Search Results

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

Page 144/456 | < Previous Page | 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151  | Next Page >

  • Nagios remote monitoring: NRPE Vs. SSH

    - by sam
    We use Nagios to monitor quite a few (~130) servers. We monitor CPU, Disk, RAM and a few other things on each server. I've always used SSH to run the remote commands, purely because it requires little to no additional config on the remote server, just install nagios-plugins, create the nagios user and add the SSH key, all of which I've automated into a shell script. I've never actually considered the performance implications of using SSH over NRPE. I'm not too bothered about the load hit on the Nagios server (It's probably over-speced for what it does, it's never been over 10% CPU), but we run each remote check every 30 seconds and each server has 5 different checks performed. I assume SSH requires more resources for each check but is there a huge difference? (I.E. enough of a difference to warrant the switch to NRPE). If it's any help, we monitor a mix of physical servers (Normally with 8, 12 or 16 physical cores) and Amazon EC2 medium/large instances.

    Read the article

  • Common filesystem for servers behind a rackspace load balancer

    - by thanos panousis
    Our PHP application consists of a single web server that will receive files from clients and perform a CPU-intensive analysis on them. Right now, analysis of a single user upload can take 3sec to conclude and take 100% CPU. This makes our system capacity amount to 1/3 requests per second. My team's requirement is to increase capacity without a lot of code reengineering. A possible solution would be to set up a load balancer in front of multiple servers running the same app, connecting to a common DB. The problem is that the analysis outputs files on disk. A load balancer would increase capacity, but then files won't be available between servers so consequent client requests may fail. We are hosted on Rackspace, is there a way to configure some sort of "common" storage for all servers, without having to rewrite our file persistance code? Current code relies on simple fopens etc. What are our options?

    Read the article

  • afp/smb transfers caps at 2 megabytes/sec, wireless N

    - by RD.
    I wanted to transfer files between two mac computers. The network is wireless-N and both computers have wireless-N modules in them. The problem is that when I transfer files between them, via file sharing (afp) the network speed caps at 2 megabytes/sec. Just downloading files from the internet I can get faster speeds, so this isn't a constriction of my wifi bandwidth, it appears to be a constriction of the protocol being used. My wifi-n is set to 130mbits, so I should see real world transfer speeds around 12-16 megabytes/sec I did this command on both computers sudo sysctl -w net.inet.tcp.delayed_ack=0 which is supposed to lower tcp overhead, but this did not affect it. How can I get the speed I am expecting?

    Read the article

  • Late Model 2011 Macbook Pro with SSD appears to be off somehow

    - by chris
    Ok, I just got a SSD for my Macbook Pro Late-2011. The specs from what I read are that the laptop is capable of 6gbps, so I got myself a OZC Agility 240gb 6gbps SSD. Decided to join the club and speed test it with Blackmagic Disk Speed Test.. and the results are equivilent to that of a 3gbps setup. So.. I am wondering overall is there a configuration setting somewhere I can tweak? The original HD was a 500gb HDD the spinning kind. So I'm figuring maybe thats why there may be a setting somewhere hidden I dunno about that I can tweak, just wanna see if anyone else knows if this is the case. edit should also mention did a fresh factory install, nothing carried over from original hd

    Read the article

  • Web & SQL Hosting 32 vs. 16 GB of ram

    - by TravisK
    I'm in the market for a new dedicated host for my website. My question is I can pay more to upgrade to 32GB of RAM, but it seems overkill for my website right now, in fact, 16GB seems a little overkill. However, I run a lot of pretty intense full text searches for my site. I'm wondering if SQL Server would benefit, or could it be configured to use the 32 GB of RAM if I purchase the additional to help speed things up? I am assuming that most of my latency is caused by disk I/O and that for the extra money spent on RAM, I might not see any improvement in overall speed?

    Read the article

  • Motherboard Issue - 3 Beep Bios (memory error) despite new RAM

    - by Glenn
    I have an Intel dG43RK motherboard, bought new and sealed, and have tried two different brands and speeds of RAM with a 3-beep BIOS indicating a memory error, which also occurs without RAM installed (as it should). The memory tried is; 1x4GB 1333 Kingston HyperX DDR3 RAM (New and Sealed) 2x4GB Team Elite 1066 DDR3 RAM (New and Sealed) I have tried multiple configurations and seating layouts and still no luck. I also have a GT520 graphics card on board as I dislike in-built graphics in most cases and had it at hand (also new and sealed). The only used parts are the CPU, which worked in my previous tower and was directly taken from the PC into the new set-up and the CPU Fan which will be replaced with a new fan in the foreseeable future once this is resolved. I've run out of ideas myself and any help is appreciated.

