Search Results

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

Page 134/837 | < Previous Page | 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141  | Next Page >

  • Wireless performance on Ubuntu 9.10

    - by Brian
    Is there something I should do to my networking configuration in Ubuntu to better the performance of my wireless connection? I'm on a netbook dual-booting Windows 7 and Ubuntu 9.10. I pick up much stronger wifi signal when in Windows than Ubuntu. As soon as I boot Ubuntu, it will connect to the network with a stronger signal, and then loses signal very quickly. After it dies, I can't reconnect. I've tested this on a couple of different networks with the same outcome.

    Read the article

  • Performance & Security Factors of Symbolic Links

    - by Stoosh
    I am thinking about rolling out a very stripped down version of release management for some PHP apps I have running. Essentially the plan is to store each release in /home/release/1.x etc (exported from a tag in SVN) and then do a symlink to /live_folder and change the document root in the apache config. I don't have a problem with setting all this up (I've actually got it working at the moment), however I'm a developer with just basic knowledge of the server admin side of things. Is there anything I need to be aware of from a security or performance perspective when using this method of release management? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Picking all the Text files from hard disk from c++

    - by muhammad-aslam
    Hello Frierndz u r very helping............. plz help me as i am doing my project where i have to search the user input from all the text files of hard disk in c++ i am not able to do so.... plz help what i have to do. which library will be helpful for me to pick text files directory from hard drive i m using visual studio C++

    Read the article

  • Best Embedded SQL DB for write performance?

    - by max.minimus
    Has anybody done any benchmarking/evaluation of the popular open-source embedded SQL DBs for performance, particularly write performance? I've some 1:1 comparisons for sqlite, Firebird Embedded, Derby and HSQLDB (others I am missing?) but no across the board comparisons... Also, I'd be interested in the overall developer experience for any of these (for a Java app).

    Read the article

  • BitLocker with Windows DPAPI Encryption Key Management

    - by bigmac
    We have a need to enforce resting encryption on an iSCSI LUN that is accessible from within a Hyper-V virtual machine. We have implementing a working solution using BitLocker, using Windows Server 2012 on a Hyper-V Virtual Server which has iSCSI access to a LUN on our SAN. We were able to successfully do this by using the "floppy disk key storage" hack as defined in THIS POST. However, this method seems "hokey" to me. In my continued research, I found out that the Amazon Corporate IT team published a WHITEPAPER that outlined exactly what I was looking for in a more elegant solution, without the "floppy disk hack". On page 7 of this white paper, they state that they implemented Windows DPAPI Encryption Key Management to securely manage their BitLocker keys. This is exactly what I am looking to do, but they stated that they had to write a script to do this, yet they don't provide the script or even any pointers on how to create one. Does anyone have details on how to create a "script in conjunction with a service and a key-store file protected by the server’s machine account DPAPI key" (as they state in the whitepaper) to manage and auto-unlock BitLocker volumes? Any advice is appreciated.

    Read the article

  • In Windows 7, why can't I use perfmon against a remote server?

    - by SomeGuy
    I am on Windows 7 and trying to run perfmon against Windows 2003 and Windows 2008 servers. I am running into the same issue with all remote machines. When creating a data collector set, I specify a domain account that is in the administrators group on the remote machines (and "Performance Log Users" and "Performance Monitor Users" to be safe). On the "Available Counters" screen, When I type in a remote computer name, PerfMon locks up for a good 2-3 minutes before I can add any counters. I can then save the collector set. However, when I save it, the go/stop buttons are disabled if I click the set in the left panel, and missing if I click the Data collector set itself in the right panel. See the screens below. I can run data collector sets against my local machine with no problem. I am opening perfmon with my local account in both scenarios. I also have Remote Registry Service started on each remote machine. What is going on?

