD, and Heartbeat, and all three of them need to be configured separately. I'm wondering are there simpler solutions? Is using DRBD+Heartbeat the best practice for a situation like mine? I'm also interested to know if there are alternatives that don't depend on DRBD.

  Read the article

• High Load average threshold in linux

  - by user2481010

  My one of friend said that his server load average sometime goes above 500-1000, for me it is strange value because I never saw load average more than 10. I asked him give me some snapshot of top and memory usages, he gave following details: TOP USAGES top - 06:06:03 up 117 days, 23:02, 2 users, load average: 147.37, 44.57, 15.95 Tasks: 116 total, 2 running, 113 sleeping, 0 stopped, 1 zombie Cpu(s): 16.6%us, 6.9%sy, 0.0%ni, 9.2%id, 66.5%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.8%si, 0.0%st Mem: 8161648k total, 7779528k used, 382120k free, 3296k buffers Swap: 5242872k total, 1293072k used, 3949800k free, 168660k cached Free $ free -gt total used free shared buffers cached Mem: 7 6 1 0 0 4 -/+ buffers/cache: 1 5 Swap: 4 0 4 Total: 12 6 6 Total cpu $ nproc 8 my question is it possible load average more than 100 on 8 core,12 GB mem Server? because I read many tutorial,article on load average, it said that thumb rule is "number of cores = max load" according to thumb rule here is max load average 16 then how his server running with 147.37 load server? he said that it is least value (147.37) some time goes more than 500.

  Read the article

• High frequency, kernel bypass vs tuning kernels?

  - by Keith

  I often hear tales about High Frequency shops using network cards which do kernel bypass. However, I also often hear about them using operating systems where they "tune" the kernel. If they are bypassing the kernel, do they need to tune the kernel? Is it a case of they do both because whilst the network packets will bypass the kernel due to the card, there is still all the other stuff going on which tuning the kernel would help? So in other words, they use both approaches, one is just to speed up network activity and the other makes the OS generally more responsive/faster? I ask because a friend of mine who works within this industry once said they don't really bother with kernel tuning anymore-because they use kernel bypass network cards? This didn't make too much sense as I thought you would always want a faster kernel for all the CPU-offloaded calculations.

  Read the article

• High CPU Steal percentage on Amazon EC2 Instance

  - by Aditya Patawari

  I am experiencing high CPU steal percentage in a Amazon EC2 large instance. I know it means that my virtual CPU is waiting on the real CPU of the machine for time. My question is that what can I do to reduce this percentage and get maximum out of the CPU? Steal percentage is consistently at 20%. System load crosses 10 when this happens. I have checked memory and network and I am sure that they are not the bottleneck. Is that normal for such environment? Also are there any system level optimization techniques for reducing steal percentage form the virtual instance? avg-cpu: %user %nice %system %iowait %steal %idle 52.38 0.00 8.23 0.00 21.21 18.18

  Read the article

• Poor disk performance with high disk capacity usage

  - by GoldenNewby

  I've heard numerous times in the web hosting industry that using "too much" disk space on a drive is bad for performance. Is this just a myth? Can someone explain why this is an issue, even in a situation where the amount of IO done to the drive would be the same at 10% as it would be at 90%? I'm especially curious in the case of virtual servers. If I set up 10 Logical volumes as the virtual disks for some VMs, is it going to run better if I "waste" 20% of the disk space?

  Read the article

• 2 servers, high availability and faster response

  - by user17886

  I recently bought a second webserver because I worry about hardware failure of my old server. Now that I have that second server I wish to do a little more then just have one server standby and replicate all day. As long as it's there I might as well get some advantage our of it ! I have a website powered by ubuntu 12.04, nginx, php-fpm, apc, mysql (5.5) and couchdb. Im currently testing configurations where i can achieve failover AND make good use of the extra harware for faster responses / distributed load. The setup I am testing nowinvolves heartbeat for ip failover and two identical servers. Of the two servers only one has a public ip adress. If one server crashes the other server takes over the public ip adress. On an incoming request nginx forwards the request tot php-fpm to either server a of server b (50/50 if both servers are alive). Once the request has been send to php-fpm both servers look at localhost for the mysql server. I use master-master mysql replication for this. The file system is synced with lsyncd. This works pretty well but Im reading it's discouraged by the (mysql) community. Another option I could think of is to use one server as a mysql master and one server as a web/php server. The servers would still sync their filesystem, would still run the same duplicate software (nginx,mysql) but master slave mysql replication could be used. As long as bother servers are alive I could just prefer nginx to listen to ip a and mysql to ip b. If one server is down, the other server could take over the task of the other server, simply by ip switching. But im completely new at this so I would greatly value your expert advice. Is either of the two setups any good ? If you have any thoughts on this please let me know ! PS, virtualisation, hosting on different locations or active/passive setups are not solutions im looking for. I find virtual server either too slow or too expensive. I already have a passive failover on another location. But in case of a crash I found the site was still unreachable for too long due to dns caching.

