Search Results

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

Page 173/456 | < Previous Page | 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180  | Next Page >

  • Diagnosing PCI issues

    - by dtsazza
    I'm upgrading a PC for a friend, and have run into a problem with upgrading the motherboard. I've been assembling custom PCs for the best part of a decade now, so I'm happy enough with the basics at the very least. The motherboard, CPU and graphics card were all updated at once - after this was done, the machine POSTs but the PCI wireless card, as well as the PCI-E graphics card, do not seem to be recognised at all by the system. No trace of them anywhere in the BIOS, or the POST output, or in Windows. I booted into Linux and ran an lspci which also showed up no sign of them. What is the best step to go about diagnosing this? Is it likely/feasible that the motherboard's PCI bus is just defective and it needs to be RMAed? Are there any other common gotchas that might cause these symptoms? For reference, the components in question are: CPU: Celeron E1400 Motherboard: Gigabyte GA-G31M-ES2L Graphics card: TBC (a low end card from a couple of years ago; worked flawlessly before the mobo change) PCI WNIC: Edimax 7128G Thanks in advance for any help.

    Read the article

  • Performance degrades for more than 2 threads on Xeon X5355

    - by zoolii
    Hi All, I am writing an application using boost threads and using boost barriers to synchronize the threads. I have two machines to test the application. Machine 1 is a core2 duo (T8300) cpu machine (windows XP professional - 4GB RAM) where I am getting following performance figures : Number of threads :1 , TPS :21 Number of threads :2 , TPS :35 (66 % improvement) further increase in number of threads decreases the TPS but that is understandable as the machine has only two cores. Machine 2 is a 2 quad core ( Xeon X5355) cpu machine (windows 2003 server with 4GB RAM) and has 8 effective cores. Number of threads :1 , TPS :21 Number of threads :2 , TPS :27 (28 % improvement) Number of threads :4 , TPS :25 Number of threads :8 , TPS :24 As you can see, performance is degrading after 2 threads (though it has 8 cores). If the program has some bottle neck , then for 2 thread also it should have degraded. Any idea? , Explanations ? , Does the OS has some role in performance ? - It seems like the Core2duo (2.4GHz) scales better than Xeon X5355 (2.66GHz) though it has better clock speed. Thank you -Zoolii

    Read the article

  • My Computer hangs for a few minutes just after startup, and then is fine.

    - by EvilChookie
    So I just built myself a reasonably beefy computer, and I installed Windows 7 on it. However, I start the machine up each morning and within a few minutes, the computer will semi hang. That is the mouse is responsive, and most of the time I can open task manager, or a new tab in Chrome. Occasionally windows will be labelled as 'Not responding'. Then, the machine will get over it's problem, and will be nice and quick until I turn it off. Here's my specs: CPU: AMD Phenom-II X4 955 Black (Quad Core, 3.2ghz) RAM: 4GB of DDR3 1300 MOBO: ASUS M4A785T-M (Latest BIOS) HARD DRIVES: 2x1TB Western Digital Caviar Blacks in RAID-0. OS: Windows 7 Ultimate x64. GPU: ASUS GT240 1GB. I believe this issue relates to the RAID array, as I didn't have the lockup problem before I created the array. I purchased a second drive and reformatted after creating a RAID array, since the single drive was a little on the pokey side (compared to the rest of the computer). What I have tried: Updated Raid Drivers Malware checks Windows Updates Unecessary Services CPU and Disk activity appears to be low (via Resource Monitor) No strange errors in the error log. Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • How would I force Debian to use the physical sector size on a hard disk?

    - by Confused User
    I just purchased a few new 3TB WD drives. These have physical 4k sectors, but there is some sort of layer which is providing 512B logical sectors (see the partition table below). In order to attempt to get some more speed out of my hard drives, I would like to get rid of this logical layer and actually use the physical 4k sectors. However, I can't figure out how to do this (or even if it's possible) from the man pages of fdisk and parted, or from searching Google. Does anybody know how this could be done? As to why this is relevant, this page demonstrates that meerly aligning the sectors properly can already make up to a 25% speed difference for reads, and more than 2500% for writes in some cases! Getting rid of the logical sectors in favor of the physicals ones should improve speeds even more. Thanks! $ parted /dev/sdc GNU Parted 2.3 Using /dev/sdc Welcome to GNU Parted! Type 'help' to view a list of commands. (parted) print Model: ATA WDC WD30EZRX-00M (scsi) Disk /dev/sdc: 3001GB Sector size (logical/physical): 512B/4096B Partition Table: gpt Number Start End Size File system Name Flags 1 1049kB 3001GB 3001GB zfs 9 3001GB 3001GB 8389kB P.S. I don't care about the data on the drives, I was just playing with different file systems. Also, this is my first time posting here, so please let me know if my posts should be formatted differently, etc.

    Read the article

  • finding the best network latency between two countries

    - by Yoav Aner
    I know there are many tools to test for bandwidth and latency, but they all rely on having at least one host from which you can run those tests. I wonder whether there's an online source or some other way to guestimate the latency or speed between two countries (in general). For example, would a customer in Japan get lower latency if the server is located in Singapore or Australia? Is a user in India likely to get higher download speed from a server in the UK or in the US? Are there any online resources or some clever ways to answer those questions with a reasonable degree of accuracy? [UPDATE]: Thanks for the great suggestions from Raffael Luthiger. I didn't know about those looking glass servers. The submarine cable maps were also really cool to discover (Thanks to Jesper Mortensen). Also seems really wise if I could ask those network professional in the area for their experience, but obviously I don't have access to those. At least some of them are on SF :) However, I'm still a little unsure how to combine those resources to give me some measurements. This is the information I have: Two countries (A,B). I do have IP addresses of customers in country A (I can obtain those from the web server log files for example). Presumably I can find some looking glass servers in country B and run a trace to those IPs. What's the best measurements to use? Are there any scripts that help automate at least some of this process?