    Read the article

  • Computer specs for a large database

    - by SpeksETC
    What sort of computer specs (CPU, RAM, disk speed) should I use for running queries on a database of 200+ million records? The queries are for a research project, so there is only one "user" and only one query will be running at a time. I tried it on my own laptop with SQL Server with an i3 processor, 2GB RAM, 5400 RPM disk and a simple query didn't finish even after 8+ hours. I have an option to connect a SSD via eSata and upgrade to 4GB RAM, but not sure if this will be enough... Thanks! Edit: The database is about 25 GB and the indexes are not setup properly. When I tried to add an index, I let it run for about 8 hours and it still hadn't finished so I gave up. Should I have more patience :)? In general, the queries will run once in a while and its ok even if it takes a couple hours to complete.... Also, the queries will produce probably about 10 million records which I need to process using Stata/Matlab and I'm concerned that my current laptop is not strong enough, but unsure of the bottleneck....

    Read the article

  • win8: access denied to external USB disk; update access rights fails

    - by Gerard
    I use to work with 2 laptops (vista and win7), my work being files on an external usb disk. My oldest laptop broke down, so I bought a new one. I had no option other than take win8. 1/ I suspect something changed with access rights, as my external disk suffered some "access denied" problem on win8. I was prompted (by win8) somehow to fix the access rights, which I tried to do, getting to the properties - security. This process was very slow and ended up saying "disk is not ready". Additonnally, the usb somehow was not recognized anymore. 2/ Back to win7, I was warned that my disk needed to be verified, which I did. In this process, some files were lost (most of them i could recover from the folder found00x, but I have some backup anyway). Also, I don't know why, but under win7, all the folder showed with a lock. 3/ Then back again to win8. Same problem : access denied to my disk + no way to change access rights as it gets stuck "disk is not ready". Now I am pretty sure there is some kind of bug or inconsistence in win8 / win7. I did 2/ and 3/ a few times. At some point, I also got an access denied in win7. I could restore access rigths to the disk to "system" (properties - security - EDIT for full control to group "system" ...). But then I still get the same access right pb on win8, and getting stuck in the process to restore full control to "system" -- and "admin" groups. Now, after I tried for more than 3 days, I am losing my patience with that bloody win8 which I did not want to buy but had no choice. I upgraded win8 with the windows updates available. Does not help. Anybody can help me ?

    Read the article

  • Does a 3ware "ECC-ERROR" matter on a JBOD when I have ZFS?

    - by Stefan Lasiewski
    I have a FreeBSD 8.x machine running ZFS and with a 3ware 9690SA controller. The 3ware controller shows an ECC-ERROR with one of the disks: //host> /c0 show VPort Status Unit Size Type Phy Encl-Slot Model ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ p0 OK u0 279.39 GB SAS 0 - SEAGATE ST3300657SS p1 OK u0 279.39 GB SAS 1 - SEAGATE ST3300657SS p2 OK u1 931.51 GB SAS 2 - SEAGATE ST31000640SS p3 ECC-ERROR u2 931.51 GB SAS 3 - SEAGATE ST31000640SS p4 OK u3 931.51 GB SAS 4 - SEAGATE ST31000640SS /c0 show events shows no ECC errors in it's recent history. ZFS does not currently detect any errors. zpool status says No known data errors My question: Is this ECC-ERROR something that I need to be concerned about? According to the 3ware CLI 9.5.2 Manual, an ECC-ERROR means that the 3ware controller caught a read-error for one or more sectors on this drive. This sometimes occurs when a RAID array is recovering from a failed disk. I believe that ECC-ERRORS can also be detected when the 3ware Controller verifies each disk. None of the drives have failed and thus there was no drive rebuild, so I assume that 3ware discovered a bad sector when it ran it's weekly auto-verify scan of the disks. Is this a safe assumption? According to our logs, ZFS has not detected any bad sectors on this drive. ZFS can work around read errors -- if ZFS detects a bad sector on the drive, it will simply mark that sector as bad and never use it again. From the ZFS perspective one bad sector isn't a big deal, although it might indicate that the drive is starting to go bad.