  Read the article

• As a programmer, should I know low and high-level programming languages?

  - by job

  I been contacted to do some work remote controlling LEDs displays over TCP/IP, but my experience and preparation is mostly about high-level programming language. I said that to the person who contact me about the work and he told me that: "if you call yourself a programmer you should know all these things" Should a programmer really know the details of low-level programming? Or can I treat it as a black box concept, as theoretical knowledge but not necessarily doing it or implementing low level language solutions, having in mind that low-level programming is not my expertise?

  Read the article

• Read only array, deep copy or retrieve copies one by one? (Performance and Memory)

  - by Arthur Wulf White

  In a garbage collection based system, what is the most effective way to handle a read only array if such a structure does not exist natively in the language. Is it better to return a copy of an array or allow other classes to retrieve copies of the objects stored in the array one by one? @JustinSkiles: It is not very broad. It is performance related and can actually be answered specifically for two general cases. You only need very few items: in this situation it's more effective to retrieve copies of the objects one by one. You wish to iterate over 30% or more objects. In this cases it is superior to retrieve all the array at once. This saves on functions calls. Function calls are very expansive when compared to reading directly from an array. A good specific answer could include performance, reading from an array and reading indirectly through a function. It is a simple performance related question.

  Read the article

• Insufficient channel capacity of 1GBit

  - by Roman S

  There is a Caching Server (Varnish): it receives data from Amazon S3 on request, saves it for some time and gives it to the client. We have encountered the problem of insufficient channel capacity of 1GBit. Peak load within 4 hours completely chokes the channel. Server performance is sufficient for now. Approximately 4.5TB of data are transmitted per day. More than 100TB are accumulated per month. The first thought that comes to mind is simply to add one more 1GBit port and sleep peacefully until 2GBit are not enough (it may happen quite quickly) or one server is not able to handle it. And then we just need to add new Caching Servers. But now we need a Load Balancer, which will send requests on one and the same URL, always on one and the same server (to avoid multiple copies of the same cached objects). Here are the questions: Does a Balancer need a band equal to sum of all bands of Caching Servers? What shall we do in case there are no ports in a Balancer? Should we add more Balancers or solve the problem by means of Round robin DNS? What are the standard approaches to such problems? Can anyone advise hosting-companies, which can solve this problem? We are interested in American and European markets.

  Read the article

• Performance problems when running Java desktop applications on Citrix Metaframe

  - by demetriusnunes

  We have a desktop Java application running within a Citrix Metaframe server farm and the performance, specially while starting up the app, is very unreliable. Sometimes it takes 15 seconds and sometimes it takes over a minute. It's really unpredicatable. Is there any way to optimize running Java desktop applications within Citrix Metaframe Terminal server sessions to a more reliable performance level? Are there any optimization directed specifically toward Java, such as pre-load JVMs or something like that? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