    Read the article

  • MySQL Config on Large Machine

    - by Jonathon
    We have a Windows 2003 Enterprise Edition server (64bit) running only MySQL 5.1.45 64-bit. It has 16G RAM and 10T of hard-drive space in RAID 10. We are having horrible performance from mysqld (85-100% CPU utilization). We were running a smaller machine with better performance, so I am assuming our my.ini file is not correct for our current machine. The my.ini file is as follows: [client] port=3306 [mysql] default-character-set=latin1 [mysqld] port=3306 basedir="D:/MySQL/" datadir="D:/MySQL/data" default-character-set=latin1 default-storage-engine=MYISAM sql-mode="" skip-innodb skip-locking max_allowed_packet = 1M max_connections=800 myisam_max_sort_file_size=5G myisam_sort_buffer_size=500M table_open_cache = 512 table_cache=8000 tmp_table_size=30M query_cache_size=50M thread_cache_size=128 key_buffer_size=3072M read_buffer_size=2M read_rnd_buffer_size=16M sort_buffer_size=2M #replication settings (this is the master) log-bin=log server-id = 1 Does anyone see anything wrong with this setup? For a machine with this much RAM, why in the world would mysqld eat up so much CPU? I know we can optimize some queries, etc., but it did run okay on a smaller machine, so I am pretty sure it is the config. Thanks in advance for any help.

    Read the article

  • Troubleshooting: Monitor never turns on, system fans running, DVD-ROM does not open.

    - by Wesley
    Hi all, Here are my specs beforehand: ECS P4VXASD2+ (V5.0) motherboard FSB 533MHz Intel Pentium 4 2.40A GHz Prescott Socket 478 2x 256MB PC2100 DDR RAM, 2x 256MB PC133 SDRAM CoolMax 350W PSU DVD-ROM - will edit with brand & model 128MB ATi Radeon 9800 Pro AGP No hard drive So, I just put those parts together today and I tried to power it up, with the monitor connected to the Radeon 9800 in the AGP slot (mobo does not have VGA port). After turning it on, the CPU fan, graphics fan and system fan go on. However, the monitor remains in standby mode, despite being plugged in. Also, after pushing the button on the DVD-ROM drive, it does not open. I've used the DVD-ROM drive before with absolutely no issues. The graphics card was slightly buggy when I put it on another machine, which was left outside in winter weather for 3 months. (Still that computer's integrated graphics worked fine.) CMOS battery was replaced and jumpers are all set correctly. Now, I'm wondering whether the motherboard, CPU, PSU or GPU is the problem. What can I do to test which part is the problem? Just to clarify, I don't have a hard drive, so I usually boot Ubuntu from the disc drive. Anyways, thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • /etc/security/limits.conf for setting program limits in Linux

    - by Flavius Akerele
    I have the following inside /etc/security/limits.conf (I have specified root separately because * will not include it.) user2 - core unlimited * - core 0 root - core 0 * - rss 512000 root - rss 512000 * - nproc 100 root - nproc 100 * - maxlogins 1 root - maxlogins 1 I run a program as user2 (./programname) but /proc/3498/limits says cores are disabled: Limit Soft Limit Hard Limit Units Max cpu time unlimited unlimited seconds Max file size unlimited unlimited bytes Max data size unlimited unlimited bytes Max stack size 8388608 unlimited bytes Max core file size 0 0 bytes Max resident set 524288000 524288000 bytes Max processes 100 100 processes Max open files 1024 1024 files Max locked memory 65536 65536 bytes Max address space unlimited unlimited bytes Max file locks unlimited unlimited locks Max pending signals 14001 14001 signals Max msgqueue size 819200 819200 bytes Max nice priority 0 0 Max realtime priority 0 0 Max realtime timeout unlimited unlimited us Both ulimit -Sa and ulimit -Ha output that cores are disabled: core file size (blocks, -c) 0 data seg size (kbytes, -d) unlimited scheduling priority (-e) 0 file size (blocks, -f) unlimited pending signals (-i) 14001 max locked memory (kbytes, -l) 64 max memory size (kbytes, -m) 512000 open files (-n) 1024 pipe size (512 bytes, -p) 8 POSIX message queues (bytes, -q) 819200 real-time priority (-r) 0 stack size (kbytes, -s) unlimited cpu time (seconds, -t) unlimited max user processes (-u) 100 virtual memory (kbytes, -v) unlimited file locks (-x) unlimited Why are cores disabled ?

    Read the article

  • load average in top and procs in vmstat

    - by Mingfei.hua
    As far as I know, the load average in top is the numbers of precess(threads) in running or uninterrupted sleep status, So it should be equal to (procs-r +1 )+ procs-b in vmstat, but in practice, this two number always have big gap. Any wrongs in my understanding, appreciate so much if some guys give me some guide. top - 05:34:50 up 1 day, 20:56, 5 users, load average: 2.83, 2.67, 1.62 Tasks: 79 total, 1 running, 78 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 6.8%us, 1.8%sy, 0.0%ni, 91.0%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.4%st Mem: 1758000k total, 582636k used, 1175364k free, 103932k buffers Swap: 917500k total, 0k used, 917500k free, 180868k cached procs -----------memory---------- ---swap-- -----io---- --system-- -----cpu----- r b swpd free buff cache si so bi bo in cs us sy id wa st 0 0 0 1182524 103784 180860 0 0 1 9 6 53 7 2 91 0 0 0 0 0 1182524 103784 180860 0 0 0 36 70 117 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 1182516 103784 180860 0 0 0 0 73 132 0 1 100 0 0 0 0 0 1182516 103784 180860 0 0 0 0 60 127 0 0 100 0 0 1 0 0 1182516 103784 180860 0 0 0 0 62 102 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 1182628 103784 180860 0 0 0 0 289 238 1 2 97 0 0 2 0 0 1152160 103784 180892 0 0 0 8 1481 2371 54 12 34 0 0 1 0 0 1182192 103784 180860 0 0 0 0 681 834 19 4 78 0 0 0 0 0 1182200 103784 180860 0 0 0 0 80 147 0 1 100 0 0 0 0 0 1182200 103784 180860 0 0 0 0 53 107 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 1182208 103788 180856 0 0 0 72 64 123 0 0 100 1 0