    Read the article

  • NVIDIA Driver Crashing on Custom-Built Windows 7 PC

    - by srunni
    I've got a custom-built PC with these specs: Fractal Design Define R3 ASUS P8Z77-V motherboard Intel Core i7-2700k with Thermalright HR-02 Macho Cooler NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 with Arctic Cooling Accelero Twin Turbo II Cooler Crucial M4 128 GB SSD 1 TB Hitachi HDD G.SKILL Ares Series 2x8 GB RAM (x2) SeaSonic 520W PSU Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 (x64) NVIDIA driver version 301.42 Upon building the PC, I overclocked the CPU (but never the GPU), and there were no problems for 1-2 months. Then I started getting crashes with this error when doing anything that's computationally or graphically intensive: I un-overclocked the CPU, but that hasn't fixed anything. This is what the inside of my case looks like: I'd appreciate any guidance on resolving this problem. I did get some of the thermal paste on the graphics card when installing the aftermarket cooler, but there were no issues for a month or two. Update I did a clean install and the issue persisted - looks like it's a hardware issue. I will try removing/cleaning/reseating all the parts.

    Read the article

  • Virtualbox crashes quite often in Windows 8

    - by user1776158
    I just installed Windows 8 on my computer. I got the ISO and the product key from my university so the software itself is sound. I use alot of virtual box. And ever since I moved to Windows 8, I have noticed that virtual box crashes more often. In particular, it is very very bad at opening multiple guests. My CPU usage will be at like 20% and I only have 3 guests open and my entire computer just freezes. Cursor and all. In Windows 7, I was able to open like 6 (not that I ever needed to) and really push my CPU. I havent experience any other issues with Windows 8 yet. Has anyone encountered this? Thanks!

    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

  • kvm process has too large a memory footprint on host

    - by gucki
    I'm using latest ubuntu quantal and start a kvm guest which should have 2048 MB of memory. Now after a few hours I can see that the kvm process of this guest is around 2700 MB, so 700 MB more than the guest should be able to consume. I mean a small overhead like 1% would be ok, but not 30%?! root 8631 74.0 22.2 4767484 2752336 ? Sl Nov07 512:58 kvm -cpu kvm64 -smp sockets=1,cores=2 -cpu kvm64 -m 2048 -device virtio-blk-pci,drive=drive-virtio0,id=virtio0,bus=pci.0,addr=0xa,bootindex=100 -drive file=rbd:data/vm-disk-1,if=none,id=drive-virtio0,cache=writeback,aio=native -device virtio-net-pci,netdev=net0,bus=pci.0,addr=0x12,id=net0,mac=02:7a:86:e6:1a:6c,bootindex=200 -netdev type=tap,id=net0,vhost=on -usbdevice tablet -nodefaults -enable-kvm -daemonize -boot menu=on -vga cirrus root 8694 0.0 0.0 0 0 ? S Nov07 0:00 [kvm-pit/8631] How is this possible and how to prevent it?

    Read the article

  • linux: upload / download difference on network shares

    - by Batsu
    I have a Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 (with SELinux) which shows significant differences of speed between download and upload (the latter significantly slower) of files shared over the LAN. The bottleneck seems to be the output of the linux machine since I have a rate around 1Mb/s when WinXP machines download files shared (using samba) by the RHEL machine uploading files from the RHEL to a WinXP's shared folder while uploading from the XP machines to linux's shares downloading XPs' shares on the RHEL any share between Windows machines only run smooth (around 50Mb/s). Since the upload from RHEL to WinXP's share is slowed too I would exclude an issue in the configuration of samba. What could possibly determine this limit in the upload speed? update: iptables doesn't show any output rule and disabling it doesn't show any noticeable difference, so I would rule out it too.

    Read the article

  • Which SSL certificate to buy [closed]

    - by Sparsh Gupta
    I am reading several notes on SSL certificates and comparison. What matters to me the most is speed. I can read that encryption is same with all different certificates available but I was wondering if there is any difference in the performance of the website with different certificates involved. I am ofcourse interested in end to end response times and I wonder if the type of encryption or number of certificates required as Chain Certificates makes a difference in speed. I dont really care for cost but looking for a good SSL certificate which ideally gives me absolutely no pain and best performance. Recommendations?

    Read the article

  • List and kill running processes on Mac OS in Ctrl/Alt/Delete-like way?