    Read the article

  • Determining a realistic measure of requests per second for a web server

    - by Don
    I'm setting up a nginx stack and optimizing the configuration before going live. Running ab to stress test the machine, I was disappointed to see things topping out at 150 requests per second with a significant number of requests taking 1 second to return. Oddly, the machine itself wasn't even breathing hard. I finally thought to ping the box and saw ping times around 100-125 ms. (The machine, to my surprise, is across the country). So, it seems like network latency is dominating my testing. Running the same tests from a machine on the same network as the server (ping times < 1ms) and I see 5000 requests per second, which is more in-line with what I expected from the machine. But this got me thinking: How do I determine and report a "realistic" measure of requests per second for a web server? You always see claims about performance, but shouldn't network latency be taken into consideration? Sure I can serve 5000 request per second to a machine next to the server, but not to a machine across the country. If I have a lot of slow connections, they will eventually impact my server's performance, right? Or am I thinking about this all wrong? Forgive me if this is network engineering 101 stuff. I'm a developer by trade. Update: Edited for clarity.

    Read the article

  • What do you upgrade to make games load faster? [on hold]

    - by Superbest
    Let's say you have a relatively modern game like Shogun 2. The loading screens take several minutes. This bothers you and you'd like to improve it. What is actually going on when loading screens are up? I'm guessing assets are being loaded into memory from disk, and possibly being decompressed first. However, what is actually causing the slow down? The memory? Mainboard? CPU? HDD? If you had $100 to spend on upgrades and your only goal is to speed up loading screens without reducing other performance, what component of the computer does it make sense to upgrade for maximum benefit? If your answer is "it depends on the existing setup", what sort of benchmarks would you run to determine what is causing the bottleneck? What if you had $500 instead? I give the two budgets for context. I am not asking for actual recommendations about which component to buy (nor are the numbers supposed to be rigid limits), but what features are important when shopping for components with small and large budgets (a large budget could allow buying multiple components which are not so good on their own, but work particularly well together). I mention Shogun 2 as an example, but I'm asking about reducing overall loading times, across all games, not just one game. Therefore, "put it on a solid state disk" probably won't be good solution, because putting every game on your SDD will quickly fill it up.

    Read the article

  • Cannot access drive in Windows 7 after scandisk lockup, but can in safe mode....

    - by Matt Thompson
    I ran scandisk on my external USB drive due to the inability to delete a few files. Windows asked me if I wanted to unmount the drive before the scan, warning me that it would be unusable until the scan was finished, and I said yes. During the scan, my machine locked up, and I was forced to reboot the machine. When it came up, I was unable to access the drive, getting an error that "L:is not accessible, access is denied". Comupter Management sees the drive, and has the proper amount of disk space filled. I booted into safe mode, and can access the drive with no problems, and I noticed that in explorer, all the folders have locks on them. I booted back into windows, but still could not access the drive, getting the same error as above. Hovever, if I right click on the drive, select properties, and go to Customize, in the folder pictures ares, I select Choose File, and a window open up, that shows the root of the directory, with all the folder able to be accessed, but again, the icon is the folder icon with a lock on it. I can even copy files from the drive to another. So, the files are not gone, windows can obviously access the drive no matter what it thinks, so there has to be a problem with the flag windows put on the drive when it ran the original scan that failed. I was able to run a scan both in safe mode with no problems, and in windows. In windows, I received the cannot access error the first time I run scan disk on it, but if I try again, it works fine. Any ideas on how to clear the flag that windows set, so I can access the drive normally again?