    Read the article

  • No clue for high load average on top

    - by Oz.
    We have several machines on Amazon (ec2) of the type c1.xlarge with 16 cpus, running the Amazon AMI. Details on the machine: 7 GB of memory 20 EC2 Compute Units (8 virtual cores with 2.5 EC2 Compute Units each) 1690 GB of instance storage 64-bit platform I/O Performance: High API name: c1.xlarge One out of the several machines is showing a high load average, since we have run the last yum upgrade a couple of weeks a go. We did not yet update the other machines, and everything looks normal on them. The strange thing is that the top command not showing any hint for the cause of the load. CPUs are 4.8%us, 1.1%sy, 0.0%ni, 94.1%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st(see below). Mem is about 1.5GB free. Any idea what could it be, or where else can we check? Many thanks for the help. # # top # top - 07:57:42 up 4:18, 1 user, load average: 1.36, 1.45, 1.47 Tasks: 131 total, 1 running, 130 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 4.8%us, 1.1%sy, 0.0%ni, 94.1%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Mem: 7120092k total, 5644920k used, 1475172k free, 532888k buffers Swap: 0k total, 0k used, 0k free, 3463936k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 1557 mysql 20 0 1829m 374m 6448 S 14.3 5.4 11:15.09 mysqld 6655 apache 20 0 416m 49m 3744 S 9.3 0.7 0:04.85 httpd 27683 apache 20 0 421m 54m 3708 S 9.0 0.8 0:00.99 httpd 6682 apache 20 0 424m 57m 3788 S 8.3 0.8 0:03.81 httpd 16816 apache 20 0 419m 51m 3760 S 4.3 0.7 0:04.09 httpd 22182 apache 20 0 417m 50m 3756 S 1.7 0.7 0:06.34 httpd 219 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.3 0.0 0:00.34 kworker/7:1 699 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.3 0.0 0:00.40 kworker/3:1 1 root 20 0 19376 1508 1212 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.29 init 2 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 kthreadd 3 root 20 0 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.71 ksoftirqd/0

    Read the article

  • My linux server "Number of processes created" and "Context switches" are growing incredibly fast

    - by Jorge Fuentes González
    I have a strange behaviour in my server :-/. Is a OpenVZ VPS (I think is OpenVZ, because /proc/user_beancounters exists and df -h returns /dev/simfs drive. Also ifconfig returns venet0). When I do cat /proc/stat, I can see how each second about 50-100 processes are created and happens about 800k-1200k context switches! All that info is with the server completely idle, no traffic nor programs running. Top shows 0 load average and 100% idle CPU. I've closed all non-needed services (httpd, mysqld, sendmail, nagios, named...) and the problem still happens. I do ps -ALf each second too and I don't see any changes, only a new ps process is created each time and the PID is just the same as before + 1, so new processes are not created, so I thought that process growing in cat /proc/stat must be threads (Yes, seems that processes in /proc/stat counts threads creation too as this states: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:8NLgzKEzHQQJ:www.linuxhowtos.org/System/procstat.htm&hl=es&tbo=d&gl=es&strip=1). I've changed to /proc dir and done cat [PID]\status with all PIDs listed with ls (Including kernel ones) and in any process voluntary_ctxt_switches nor nonvoluntary_ctxt_switches are growing at the same speed as cat /proc/stat does (just a few tens/second), Threads keeps the same also. I've done strace -p PID to all process too so I can see if any process is crating threads or something but the only process that has a bit of movement is ssh and that movement is read/write operations because of the data is sending to my terminal. After that, I've done vmstat -s and saw that forks is growing at the same speed processes in /proc/stat does. As http://linux.die.net/man/2/fork says, each fork() creates a new PID but my server PID is not growing! The last thing I can think of is that all process data that proc/stat and vmstat -s show is shared with all the other VPS stored in the same machine, but I don't know if that is correct... If someone can throw some light on this I would be really grateful.