  Read the article

• Need help diagnosing network performance issues

  - by tokes

  I am currently working in a developing country as a system analyst for a government department. My area of expertise is software projects, but I've come across a few issues with the network setup in my office. (Unfortunately, being a developing country, there's not a lot of professional help available for this sort of thing.) Most recently, I am trying to diagnose a problem with slowness on the network. Our office is connected to the internet via an ADSL wireless modem/router (called Router). The modem is connected via ethernet to a switch (called Switch). The modem also acts as a wireless access point (called Wireless1), though because it is in a room at the end of the floor, it's range is limited. There are ethernet ports installed around the office. The cables of these all lead back to the same switch. In closer vicinity to the bulk of the client computers, there is another wireless router that acts as an access point for those clients (called Wireless2). That router is connected via ethernet to a wall port, and therefore to Switch. There is also a Windows server which acts as a DNS server (called DNSBox) which is located in the same room and is connected directly to Switch. ---Internet----------| Router/Wireless1 192.168.10.1 ---------------| |----|=========| DNSBox | |-------------------- 192.168.10.4 --------------------| Switch |---Other clients---- | |-------------------- |----|=========| Wireless2 ------------------| 192.168.10.198 One final thing to mention about the network setup. All clients are configured with manual IP addresses. Their router/gateway is set to the IP address of Router, and their DNS server is set to the IP address of DNSBox (with a secondary IP set to an external IP - that of our ISP's DNS server). Here are the symptoms we are experiencing: Clients connected to Wireless2 AP experience slow and unstable connections to the internet. (Slow here is defined as speeds of ~1KB/s, though ping response times seem to be as normal.) Clients connected via ethernet to Switch also experience the same slowness. Clients connected to Wireless1 AP (i.e. connecting via wireless directly to the ADSL modem) experience normal connections to the internet. Clients connected via ethernet to Router (i.e. connecting via ethernet directly to the ADSL modem) also experience normal connections to the internet. I also tried to gauge the connection performance between two machines on the network via ethernet: A file transfer between two clients who were both directly connected to Switch was the fastest; A file transfer between one client directly connected to Switch, and one client directly connected to Router (which is directly connected to Switch) performed much slower; A file transfer between two clients directly connected to Router also performed slowly. Things I have attempted to diagnose the problem: Restarted Switch -- no change. We tried unplugging ethernet jacks from Switch 4 at a time and testing the internet connection. The thought here was that perhaps a client on the network has contracted a virus, and is possibly spamming the network with traffic? (Not very technical, I know.) Unfortunately we couldn't get any significant increases in performance using this method. There were a couple of times when it seemed to be better, but then the connection speed quickly dropped back to slow/dead pace. I didn't want to unplug all jacks from Switch because I was concerned that users might be affected or that I would re-plug in the jacks incorrectly (should I even be worried about that? a port is a port on a switch, right?) I tried swapping the ethernet cable used to connect Router to Switch -- no change in performance. I tried swapping the port used on Switch for Router -- no change in performance. Anyone got any ideas on what this could be? Should I be mentioning specific brand names/models of the hardware used? Virii outbreaks are common in this country/office -- what could I be doing to figure out if a virus is at fault? If it is a virus, it doesn't seem to be generating a lot of traffic to/from the internet, because a) I can still get a good speed if I am directly connected to Router / Wireless1 and b) our ISP data usage has not risen suspiciously. Thanks for your help! Update #1 Here are the specs of some of the hardware: Switch is an Edimax ES3132RL 32-Port 10/100 Rackmount Switch Router is a D-Link DSL-G604T Update #2 I just tried unplugging everything except a laptop and Router from Switch. Speeds are still slow. I guess that means that Router / Switch are not being flooded? It seems more and more likely that the cause is something to do with the interaction between Router and Switch. However, I still can't find any useful resources on setting the LAN speed for either (and I'm not well-versed in these advanced networking configurations).

  Read the article

• Slow performance by PHP directory operations on virtual machine (Ubuntu libvirt)

  - by thonixx

  Some days ago I installed an Ubuntu server and two running virtual machines with libvirt. Everything works fine except one performance problem. Everytime when I call a PHP script with directory operations the operations are very slow and not performant. Here is an example: http://zother.white-tiger.ch/ And here you see an example without a directory operation and how fast it is: http://michaeltanner.ch/ It's all on the same virtual server. The virtual machine uses 6 cores (8 are available) and 7500 megabytes RAM (8 Gigabyte are available). The disk image format is qcow2. How can I improve the performance?

  Read the article

• Performance Alert Writing to event Log but not running program

  - by TooFat

  I followed the instructions here How to create and configure performance alerts in Windows Server 2003 to set up an alert if the available logical disk space on one of my drives goes below a certain number. I selected the option to write to the application event log and select the "run this program" option and put in the path to a script that sends me an email. If I copy the path to the script and run it everything works and I get the email. When I start the alert I can see that the limit I set is being exceeded and the logs are being written to the application log, but the email is never being sent. I have the runas user and pword set to a Domain Admin. If I make the "run this program path" to C:\Windows\System32\calc.exe" it also doesn't start up the calculator. The Performance Logs and alerts services is running as Local Admin with allow to interact with desktop. What am I doing wrong?