    Read the article

  • Different network response for indentical co-located machines

    - by Santosh
    We have a situation as follows: We have a two different virtual machines (VMs) on some remote server farm. The machines are identical in terms of hardware/software(OS) configurations. We have a J2EE application running on JBoss on each of those two machines. These two applications are of different version sav V1 on VM1 and V2 on VM2. We observed some degraded response time for application V2 when accessed via public URL. When we accessed the application through a secured VPN, there is hardly any difference. The bandwidth test (upload/download speed, ping etc) shows that VM1 is responding better when accessed via secured VPN. We concluded that the application does not seem to have performance issue. Because, it that's the case the performance degradation should also be there when access via VPN. So we concluded its the network problem. But since those two identical VMs are on same network we are looking for the reasons for different responses. My question is, given the above situation, what could be reasons for such a behavior ?

    Read the article

  • Postfix spool on ext3 optimiziations in >=linux-2.6.34 days

    - by Luke404
    Given the very specific nature of the subject (we're not talking about mailboxes, just the spool; we're not talking about other filesystems, just ext3; and so on...) and the maturity of the softwares involved (linux kernel, ext3fs, postfix) I'd think there should be a more or less agreed on set of best practices to filesystem related tuning. I'm trying to get a roundup of them: data=journal became the default in recent kernels (somewhere around 2.6.30 IIRC) so we should be ok with that Wietse Venema says atime must be on, but Postfix documentation recommendsnoatime while talking about the Incoming Queue. Does that mean that postfix needs atime on just for some queue directories and will benefit from noatime on the others? can we use noatime if we just don't use ETRN? filesystem can be mounted nodev,noexec,nosuid - no* won't prevent you from setting attributes (postfix uses exec attr) they just won't have any effect (we don't run anything from the spool) the fsync() issue cited by Wietse and/or the chattr -S are probably linked to sync/async options of ext3fs but I do not understand them enough. Mouting the filesystem with async option is equivalent to chattr -R -S the whole fs? Seems like it will increase performance, but will that pose a risk of "loss of mail after a system crash" or is it really "safe on /var/spool/postfix" ? would you tune anything else on postfix-2.6.x to work better on ext3 or do you leave defaults everywhere? is there a "best" linux I/O scheduler for this kind of workload (namely CFQ or deadline?) or that's something that will vary too much based on hardware configuration? would you tune anything else in the filesystem or in the kernel? anything else? References: Postfix Performance here on SF Postfix documentation about the Incoming Queue Wietse Venema in Best file system on [email protected] here Postfix and ext3 on [email protected] here and there

    Read the article

  • Some free cloud solution to enhance your business

    - by Saif Bechan
    I am co-owner of a small internet business. I am in charge of IT, and I try to get things done as low cost as possible. When investing in servers, resources and overall business costs your project can soon turn into a financial disaster. Cloud solutions can help you in solving some financial problems, they can help you in scalability problems, and overall performance problems of your server or web application. Recently I moved the whole internal/external communication(email,calendar,documents) of my business to the cloud. I did this by using the free version of Google Apps. This works great and is a big advantage on multiple levels. I do not have to fight spam anymore on my system, and there are less resources used on my system. Also switching servers will go a lot easier. Questions Can you name some cloud solution that you have used, or some you just recommend. They can fairy form financial benefits, organizational benefits, performance benefits. It doesn't matter as soon as it helps you spread the load of your business.

    Read the article

  • What is the best VM for developing WPF apps from within OS X?

    - by MarqueIV
    All of my machines are Macs (Mac Pro, MacBook Pro, MacBook Air and Mac Mini (and Apple TV 2.0 too! :) ) but for my day-job, I develop .NET/WPF applications. Normally I just boot into Boot Camp and develop that way, which of course works great, but there are times when I need to simultaneously get to things on my Mac-side of the equation, so I've bought both VMware 3.1 and Parallels 6. Both work, however, even on my Mac Pro where I paid to upgrade to the better video cards (the NVidia 8600s I think vs. the stock ATI cards) the WPF performance bites!! Now this confuses me since both boast that they support not only hardware-accelerated OpenGL 2.1, but also hardware-accelerated DirectX 9 (VMware even allegedly supports DirectX 10!) via their respective virtual drivers and both can run 3D games just fine, even in a window. But even the simple act of resizing a WPF window that has a tiled background results in some HIDEOUS repainting and resizing behaviors. It's damn near closer to what you'd expect over RDP let alone a software-only renderer (forget accelerated hardware completely!) So... can anyone please tell me WTF WPF is doing differently? More importantly, how can I speed up the WPF performance? Should I switch to VirtualBox that also has support for DirectX? Or am I just gonna have to 'byte' the bullet (sorry... had to. So I like puns! Thank Jon Stewart!) and continue using Boot Camp?