    Read the article

  • MySQL query, 2 similar servers, 2 minute difference in execution times

    - by mr12086
    I had a similar question on stack overflow, but it seems to be more server/mysql setup related than coding. The queries below all execute instantly on our development server where as they can take upto 2 minutes 20 seconds. The query execution time seems to be affected by home ambiguous the LIKE string's are. If they closely match a country that has few matches it will take less time, and if you use something like 'ge' for germany - it will take longer to execute. But this doesn't always work out like that, at times its quite erratic. Sending data appears to be the culprit but why and what does that mean. Also memory on production looks to be quite low (free memory)? Production: Intel Quad Xeon E3-1220 3.1GHz 4GB DDR3 2x 1TB SATA in RAID1 Network speed 100Mb Ubuntu Development Intel Core i3-2100, 2C/4T, 3.10GHz 500 GB SATA - No RAID 4GB DDR3 UPDATE 2 : mysqltuner output: [prod] -------- General Statistics -------------------------------------------------- [--] Skipped version check for MySQLTuner script [OK] Currently running supported MySQL version 5.1.61-0ubuntu0.10.04.1 [OK] Operating on 64-bit architecture -------- Storage Engine Statistics ------------------------------------------- [--] Status: +Archive -BDB -Federated +InnoDB -ISAM -NDBCluster [--] Data in MyISAM tables: 103M (Tables: 180) [--] Data in InnoDB tables: 491M (Tables: 19) [!!] Total fragmented tables: 38 -------- Security Recommendations ------------------------------------------- [OK] All database users have passwords assigned -------- Performance Metrics ------------------------------------------------- [--] Up for: 77d 4h 6m 1s (53M q [7.968 qps], 14M conn, TX: 87B, RX: 12B) [--] Reads / Writes: 98% / 2% [--] Total buffers: 58.0M global + 2.7M per thread (151 max threads) [OK] Maximum possible memory usage: 463.8M (11% of installed RAM) [OK] Slow queries: 0% (12K/53M) [OK] Highest usage of available connections: 22% (34/151) [OK] Key buffer size / total MyISAM indexes: 16.0M/10.6M [OK] Key buffer hit rate: 98.7% (162M cached / 2M reads) [OK] Query cache efficiency: 20.7% (7M cached / 36M selects) [!!] Query cache prunes per day: 3934 [OK] Sorts requiring temporary tables: 1% (3K temp sorts / 230K sorts) [!!] Joins performed without indexes: 71068 [OK] Temporary tables created on disk: 24% (3M on disk / 13M total) [OK] Thread cache hit rate: 99% (690 created / 14M connections) [!!] Table cache hit rate: 0% (64 open / 85M opened) [OK] Open file limit used: 12% (128/1K) [OK] Table locks acquired immediately: 99% (16M immediate / 16M locks) [!!] InnoDB data size / buffer pool: 491.9M/8.0M -------- Recommendations ----------------------------------------------------- General recommendations: Run OPTIMIZE TABLE to defragment tables for better performance Enable the slow query log to troubleshoot bad queries Adjust your join queries to always utilize indexes Increase table_cache gradually to avoid file descriptor limits Variables to adjust: query_cache_size (> 16M) join_buffer_size (> 128.0K, or always use indexes with joins) table_cache (> 64) innodb_buffer_pool_size (>= 491M) [dev] -------- General Statistics -------------------------------------------------- [--] Skipped version check for MySQLTuner script [OK] Currently running supported MySQL version 5.1.62-0ubuntu0.11.10.1 [!!] Switch to 64-bit OS - MySQL cannot currently use all of your RAM -------- Storage Engine Statistics ------------------------------------------- [--] Status: +Archive -BDB -Federated +InnoDB -ISAM -NDBCluster [--] Data in MyISAM tables: 185M (Tables: 632) [--] Data in InnoDB tables: 967M (Tables: 38) [!!] Total fragmented tables: 73 -------- Security Recommendations ------------------------------------------- [OK] All database users have passwords assigned -------- Performance Metrics ------------------------------------------------- [--] Up for: 1d 2h 26m 9s (5K q [0.058 qps], 1K conn, TX: 4M, RX: 1M) [--] Reads / Writes: 99% / 1% [--] Total buffers: 58.0M global + 2.7M per thread (151 max threads) [OK] Maximum possible memory usage: 463.8M (11% of installed RAM) [OK] Slow queries: 0% (0/5K) [OK] Highest usage of available connections: 1% (2/151) [OK] Key buffer size / total MyISAM indexes: 16.0M/18.6M [OK] Key buffer hit rate: 99.9% (60K cached / 36 reads) [OK] Query cache efficiency: 44.5% (1K cached / 2K selects) [OK] Query cache prunes per day: 0 [OK] Sorts requiring temporary tables: 0% (0 temp sorts / 44 sorts) [OK] Temporary tables created on disk: 24% (162 on disk / 666 total) [OK] Thread cache hit rate: 99% (2 created / 1K connections) [!!] Table cache hit rate: 1% (64 open / 4K opened) [OK] Open file limit used: 8% (88/1K) [OK] Table locks acquired immediately: 100% (1K immediate / 1K locks) [!!] InnoDB data size / buffer pool: 967.7M/8.0M -------- Recommendations ----------------------------------------------------- General recommendations: Run OPTIMIZE TABLE to defragment tables for better performance Enable the slow query log to troubleshoot bad queries Increase table_cache gradually to avoid file descriptor limits Variables to adjust: table_cache (> 64) innodb_buffer_pool_size (>= 967M) UPDATE 1: When testing the queries listed here there is usually no more than one other query taking place, and usually none. Because production is actually handling apache requests that development gets very few of as it's only myself and 1 other who accesses it - could the 4GB of RAM be getting exhausted by using the single machine for both apache and mysql server? Production: sudo hdparm -tT /dev/sda /dev/sda: Timing cached reads: 24872 MB in 2.00 seconds = 12450.72 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 368 MB in 3.00 seconds = 122.49 MB/sec sudo hdparm -tT /dev/sdb /dev/sdb: Timing cached reads: 24786 MB in 2.00 seconds = 12407.22 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 350 MB in 3.00 seconds = 116.53 MB/sec Server version(mysql + ubuntu versions): 5.1.61-0ubuntu0.10.04.1 Development: sudo hdparm -tT /dev/sda /dev/sda: Timing cached reads: 10632 MB in 2.00 seconds = 5319.40 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 400 MB in 3.01 seconds = 132.85 MB/sec Server version(mysql + ubuntu versions): 5.1.62-0ubuntu0.11.10.1 ORIGINAL DATA : This query is NOT the query in question but is related so ill post it. SELECT f.form_question_has_answer_id FROM form_question_has_answer f INNER JOIN project_company_has_user p ON f.form_question_has_answer_user_id = p.project_company_has_user_user_id INNER JOIN company c ON p.project_company_has_user_company_id = c.company_id INNER JOIN project p2 ON p.project_company_has_user_project_id = p2.project_id INNER JOIN user u ON p.project_company_has_user_user_id = u.user_id INNER JOIN form f2 ON p.project_company_has_user_project_id = f2.form_project_id WHERE (f2.form_template_name = 'custom' AND p.project_company_has_user_garbage_collection = 0 AND p.project_company_has_user_project_id = '29') AND (LCASE(c.company_country) LIKE '%ge%' OR LCASE(c.company_country) LIKE '%abcde%') AND f.form_question_has_answer_form_id = '174' And the explain plan for the above query is, run on both dev and production produce the same plan. +----+-------------+-------+--------+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+----------------------------------+---------+----------------------------------------------------+------+-------------+ | id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra | +----+-------------+-------+--------+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+----------------------------------+---------+----------------------------------------------------+------+-------------+ | 1 | SIMPLE | p2 | const | PRIMARY | PRIMARY | 4 | const | 1 | Using index | | 1 | SIMPLE | f | ref | form_question_has_answer_form_id,form_question_has_answer_user_id | form_question_has_answer_form_id | 4 | const | 796 | Using where | | 1 | SIMPLE | u | eq_ref | PRIMARY | PRIMARY | 4 | new_klarents.f.form_question_has_answer_user_id | 1 | Using index | | 1 | SIMPLE | p | ref | project_company_has_user_unique_key,project_company_has_user_user_id,project_company_has_user_company_id,project_company_has_user_project_id | project_company_has_user_user_id | 4 | new_klarents.f.form_question_has_answer_user_id | 1 | Using where | | 1 | SIMPLE | f2 | ref | form_project_id | form_project_id | 4 | const | 15 | Using where | | 1 | SIMPLE | c | eq_ref | PRIMARY | PRIMARY | 4 | new_klarents.p.project_company_has_user_company_id | 1 | Using where | +----+-------------+-------+--------+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+----------------------------------+---------+----------------------------------------------------+------+-------------+ This query takes 2 minutes ~20 seconds to execute. The query that is ACTUALLY being run on the server is this one: SELECT COUNT(*) AS num_results FROM (SELECT f.form_question_has_answer_id FROM form_question_has_answer f INNER JOIN project_company_has_user p ON f.form_question_has_answer_user_id = p.project_company_has_user_user_id INNER JOIN company c ON p.project_company_has_user_company_id = c.company_id INNER JOIN project p2 ON p.project_company_has_user_project_id = p2.project_id INNER JOIN user u ON p.project_company_has_user_user_id = u.user_id INNER JOIN form f2 ON p.project_company_has_user_project_id = f2.form_project_id WHERE (f2.form_template_name = 'custom' AND p.project_company_has_user_garbage_collection = 0 AND p.project_company_has_user_project_id = '29') AND (LCASE(c.company_country) LIKE '%ge%' OR LCASE(c.company_country) LIKE '%abcde%') AND f.form_question_has_answer_form_id = '174' GROUP BY f.form_question_has_answer_id;) dctrn_count_query; With explain plans (again same on dev and production): +----+-------------+-------+--------+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+----------------------------------+---------+----------------------------------------------------+------+------------------------------+ | id | select_type | table | type | possible_keys | key | key_len | ref | rows | Extra | +----+-------------+-------+--------+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+----------------------------------+---------+----------------------------------------------------+------+------------------------------+ | 1 | PRIMARY | NULL | NULL | NULL | NULL | NULL | NULL | NULL | Select tables optimized away | | 2 | DERIVED | p2 | const | PRIMARY | PRIMARY | 4 | | 1 | Using index | | 2 | DERIVED | f | ref | form_question_has_answer_form_id,form_question_has_answer_user_id | form_question_has_answer_form_id | 4 | | 797 | Using where | | 2 | DERIVED | p | ref | project_company_has_user_unique_key,project_company_has_user_user_id,project_company_has_user_company_id,project_company_has_user_project_id,project_company_has_user_garbage_collection | project_company_has_user_user_id | 4 | new_klarents.f.form_question_has_answer_user_id | 1 | Using where | | 2 | DERIVED | f2 | ref | form_project_id | form_project_id | 4 | | 15 | Using where | | 2 | DERIVED | c | eq_ref | PRIMARY | PRIMARY | 4 | new_klarents.p.project_company_has_user_company_id | 1 | Using where | | 2 | DERIVED | u | eq_ref | PRIMARY | PRIMARY | 4 | new_klarents.p.project_company_has_user_user_id | 1 | Using where; Using index | +----+-------------+-------+--------+------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+----------------------------------+---------+----------------------------------------------------+------+------------------------------+ On the production server the information I have is as follows. Upon execution: +-------------+ | num_results | +-------------+ | 3 | +-------------+ 1 row in set (2 min 14.28 sec) Show profile: +--------------------------------+------------+ | Status | Duration | +--------------------------------+------------+ | starting | 0.000016 | | checking query cache for query | 0.000057 | | Opening tables | 0.004388 | | System lock | 0.000003 | | Table lock | 0.000036 | | init | 0.000030 | | optimizing | 0.000016 | | statistics | 0.000111 | | preparing | 0.000022 | | executing | 0.000004 | | Sorting result | 0.000002 | | Sending data | 136.213836 | | end | 0.000007 | | query end | 0.000002 | | freeing items | 0.004273 | | storing result in query cache | 0.000010 | | logging slow query | 0.000001 | | logging slow query | 0.000002 | | cleaning up | 0.000002 | +--------------------------------+------------+ On development the results are as follows. +-------------+ | num_results | +-------------+ | 3 | +-------------+ 1 row in set (0.08 sec) Again the profile for this query: +--------------------------------+----------+ | Status | Duration | +--------------------------------+----------+ | starting | 0.000022 | | checking query cache for query | 0.000148 | | Opening tables | 0.000025 | | System lock | 0.000008 | | Table lock | 0.000101 | | optimizing | 0.000035 | | statistics | 0.001019 | | preparing | 0.000047 | | executing | 0.000008 | | Sorting result | 0.000005 | | Sending data | 0.086565 | | init | 0.000015 | | optimizing | 0.000006 | | executing | 0.000020 | | end | 0.000004 | | query end | 0.000004 | | freeing items | 0.000028 | | storing result in query cache | 0.000005 | | removing tmp table | 0.000008 | | closing tables | 0.000008 | | logging slow query | 0.000002 | | cleaning up | 0.000005 | +--------------------------------+----------+ If i remove user and/or project innerjoins the query is reduced to 30s. Last bit of information I have: Mysqlserver and Apache are on the same box, there is only one box for production. Production output from top: before & after. top - 15:43:25 up 78 days, 12:11, 4 users, load average: 1.42, 0.99, 0.78 Tasks: 162 total, 2 running, 160 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 0.1%us, 50.4%sy, 0.0%ni, 49.5%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Mem: 4037868k total, 3772580k used, 265288k free, 243704k buffers Swap: 3905528k total, 265384k used, 3640144k free, 1207944k cached top - 15:44:31 up 78 days, 12:13, 4 users, load average: 1.94, 1.23, 0.87 Tasks: 160 total, 2 running, 157 sleeping, 0 stopped, 1 zombie Cpu(s): 0.2%us, 50.6%sy, 0.0%ni, 49.3%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Mem: 4037868k total, 3834300k used, 203568k free, 243736k buffers Swap: 3905528k total, 265384k used, 3640144k free, 1207804k cached But this isn't a good representation of production's normal status so here is a grab of it from today outside of executing the queries. top - 11:04:58 up 79 days, 7:33, 4 users, load average: 0.39, 0.58, 0.76 Tasks: 156 total, 1 running, 155 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 3.3%us, 2.8%sy, 0.0%ni, 93.9%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Mem: 4037868k total, 3676136k used, 361732k free, 271480k buffers Swap: 3905528k total, 268736k used, 3636792k free, 1063432k cached Development: This one doesn't change during or after. top - 15:47:07 up 110 days, 22:11, 7 users, load average: 0.17, 0.07, 0.06 Tasks: 210 total, 2 running, 208 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 0.1%us, 0.2%sy, 0.0%ni, 99.7%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Mem: 4111972k total, 1821100k used, 2290872k free, 238860k buffers Swap: 4183036k total, 66472k used, 4116564k free, 921072k cached