    - by AP257
    So, what do you do on a Mac when a process (as opposed to an application) is hogging CPU, swamping your machine, and you need to kill it? I know you can use top or open Applications > Utilities > Activity Monitor and kill it from there. But what happens when the process is already using so much CPU that doing either of those tasks is impossible? On Windows, you can just do Ctrl/Alt/Delete and the process list will reliably open. So no matter how much your computer is thrashing, you always have access to the list of processes. On Mac OS, there's Cmd/Alt/Escape, which reliably shows running applications. Fine when it's an application causing the problem. But: what do you do if it's a process?

    Read the article

  • slow software raid

    - by Jure1873
    I've got software raid 1 for / and /home and it seems I'm not getting the right speed out of it. Reading from md0 I get around 100 MB/sec Reading from sda or sdb I get around 95-105 MB/sec I thought I would get more speed (while reading data) from two drives. I don't know what is the problem. I'm using kernel 2.6.31-18 hdparm -tT /dev/md0 /dev/md0: Timing cached reads: 2078 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1039.72 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 304 MB in 3.01 seconds = 100.96 MB/sec hdparm -tT /dev/sda /dev/sda: Timing cached reads: 2084 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1041.93 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 316 MB in 3.02 seconds = 104.77 MB/sec hdparm -tT /dev/sdb /dev/sdb: Timing cached reads: 2150 MB in 2.00 seconds = 1075.94 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 302 MB in 3.01 seconds = 100.47 MB/sec Edit: Raid 1

    Read the article

  • IIS slow response

    - by Martin Ševic
    I have developed ASP.NET 4.5 application which take infos about sensors from sqlite database every 3 seconds. This application runs nice on my local develop machine on IIS Express server. I have created virtual machine (4x 3,25 GHz CPU; 6GB RAM) where i have installed Windows Server 2012 and IIS 8 service in order to test application on real server because we will run it on production machine later. After installing VC++ 2010 x64 and VC++ 2010 x86 and set "Enable 32-bit application" to true in application pool website started to work but there is a large problem with response time. There is a for example 10 seconds delay before page loads. CPU utillization is about 10% and RAM about 1,5GB. I am new to configuring IIS server so i want to ask if there is some tip how to make it faster. I am sure, there will be some twist which will make it normal work. Many thanks.

    Read the article

  • Choosing parts for a high-spec custom PC - feedback required [closed]

    - by James
    I'm looking to build a high-spec PC costing under ~£800 (bearing in mind I can get the CPU half price). This is my first time doing this so I have plenty of questions! I have been doing lots of research and this is what I have come up with: http://pcpartpicker.com/uk/p/j4lE Usage: I will be using it for Adobe CS6, rendering in 3DS Max, particle simulations in Realflow and for playing games like GTA IV (and V when it comes out), Crysis 1/2, Saints Row The Third, Deus Ex HR, etc. Questions: Can you see any obvious problem areas with the current setup? Will it be sufficient for the above usage? I won't be doing any overclocking initially. Is it worth buying the H60 liquid cooler, or will the fan that comes with the CPU be sufficient? Is water cooling generally quieter? Is the chosen motherboard good for the current components? And is it future-proof? I read that the HDD is often the bottleneck when it comes to gaming. I presume this is true to other high-end applications? If so, is my selection good? I keep changing my mind about the GPU; first the 560, now the 660. Can anyone shed some light on how to choose? I read mixed opinions about matching the GPU to the CPU. Will the 560 or the 660 be sufficient for my required usage? Atm I'm basing my choice on the PassMark benchmarks and how much they cost. The specs on the GeForce website state that the 560 and the 660 both require 450W. Is this a good figure to base the wattage of my PSU on? If so, how do you decide? Do I really need 750W? The latest GTX 690 requires 650W. Is it a good idea to buy a 750W PSU now to future-proof myself?

    Read the article

  • Weird nfs performance: 1 thread better than 8, 8 better than 2!