    Read the article

  • Real benefits of tcp TIME-WAIT and implications in production environment

    - by user64204
    SOME THEORY I've been doing some reading on tcp TIME-WAIT (here and there) and what I read is that it's a value set to 2 x MSL (maximum segment life) which keeps a connection in the "connection table" for a while to guarantee that, "before your allowed to create a connection with the same tuple, all the packets belonging to previous incarnations of that tuple will be dead". Since segments received (apart from SYN under specific circumstances) while a connection is either in TIME-WAIT or no longer existing would be discarded, why not close the connection right away? Q1: Is it because there is less processing involved in dealing with segments from old connections and less processing to create a new connection on the same tuple when in TIME-WAIT (i.e. are there performance benefits)? If the above explanation doesn't stand, the only reason I see the TIME-WAIT being useful would be if a client sends a SYN for a connection before it sends remaining segments for an old connection on the same tuple in which case the receiver would re-open the connection but then get bad segments and and would have to terminate it. Q2: Is this analysis correct? Q3: Are there other benefits to using TIME-WAIT? SOME PRACTICE I've been looking at the munin graphs on a production server that I administrate. Here is one: As you can see there are more connections in TIME-WAIT than ESTABLISHED, around twice as many most of the time, on some occasions four times as many. Q4: Does this have an impact on performance? Q5: If so, is it wise/recommended to reduce the TIME-WAIT value (and what to)? Q6: Is this ratio of TIME-WAIT / ESTABLISHED connections normal? Could this be related to malicious connection attempts?

    Read the article

  • Dell R320 RAID 10 with CacheCade

    - by Geekman
    I'm looking for a higher-performance build for our 1RU Dell R320 servers, in terms of IOPS. Right now I'm fairly settled on: 4 x 600 GB 3.5" 15K RPM SAS RAID 1+0 array This should give good performance, but if possible, I want to also add an SSD Cache into the mix, but I'm not sure if there's enough room? According to the tech-specs, there's only up to 4 total 3.5" drive bays available. Is there any way to fit at least a single SSD drive along-side the 4x3.5" drives? I was hoping there's a special spot to put the cache SSD drive (though from memory, I doubt there'd be room). Or am I right in thinking that the cache drives are simply drives plugged in "normally" just as any other drive, but are nominated as CacheCade drives in the PERC controller? Are there any options for having the 4x600GB RAID 10 array, and the SSD cache drive, too? Based on the tech-specs (with up to 8x2.5" drives), maybe I need to use 2.5" SAS drives, leaving another 4 bays spare, plenty of room for the SSD cache drive. Has anyone achieved this using 3.5" drives, somehow?