    Read the article

  • How do I fix a super slow MacBook?

    - by MakingScienceFictionFact
    I'm running a black MacBook 4.1. Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2.4 GHz, 2 GB RAM, 250 GB hard disk drive, bus speed is 800 MHz. It's about three years old in excellent shape externally. I treat this thing like a baby. It used to run awesome, but now it's super slow at everything. I get the spinning pizza of death constantly. It takes a long time to boot up or load any program, even Safari and iTunes. iPhoto is terribly slow. The Internet doesn't work properly and it reminds me of a buggy PC. I've formatted it and re-installed Mac OS X 10.6 (with all updates), and I've done the disk repairs process. As an iOS developer this is driving me crazy, but luckily I have an iMac to work on in the day which is fast. I'm ready to format it again, but that didn't work last time. After the last format, I copied back files from an external drive so maybe the offending files were hidden in there somewhere. Here are the hard disk drive and RAM specifications. It is upgrade-able to 4 GB of RAM. Hard disk drive: The Fujitsu Mobile MHY2250BH is a 250 GB, standard hard disk drive. Its burst transfer rate is 150 Mbyte/s. This is a 5400 RPM drive and comes with an 8 MB buffer. RAM: two sticks of 1 GB DDR2 SDRAM, speed: 667 MHz.

    Read the article

  • Why is my second monitor not working?

    - by StampedeXV
    Since I have my new computer, I have a very weird problem. Facts: New Computer: Motherboard: ASRock Z77 Pro 3 Graphics-card: Asus1GB D5 X EN GTX560 DCII OC/2DI R CPU: Intel i5-3570 Windows 7 64bit 500W beQuiet special edition (92% efficiency) 8GB 1333MHz DDR3 Corsair RAM (CL9) Scythe Mugen 2 2 magnetic HDDs + 1 SDD 1 DVD-R Old Computer: Motherboard: Asus P55 something Graphics-card: Asus1GB D5 X EN GTX560 DCII OC/2DI R CPU: Intel i7-870 Windows 7 64bit 550W Corsair 8GB 1333MHz DDR3 Corsair RAM (CL9) Scythe Mugen 3 2 magnetic HDDs + 1 SDD 1 DVD-R On the old computer it worked fine with two monitors. Moving to the new (I took the same Graphics-card) it only works with one. The weird thing I mentioned is: not matter which one. But if I put both there, only one is available. There is no reaction at the start (where normally (at least if I remember correctly) the monitor shortly went from "standby" to "on"). Windows does not recognize a second monitor in the Device Manager. I have the latest drivers for Motherboard and Graphics-card. I have the latest BIOS drivers. I am out of ideas. Edit: completed computer setup

    Read the article

  • Slow performance of MySQL database on one server and fast on another one, with similar configurations

    - by Alon_A
    We have a web application that run on two servers of GoDaddy. We experince slow preformance on our production server, although it has stronger hardware then the testing one, and it is dedicated. I'll start with the configurations. Testing: CentOS Linux 5.8, Linux 2.6.18-028stab101.1 on i686 Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU L5609 @ 1.87GHz, 8 cores 60 GB total, 6.03 GB used Apache/2.2.3 (CentOS) MySQL 5.5.21-log PHP Version 5.3.15 Production: CentOS Linux 6.2, Linux 2.6.18-028stab101.1 on x86_64 Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU L5410 @ 2.33GHz, 8 cores 120 GB total, 2.12 GB used Apache/2.2.15 (CentOS) MySQL 5.5.27-log - MySQL Community Server (GPL) by Remi PHP Version 5.3.15 We are running the same code on both servers. The Problem We have some function that executes ~30000 PDO-exec commands. On our testing server it takes about 1.5-2 minutes to complete and our production server it can take more then 15 minutes to complete. As you can see here, from qcachegrind: Researching the problem, we've checked the live graphs on phpMyAdmin and discovered that the MySQL server on our testing server was preforming at steady level of 1000 execution statements per 2 seconds, while the slow production MySQL server was only 250 executions statements per 2 seconds and not steady at all, jumping from 0 to 250 every seconds. You can clearly see it in the graphs: Testing server: Production server: You can see here the comparison between both of the configuration of the MySQL servers.Left is the fast testing and right is the slow production. The differences are highlighted, but I cant find anything that can cause such a behavior difference, as the configs are mostly the same. Maybe you can see something that I cant see. Note that our tables are all InnoDB, so the MyISAM difference is (probably) not relevant. Maybe it is the MySQL Community Server (GPL) that is installed on the production server that can cause the slow performance? Or maybe it needs to be configured differently for 64bit ? I'm currently out of ideas...

    Read the article

  • How does it hurt to use Linux (Ubuntu) as a guest OS for all my tasks?

    - by sauparna
    I have a machine running Windows, where the disk has two partitions C (50 GB) and D (250GB). I do research in Information Retrieval and need to work with a large corpus (more than 50 GB) and in Linux. So if I want to install Linux on the existing system, keeping the Windows installation intact, will it be fine to run it in a virtual box? (say, QEMU, VMWare, etc.) An alternative is using Wubi. In that case the Linux installation has to be on drive C. Then, if I keep a small Linux installation (say 5GB) on C, and my corpus on D (mounted in Linux), how will it affect the performance of my programs which would be accessing the mounted Windows drive D. Is it feasible to use Linux this way? Which of the above is better if at all they are a way out? Note : Since my post in July 2010, I have been using and have tried several ways of maintaining a disk-image that I can mount in Linux. I had a 100GB qcow2 disk and a 100GB raw disk, both formatted to an EXT3 file system. I was mounting and connecting to the qcow2 disk using qemu-nbd. The problem was that every now and then, the connection to the disk would get lost and the running programs would throw disk I/O errors. The raw disk would mount and work fine as a loop mounted device, but when writing data to it, the mount.ntfs program would hog the CPU and the process would take an enormous amount of time. I was in fact running make on a piece of software located on this raw disk, and after a point of time make was waiting while mount.ntfs would show 100% CPU usage.

    Read the article

  • Get Illegal Instruction error when booting Linux in VirtualBox, works fine when booted directly

    - by rkjnsn
    I have a computer on which I am dual booting Windows 7 and Gentoo Linux (both 64-bit). I want to be able to load up my Linux installation in a VM while I am booted into Windows. I have installed VirtualBox and followed the instructions for creating a raw disk VMDK. When I start the VM, Linux starts booting, but then fails with the following error when unlocking my root partition: truecrypt[441] trap invalid opcode ip:373615538e0 sp:3dd0e0dfb60 error:0 in libpixman-1.so.0[373614d6000+8d000] Everything works fine when I boot into Linux directly. What could cause an illegal instruction to be hit in libpixman only when booting in VirtualBox? Update: As a troubleshooting step, I recompiled pixman without "-march", and no longer get an illegal instruction error in that library. (The boot fails in the same spot with the same error in a different library, however.) How can I determine the specific opcode that isn't working in VirtualBox so I can disable it in my CFLAGS without having to disable all CPU-specific optimizations? I am still confused as to why there would be any user-mode instruction that would fail to work in a VM. Is this a known limitation? My CPU is an Intel Core i7 3720QM, and I have hardware virtualization support enabled.