    - by Joe
    I'm trying to determine the cause of poor nfs performance between two Xen Virtual Machines (client & server) running on the same host. Specifically, the speed at which I can sequentially read a 1GB file on the client is much lower than what would be expected based on the measured network connection speed between the two VMs and the measured speed of reading the file directly on the server. The VMs are running Ubuntu 9.04 and the server is using the nfs-kernel-server package. According to various NFS tuning resources, changing the number of nfsd threads (in my case kernel threads) can affect performance. Usually this advice is framed in terms of increasing the number from the default of 8 on heavily-used servers. What I find in my current configuration: RPCNFSDCOUNT=8: (default): 13.5-30 seconds to cat a 1GB file on the client so 35-80MB/sec RPCNFSDCOUNT=16: 18s to cat the file 60MB/s RPCNFSDCOUNT=1: 8-9 seconds to cat the file (!!?!) 125MB/s RPCNFSDCOUNT=2: 87s to cat the file 12MB/s I should mention that the file I'm exporting is on a RevoDrive SSD mounted on the server using Xen's PCI-passthrough; on the server I can cat the file in under seconds ( 250MB/s). I am dropping caches on the client before each test. I don't really want to leave the server configured with just one thread as I'm guessing that won't work so well when there are multiple clients, but I might be misunderstanding how that works. I have repeated the tests a few times (changing the server config in between) and the results are fairly consistent. So my question is: why is the best performance with 1 thread? A few other things I have tried changing, to little or no effect: increasing the values of /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ipfrag_low_thresh and /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ipfrag_high_thresh to 512K, 1M from the default 192K,256K increasing the value of /proc/sys/net/core/rmem_default and /proc/sys/net/core/rmem_max to 1M from the default of 128K mounting with client options rsize=32768, wsize=32768 From the output of sar -d I understand that the actual read sizes going to the underlying device are rather small (<100 bytes) but this doesn't cause a problem when reading the file locally on the client. The RevoDrive actually exposes two "SATA" devices /dev/sda and /dev/sdb, then dmraid picks up a fakeRAID-0 striped across them which I have mounted to /mnt/ssd and then bind-mounted to /export/ssd. I've done local tests on my file using both locations and see the good performance mentioned above. If answers/comments ask for more details I will add them.

    Read the article

  • My VPS ubuntu server is very slow

    - by askmike
    I just installed a frech copy of Ubuntu 12.04 on my vps because my old installation was very slow, unfortunately this did not fix the problem. With slow I mean requests for my PHP websites take a long time, very slow (30 sec per request) to slow (3+ sec per request). When it's really bad SSH is also laggish. The websites are: askmike.org (pretty standard Wordpress) mvr.me (own PHP) slow? very slow: Here is a picture of loading a clean install of wordpress slow: here is a picture of loading a small PHP based website the vps The VPS has 256mb ram and an 25GB hdd. Besides serving the 2 small websites it isn't doing anything AFAIK. What have I installed Clean Ubuntu server 12.04 LAMP stack few things like git and nodejs (not using both) ossec (because I thought my server was getting hammered) munin What I already tried / done I installed munin so that I could watch io speed and such. The problem is that I don't know where to look for in the munin report. I checked logs and don't see anything strange (although I don't really know where to look for besides strange / repetitive errors and GET requests). I configured Apache MPM to: <IfModule mpm_prefork_module> StartServers 5 MinSpareServers 5 MaxSpareServers 10 MaxClients 40 MaxRequestsPerChild 0 </IfModule> (apache is using prefork, the default) Stats I copied the munin report as it appeared at 4:50 last night to a site hosted on a shared webhost. Note that tonight my mysql crashed somewhere after 1:00 (which is a new problem altogether), so therefor the graph for last night might look strange. Can anyone help me get my VPS up to normal speed? EDIT: Thanks for the replies. The VPS is 10 bucks a month and is from directvps.nl (Dutch host and I'm also dutch). I did two speed tests for disk IO: $ dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 23.1506 s, 46.4 MB/s $ dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync 1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 39.3796 s, 27.3 MB/s Anyway: how can I prove to my VPS host that it is to slow? I can understand a server being busy slowing a website down. But 5-30 sec loadtime for a normal PHP webpage?

    Read the article

  • HTTP transfer speeds start fast then slows to a crawl

    - by AnITAdmin
    We just got a new dedicated 1 gigabit server running IIS. The CPU is 15% or less, the RAM (4 GB total) has 3 GB unused... We are pushing 110 mbits per second... Speeds are really slow.. And, if fact, here's how it happens: We connect, and then the speeds are really fast, and quickly decline to 40 kBps or less. What's going on? It seems the server just wont go above 120 mbits per second. The files are all very large. 50 MB to 500 MB... Could this be a factor? Again, CPU, RAM, UI responsiveness when accessing remotely all seem fine.