  Read the article

• How to troubleshoot performance issues of PHP, MySQL and generic I/O

  - by jbx

  I have a WordPress based website running on a shared hosting. Its response time is very decent (around 2s to retrieve the HTML page and 5s to load all the resources). I was planning to move it to a dedicated virtual server (Ubuntu 12.04 LTS), which should theoretically improve things and make them more consistent given its not shared. However I observed severe performance degredation, with the page taking 10seconds to be generated. I ruled out network issues by editing /etc/hosts on the server and mapping the domain to 127.0.0.1. I used the Apache load tester ab to get the HTML, so JS, CSS and images are all excluded. It still took 10 seconds. I have Zpanel installed on the server which also uses MySQL, and its pages come up quite fast (1.5s) and also phpMyAdmin. Performing some queries on the wordpress database directly through phpMyAdmin returns them quite fast too, with query times in the 10 to 30 millisecond region. Memory is also sufficient, with only 800Mb being used of the 1Gb physical memory available, so it doesn't seem to be a swap issue either. I have also installed APC to try to improve the PHP performance, but it didn't have any effect. What else should I look for? What could be causing this degradation in performance? Could it be some kind of I/O issue since I am running on a cloud based virtual server? I wish to be able to raise the issue with my provider but without showing actual data from some diagnosis I am afraid he will just blame my application. UPDATE with sar output (every second) when I did an HTTP request: 02:31:29 CPU %user %nice %system %iowait %steal %idle 02:31:30 all 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 02:31:31 all 2.22 0.00 2.22 0.00 0.00 95.56 02:31:32 all 41.67 0.00 6.25 0.00 2.08 50.00 02:31:33 all 86.36 0.00 13.64 0.00 0.00 0.00 02:31:34 all 75.00 0.00 25.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 02:31:35 all 93.18 0.00 6.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 02:31:36 all 90.70 0.00 9.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 02:31:37 all 71.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 28.95 02:31:38 all 14.89 0.00 10.64 0.00 2.13 72.34 02:31:39 all 2.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 97.44 02:31:40 all 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 02:31:41 all 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 100.00 My suspicion that this comes from I/O related issue is also because a caching plugin I use to reduce the amount of queries to the database, by precompiling PHP pages is actually making things worse instead of better. It seems that file access is making things worse instead.

  Read the article

• VMWare Workstation Performance

  - by tekiegreg

  Hi there, awhile ago I upgraded my laptop to Windows 7 x64 from Windows XP 32 bit edition. However not before virtualizing the physical installation and I continue to run it under VMWare Workstation today. The performance on the resulting VM is just absolutely atrocious! I've done a lot of uninstalling stuff that's not longer needed since the machine is virtual in an effort to reduce RAM, but in general the responsiveness seems sluggish. I also run the Virtual Machine on it's own separate HD that is seldom used by the host OS. I'm just hoping for some general tips in increasing VMWare performance anywhere, thoughts? EDIT: Both of the below answers were excellent starting points for me. However I did like the selected answer's strategies on disk management. I am running the Virtual Machine in a separate external hard disk, likely I'm going to have to reconfigure somehow. Thanks all!

  Read the article

• Optimizing PHP<>MySQL performance

  - by BarsMonster

  I am trying to optimize my PHP<MySQL on this test script: <? for($i=0;$i<100;$i++)//Itterations count $res.= var_dump(loadRow("select body_ru from articles where id>$i*50 limit 100")); print_r($res); ?> I have APC, and article table have an index on id. Also, all these queries are hitting query cache, so sole MySQL performance if great. But when I am using ab -c 10 -t 10 to bench this scipt, I am getting: 100 itterations: ~100req/sec (~10'000 MySQL queries per second) 5 itteration: ~200req/sec 1 itteration: ~380req/sec 0 itteration: ~580req/sec I've tried to disable persistent connections in PHP - it made it slower a bit. So, how can I make it work faster, provided that MySQL is not limiting performance here?

  Read the article

• MySQL Extremely High Disk Activity (Read Operations)