    Read the article

  • Can enabling a RAID controller's writeback cache harm overall performance?

    - by Nathan O'Sullivan
    I have an 8 drive RAID 10 setup connected to an Adaptec 5805Z, running Centos 5.5 and deadline scheduler. A basic dd read test shows 400mb/sec, and a basic dd write test shows about the same. When I run the two simultaneously, I see the read speed drop to ~5mb/sec while the write speed stays at more or less the same 400mb/sec. The output of iostat -x as you would expect, shows that very few read transactions are being executed while the disk is bombarded with writes. If i turn the controller's writeback cache off, I dont see a 50:50 split but I do see a marked improvement, somewhere around 100mb/s reads and 300mb/s writes. I've also found if I lower the nr_requests setting on the drive's queue (somewhere around 8 seems optimal) I can end up with 150mb/sec reads and 150mb/sec writes; ie. a reduction in total throughput but certainly more suitable for my workload. Is this a real phenomenon? Or is my synthetic test too simplistic? The reason this could happen seems clear enough, when the scheduler switches from reads to writes, it can run heaps of write requests because they all just land in the controllers cache but must be carried out at some point. I would guess the actual disk writes are occuring when the scheduler starts trying to perform reads again, resulting in very few read requests being executed. This seems a reasonable explanation, but it also seems like a massive drawback to using writeback cache on an system with non-trivial write loads. I've been searching for discussions around this all afternoon and found nothing. What am I missing?

    Read the article

  • Slow Local Network, Windows 7, Snow Leopard, WiFi/Wired

    - by WerkkreW
    Hello - I am experiencing really poor local network performance in my home. I was recently using a Linksys WRT54G Router with DD-WRT on it, and a couple comparable Linksys-G PCI cards for connectivity but decided to upgrade hoping it would help with my performance issues. The computers in my house are connected as follows: Comcast Business Class Commercial 25mbps/10mbps (Verified with SpeakEasy and Speedtest.net) D-Link DGL-4500 Wireless N Router Windows 7x64 - D-Link DWA-552 Wireless-N Windows 7x64 - D-Link DWA-552 Wireless-N Mac Mini 10.6.2 - AirPort Extreme N Playstation 3, Hard Wired Xbox 360, Hard Wired Essentially the problem is very specific. Web browsing and uploading/downloading files from the internet is fine, more than fine. But if I want to say, Stream a video from one of my Windows 7 computers to my PS3, or copy a large video file between either of the PC's or the Mac, I get a consistent 500-900Kbps throughput at the high end. If I open my network browser, or try to browse my homegroup the response time is horrible. Both of my Windows computers are showing Strong wireless signals with a connection speed of 300Mbps. I know I can never expect to achieve anything near those speeds, but 500Kbps? Here is what I have tried so far: Enabled Single mode N-only and N/G Only on router WPA2 with AES Encrpytion Disabled "Remote Differential Compression" in Windows 7 Disabled TCP "Auto-Tuning" Used other software for file copies such as "Teracopy" I am at the end of my rope. Unfortunately I live in a 75 year old home with plaster walls, so hard-wiring my entire house isn't really an option I can handle right now. Any ideas to help me get decent speed when transferring files across my network would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Mysterious Windows 7 slowdown problem

    - by cletus
    I have a fairly beefy machine: Intel Q9450 8GB DDR2800 (4x2) Intel X25-M G2 80GB SSD Several other hard drives Windows 7 Ultimate 64 In the last month I've gotten a mysterious slowdown problem. When I start my IDE (IntelliJ IDEA) it usually takes about 20 seconds on the SSD. If my machine has been on for a day or two (as far as I can tell this is the only pattern) and I try to start the IDE, it brings my machine to a halt. CPU usage goes up to 25% per core (so it's basically 100% usage) and it takes up to 5 minutes to start. Other things I've noticed: iTunes will start to skip and stutter (my music is running off a second hard drive). The only persistent things I'm running are: AVG Anti-Virus Spybot (the slowdown predates this) Hamachi and Murmur (again the slowdown predates this) Apple Airport Base Agent HP OfficeJet 8500 driver/manager The browser I use is Chrome. I can't think why that'd be relevant but it's always on so I thought I'd mention it. When this happens I can't see a reason for it in the process list. No CPU hogs. No spikes in IO activity that I can see. Basically I'm at a loss to explain it and need to reboot, at which point everything returns to normal (for awhile). FWIW the Intel SSD is about 75-80% full. I know being too full can really degrade performance. I don't believe that's the issue here. Does anyone have any ideas on what I can do to fix this or at least help find what's going wrong? This same machine (sans SSD) could run Win XP and stay up fine for a month or two.

    Read the article

  • MySQL is killing the server IO.

    - by OneOfOne
    I manage a fairly large/busy vBulletin forums (running on gigenet cloud), the database is ~ 10 GB (~9 milion posts, ~60 queries per second), lately MySQL have been grinding the disk like there's no tomorrow according to iotop and slowing the site. The last idea I can think of is using replication, but I'm not sure how much that would help and worried about database sync. I'm out of ideas, any tips on how to improve the situation would be highly appreciated. Specs : Debian Lenny 64bit ~12Ghz (6 cores) CPU, 7520gb RAM, 160gb disk. Kernel : 2.6.32-4-amd64 mysqld Ver 5.1.54-0.dotdeb.0 for debian-linux-gnu on x86_64 ((Debian)) Other software: vBulletin 3.8.4 memcached 1.2.2 PHP 5.3.5-0.dotdeb.0 (fpm-fcgi) (built: Jan 7 2011 00:07:27) lighttpd/1.4.28 (ssl) - a light and fast webserver PHP and vBulletin are configured to use memcached. MySQL Settings : [mysqld] key_buffer = 128M max_allowed_packet = 16M thread_cache_size = 8 myisam-recover = BACKUP max_connections = 1024 query_cache_limit = 2M query_cache_size = 128M expire_logs_days = 10 max_binlog_size = 100M key_buffer_size = 128M join_buffer_size = 8M tmp_table_size = 16M max_heap_table_size = 16M table_cache = 96 Other : > vmstat procs -----------memory---------- ---swap-- -----io---- -system-- ----cpu---- r b swpd free buff cache si so bi bo in cs us sy id wa 9 0 73140 36336 8968 1859160 0 0 42 15 3 2 6 1 89 5 > /etc/init.d/mysql status Threads: 49 Questions: 252139 Slow queries: 164 Opens: 53573 Flush tables: 1 Open tables: 337 Queries per second avg: 61.302. Edit Additional info.