    Read the article

  • Using TrueCrypt (software encryption) with an SSD

    - by Shackrock
    I use full drive encryption (FDE) w/ TrueCrypt on my laptop. I have a 2nd gen I7 with AES instruction support, so honestly I can't even notice a speed change on the system with it on. My question, is for those who know about SSD's a lot. I previously (early 2011) read articles about how software encryption will negate the speed benefits that an SSD provides - because of the need for the SSD to send a delete command, then a write command, for every encrypted write - instead of just writing over data like a regular HDD would (or something like this...honestly I can't remember...ha!). Anyway, any improvements in this field? Is it pointless for me to grab an SSD if I'm using FDE? Thanks all.

    Read the article

  • Can a motherboard be faulty even if it's getting power and so are components hooked up to it?

    - by Davy8
    Sort of a followup to this question. The mobo's getting power, the lights are on. The GPU fan is spinning (it doesn't use auxiliary power, it's only connected to the mobo). I'm not getting any video signal, and it's not the video card (nor monitor) that's faulty, so I'm suspecting mobo or CPU (possibly RAM?) and I'm trying to pinpoint which part is at fault. Is the motherboard a candidate for being broken or is it not very likely if it's getting power and powering other components? The CPU fan is getting power as well.

    Read the article

  • How can I restrict my mates to stop downloading?

    - by user239295
    We are sharing an internet broadband connection with 6 users at a place we live. We get 20 gb fup ( Fair usage policy) with 2 mbps speed from the ISP after the 20 gb is consumed the speed comes down to 512 kbps very difficult to browse any page. The problem is we cannot track which user/mate is downloading and ending the FUP. it is very difficult to track so is there something that we can allot per user some amount of space like 2 gb of downloading or restrict all from downloading so that we can utilize all the fup till the end of the month. We are using this connection as wifi configured. A adsl router is configured as wifi and we all using all 6 laptops. No PC. Any help would be appreciated. I apologize if i am not clear with my question.

    Read the article

  • How do I change the output line length from the "top" linux command running in batch mode

    - by Tom
    The following command is useful to capture the current processes that are taking up the most CPU in a file: top -c -b -n 1 > top.log The -c flag is particularly useful because it gives you the command line arguments of each process rather than just the process name. The problem is that each line of output is truncated to fit on the current terminal window. This is ok if you can have a wide terminal because you have a lot of the output but if your terminal is only 165 characters wide, you only get 165 characters of information per process and it is often not enough characters to show the full process command. This is a particular problem when the command is executed without a terminal, for example if you do it via a cron job. Does anyone know how to stop top truncating data or force top to display a certain number of characters per line? This is not urgent because there is an alternative method of getting the top 10 CPU using processes: ps -eo pcpu,pmem,user,args | sort -r -k1 | head -n 10

    Read the article

  • How to find the process(es) which are hogging the machine

    - by Aaron Digulla
    Scenario: All of a sudden, my computer feels sluggish. Mouse moves but windows take ages to open, etc. uptime says the load is 7.69 and raising. What is the fastest way to find out which process(es) are the cause of the load? Now, "top" and similar tools isn't the answer because they either show CPU or memory usage but not both at the same time. What I need is the single command which I might be able to type as it happens - something that will figure out any of System is trying to swap 8GB of RAM to disk because process X ... or process X seeks all over the disk or process X uses 400% CPU" So what I'm looking for is iostat, htop/atop and similar tools run into one with an output like this: 1235 cp - Disk trashing 87 chrome - Uses 2&nbsp;GB of RAM 137 nfs_bench - Uses 95% of the network bandwidth I don't want a tool that gives me some numbers which I can analyze but a tool that tells me exactly which process causes the current load. Assume that the user in front of the keyboard barely knows how to write "process", but the user is quickly overwhelmed when it comes to "resident size", "virtual memory" or "process life cycle". My argument goes like this: A user notices a problem. There can be thousands of reasons ... well, almost :-) The user wants to know the source of the problem. The current solutions give me lots of numbers, and I need to know what these numbers mean. What I'm looking for is a meta tool. 99% of the data is irrelevant to the problem. So what the tool should do is look for processes which hog some resource and list only those along with "this process needs a lot of CPU, this produces many IRQs, this process allocates a lot of RAM (and it's still growing)". This will be a relatively short list. It will be much more simple for someone new to this to locate the culprit from this list than from the output of, say, htop which gives me about 5000 numbers but requires me to fold multi-threaded processes myself (I have 50 lines which say VIRT 2750M but only 16 GB of RAM - the machine ought to swap itself to death but of course, this is a misinterpretation of the data that can happen quickly).

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151  | Next Page >