    Read the article

  • ZFS with L2ARC (SSD) slower for random seeks than without L2ARC

    - by Florian Kruse
    I am currently testing ZFS (Opensolaris 2009.06) in an older fileserver to evaluate its use for our needs. Our current setup is as follows: Dual core (2,4 GHz) with 4 GB RAM 3x SATA controller with 11 HDDs (250 GB) and one SSD (OCZ Vertex 2 100 GB) We want to evaluate the use of a L2ARC, so the current ZPOOL is: $ zpool status pool: tank state: ONLINE scrub: none requested config: NAME STATE READ WRITE CKSUM afstank ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz1 ONLINE 0 0 0 c11t0d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c11t1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c11t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c11t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 raidz1 ONLINE 0 0 0 c13t0d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c13t1d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c13t2d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 c13t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 cache c14t3d0 ONLINE 0 0 0 where c14t3d0 is the SSD (of course). We run IO tests with bonnie++ 1.03d, size is set to 200 GB (-s 200g) so that the test sample will never be completely in ARC/L2ARC. The results without SSD are (average values over several runs which show no differences) write_chr write_blk rewrite read_chr read_blk random seeks 101.998 kB/s 214.258 kB/s 96.673 kB/s 77.702 kB/s 254.695 kB/s 900 /s With SSD it becomes interesting. My assumption was that the results should be in worst case at least the same. While write/read/rewrite rates are not different, the random seek rate differs significantly between individual bonnie++ runs (between 188 /s and 1333 /s so far), average is 548 +- 200 /s, so below the value w/o SSD. So, my questions are mainly: Why do the random seek rates differ so much? If the seeks are really random, they should not differ much (my assumption). So, even if the SSD is impairing the performance it should be the same in each bonnie++ run. Why is the random seek performance worse in most of the bonnie++ runs? I would assume that some part of the bonnie++ data is in the L2ARC and random seeks on this data performs better while random seeks on other data just performs similarly like before.

    Read the article

  • HP Proliant DL380 G4 - Can this server still perform in 2011?

    - by BSchriver
    Can the HP Proliant DL380 G4 series server still perform at high a quality in the 2011 IT world? This may sound like a weird question but we are a very small company whose primary business is NOT IT related. So my IT dollars have to stretch a long way. I am in need of a good web and database server. The load and demand for a while will be fairly low so I am not looking nor do I have the money to buy a brand new HP Dl380 G7 series box for $6K. While searching around today I found a company in ATL that buys servers off business leases and then stripes them down to parts. They clean, check and test each part and then custom "rebuild" the server based on whatever specs you request. The interesting thing is they also provide a 3-year warranty on all their servers they sell. I am contemplating buying two of the following: HP Proliant DL380 G4 Dual (2) Intel Xeon 3.6 GHz 800Mhz 1MB Cache processors 8GB PC3200R ECC Memory 6 x 73GB U320 15K rpm SCSI drives Smart Array 6i Card Dual Power Supplies Plus the usual cdrom, dual nic, etc... All this for $750 each or $1500 for two pretty nicely equipped servers. The price then jumps up on the next model up which is the G5 series. It goes from $750 to like $2000 for a comparable server. I just do not have $4000 to buy two servers right now. So back to my original question, if I load Windows 2008 R2 Server and IIS 7 on one of the machines and Windows 2008 R2 server and MS SQL 2008 R2 Server on another machine, what kind of performance might I expect to see from these machines? The facts is this series is now 3 versions behind the G7's and this series of server was built when Windows 200 Server was the dominant OS and Windows 2003 Server was just coming out. If you are running Windows 2008 R2 Server on a G4 with similar or less specs I would love to hear what your performance is like.

    Read the article

  • PC only boots from Linux-based media and won't boot from DOS-based media

    - by Xolstice
    I have this problem where the PC only seems to boot from a floppy disk or CD if it was created as a Linux-based bootable media. If it was created as a DOS-based bootable media the system just freezes at the starting point of the boot process. I originally asked this under question 139515 for CD booting only, and based on the given answers, I was under the impression the problem was with the CD-ROM drive; however, I have since installed a newly purchased CD-ROM drive and the same freezing occurs. This then made me try the DOS bootable floppy disk approach and I was quite surprised that it exhibited the same freezing problem. I then tried try a Linux bootable floppy and everything booted from it without any issues. As I mentioned in my original question, the PC was booting just fine from the DOS-based bootable CD, and then it suddenly decides to pull this freezing stunt. I can't remember if I changed anything in the BIOS settings that may I have caused the problem, but I am wondering if that could be the case - it is currently using the Award Module BIOS v4.60PGMA. Can anyone help?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141  | Next Page >