  - by Jake Schoermer

  I have 1GB Linode VPS with a standard LAMP stack. Apache is tuned fine but for some reason MySQL's disk usage is high. This is causing really slow site load times. RAM and CPU usage are fine. Can anyone give me any pointers on tuning mysql's disk performance? I'm using InnoDB. iotop output is below. Total DISK READ: 38.50 M/s | Total DISK WRITE: 27.20 K/s TID PRIO USER DISK READ> DISK WRITE SWAPIN IO COMMAND 9808 be/4 mysql 22.40 M/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 63.75 % mysqld 10045 be/4 mysql 2.06 M/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 26.65 % mysqld 9987 be/4 mysql 1694.38 K/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 18.33 % mysqld 10015 be/4 mysql 1554.47 K/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 12.71 % mysqld 10019 be/4 mysql 1461.21 K/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 5.58 % mysqld 9839 be/4 mysql 1383.48 K/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 25.69 % mysqld 10031 be/4 mysql 1243.58 K/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 5.68 % mysqld 10023 be/4 mysql 1057.04 K/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 2.02 % mysqld 10020 be/4 mysql 1025.95 K/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 7.05 % mysqld 10001 be/4 mysql 808.33 K/s 683.97 K/s 0.00 % 1.16 % mysqld 10025 be/4 mysql 746.15 K/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 3.28 % mysqld 10043 be/4 mysql 715.06 K/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.48 % mysqld 10044 be/4 mysql 672.31 K/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 5.25 % mysqld 10034 be/4 mysql 668.42 K/s 1989.73 K/s 0.00 % 5.31 % mysqld 9985 be/4 mysql 450.80 K/s 124.36 K/s 0.00 % 8.83 % mysqld 9989 be/4 mysql 357.53 K/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 5.21 % mysqld 10033 be/4 mysql 186.54 K/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 1.59 % mysqld 10021 be/4 mysql 155.45 K/s 435.25 K/s 0.00 % 1.23 % mysqld 10007 be/4 mysql 124.36 K/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.53 % mysqld 9763 be/4 www-data 38.86 K/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 4.56 % apache2 -k start 10027 be/4 mysql 31.09 K/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 4.24 % mysqld 1 be/4 root 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % init 2 be/4 root 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % [kthreadd] 3 be/4 root 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % [ksoftirqd/0] 4 be/4 root 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % [kworker/0:0] 5 be/4 root 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % [kworker/u:0] 6 rt/4 root 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % [migration/0] 7 rt/4 root 0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % [migration/1]

  Read the article

• Skyrim: Heavy Performance Issues after a couple of location changes

  - by Derija

  Okay, I've tried different solutions: ENB Series, removing certain mods, checking my FPS Rate, monitoring my resources, .ini tweaks. It's all just fine, I don't see what I'm missing. A couple of days ago, I bought Skyrim. Before I bought the game, I admit I had a pirated copy because my girlfriend actually wanted to buy me the game as a present, then said she didn't have enough money. Sick of waiting, I decided to buy the game by myself. The ridiculous part is, it worked better cracked than it does now uncracked. As the title suggests, after entering and leaving houses a couple of times, my performance obviously drops extremely. My build is just fine, Intel i5 quad core processor, NVIDIA GTX 560 Ti from Gigabyte, actually stock-OC, but manually downclocked to usual settings using appropriate Gigabyte software. This fixed the CTD issues I had before with both Skyrim and BF3. I have 4GB RAM. A website about Game Tweaks suggested that my HDD may be too slow. A screenshot of a Windows Performance Index sample with the subscription "This is likely to cause issues" showed the HDD with a performance index of 5.9, the exact same mine has, so I was playing with the thought to purchase an SSD instead, load games onto it that really need it like Skyrim, and hope it'd do the trick. Unfortunately, SSDs are likewise expensive, compared to "normal" HDDs... I'm really getting desperate about it. My save is gone because the patches made it impossible to load saves of the unpatched version and I already saved more than 80 times despite being only level 8, just because every time I interact with a door leading me to another location I'm scared the game will drop again. I can't even play for 30 mins straight anymore, it's just no fun at all. I've researched for a couple of days before I decided to post my question here. Any help is appreciated, I don't want to regret having bought the game... Since it actually is the best game I've played possibly for ever. Sincerely. P.S.: I don't think it's necessary to say, but still, of course I'm playing on PC. P.P.S.: After monitoring both my PC resources including CPU usage and HDD usage as well as the GPU usage, I don't see any changes even after the said event. P.P.P.S.: Original question posted here where I've been advised to ask here.

  Read the article

• Performance affects of compressing Program Files on Windows / NTFS

  - by SRobertJames

  What are the performance affects of compressing Program Files on Windows NTFS? On a fast, multicore machine, the overhead of decompression is minimal. Machines are generally disk bound, and if you can reduce the disk load by compression, you often speed things up. (Microsoft says that the built in compression of Windows Search indexes actually improves speed for this reason.) On the other hand, Windows' virtual memory is complicated. Perhaps if files are compressed, they can't be paged out simply. And there may be other issues. In short: On a fast, multicore machine with a relatively slow disk, what performance affects will compressing Program Files have?

  Read the article

• Tips to increase performance of a Windows computer

  - by Niyaz

  What are some general guidelines to increase the speed/performance of my Windows machine?

  Read the article

• Verify server performance

  - by George Kesler

  I'm looking for a quick and SIMPLE way to verify that new servers are performing as expected. The most important metric is disk performance, second is network performance. I’m trying to prevent problems caused by misconfiguration of RAID arrays, NIC teaming etc. The solution should work with both physical and virtual servers. I don’t need sophisticated analysis with different workloads, just one set of benchmarks which I would run against a reference server and later compare to new ones. One problem is that most benchmarks are not giving accurate results when running on a VM.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20  | Next Page >