    Read the article

  • How important is dual-gigabit lan for a super user's home NAS?

    - by Andrew
    Long story short: I'm building my own home server based on Ubuntu with 4 drives in RAID 10. Its primary purpose will be NAS and backup. Would I be making a terrible mistake by building a NAS Server with a single Gigabit NIC? Long story long: I know the absolute max I can get out of a single Gigabit port is 125MB/s, and I want this NAS to be able to handle up to 6 computers accessing files simultaneously, with up to two of them streaming video. With Ubuntu NIC-bonding and the performance of RAID 10, I can theoretically double my throughput and achieve 250MB/s (ok, not really, but it would be faster). The drives have an average read throughput of 83.87MB/s according to Tom's Hardware. The unit itself will be based on the Chenbro ES34069-BK-180 case. With my current hardware choices, it'll have this motherboard with a Core i3 CPU and 8GB of RAM. Overkill, I know, but this server will be doing other things as well (like transcoding video). Unfortunately, the only Mini-ITX boards I can find with dual-gigabit and 6 SATA ports are Intel Atom-based, and I need more processing power than an Atom has to offer. I would love to find a board with 6 SATA ports and two Gigabit LAN ports that supports a Core i3 CPU. So far, my search has come up empty. Thus, my dilemma. Should I hold out for such a board, go with an Atom-based solution, or stick with my current single-gigabit configuration? I know there are consumer NAS units with just one gigabit interface (probably most of them), but I think I will demand a lot more from my server than the average home user. Any advice is appreciated. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • WMI Sensors monitoring

    - by DmitrySemenov
    Monitoring tool Paessler stopped to monitor WMI Windows Sensors Paessler is Updated to version 12.4.5.3165. (10/30/2012 1:44:11 PM) Paessler windows sensors (against windows server 2008 R2 web edition) stopped to work (no changes have been made on server that we monitor) with the message Connection could not be established (80070005: Access is denied - Host: 192.168.2.10, User: Administrator, Password: **, Domain: ntlmdomain:) (code: PE015) However if I go to Virtual machine used to run Paessler and the following cscript runs successfully: strComputer = "192.168.2.10" Set objSWbemLocator = CreateObject("WbemScripting.SWbemLocator") Set objSWbemServices = objSWbemLocator.ConnectServer _ (strComputer, "root\cimv2", _ "Administrator", "pass") Set colProcessList = objSWbemServices.ExecQuery( _ "Select * From Win32_Processor") For Each objProcess in colProcessList Wscript.Echo "Process Name: " & objProcess.Name Next I'm getting output C:\>cscript test.vbs Microsoft (R) Windows Script Host Version 5.8 Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Process Name: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X5680 @ 3.33GHz Process Name: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X5680 @ 3.33GHz So WMI works a. I gave Administrator credentials for Device to monitor in Paessler setting, the same I used in the script above b. I restarted windows server (broken sensors) - but this didn't help c. I restarted Paessler probe service - no effect any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Computer sponteously reboots when doing heavy file copy to/from disk

    - by Mark Hosang
    I've been fighting with this problem for the last 3 weeks where my machine will just instantly reboot. No BSOD, and when i checked the event log all that was reported was the generic "Kernal-power" error with the detailed information pointing to a hard crash. This is a machine that was working for 18 months before these crashes started happening. When they started happening is after I added 3 HDs in a RAID-5, upped the memory to 12gb, moved to a new house, added a SSD and added about 5 case fans. I have thus eliminated the RAID, and determined that the SSD was not the cause (because it was still crashing even though the ssd wasn't connected). I've run memtest several times over night with no memory problems showing up. I've run IntelBurnTest to max out the cpu to see if it was a heat issue and at full tilt after 20 min it was only at 85C and the machine didn't crash. I also took a look at the voltages during this test, with a screenshot at the bottom of this post I've ruled out a software issue by reinstalling windows 7 ultimate x64 a total of 5 times, but even during that the install it crashes. Happens sometime during file copying at the beginning, or during uncompressing files, or sometimes during running windows update. The only discernible pattern i can see is that it seems to crash when hard disks might be spinning up or when they are accessed heavily from large file transfers. My current guess is that it is probably an issue with the MB, PSU or the power coming through the outlet. Any suggestions of what i could try to troubleshoot or what may be wrong? Specs PSU: Seasonic M12 700w Mem: 12gb CPU: i7-920 with stock heatsink MB: Asus P6T HDs: 3 green WD and 1 Corsair force 3 120b with 1.3.3 firmware Running full tilt voltages Idling Voltages

    Read the article

  • mysql thread count

    - by Ryan M.
    We have a web application that uses apache and mysql. Generally (according to Munin) our MySQL thread count sits between 2 and 4 at all times. The other day, our server almost came to a halt. HTTP requests were slow or wouldn't go through at all, SSH would work, but would take 30+ seconds to register keystrokes, etc.. So we pull up Munin and the only thing that's out of normal boundaries is the Mysql thread count. CPU usage was under 1%, load was under 1.0, plenty of available RAM. As mentioned before, the thread count floats around 2 to 4. At the time of our slow downs it had spiked to 14. So I start poking around the Internet and I see that in most cases, you'll start to see a higher thread count when you start running into slow queries. If I understand it correctly, the request comes in that takes a while to process, in the mean time other requests are coming in, so a new thread will be created to work on the request (yes?). But at the time of the slow down, we had 0 slow queries. My question is: What else can cause mysql to create additional threads. And would this sudden spike in threads possibly cause the server to slow down? To fix the issue, we restarted apache and everything went back to it's beautiful, normal self. Considering the the Server Vitals (CPU, RAM, Network, etc) were all ideal, and the thread count was the only thing out of place, this seems like the most logical thing to pursue as the possible cause. If it matters, we're on Mysql 5.1.40. Server is FreeBSD 7.2 and the server in question is inside a jail.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180  | Next Page >