Search Results

Search found 6355 results on 255 pages for 'slow downs'.

Page 28/255 | < Previous Page | 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35  | Next Page >

• Outlook slow to open attachments

  - by Alistair McMillan

  When a colleague tries to open attachments in her email (Outlook 2003 talking to an Exchange 2007 server) they talk ages to open. The files are relatively small, all less than 1MB. We've tried creating a new Windows profile for the user and tried creating new Outlook profiles, however that hasn't made any difference. And we've tried accessing her account from someone else's PC, and the attachments open immediately there. The only thing that might provide a clue is that Process Monitor shows Outlook on her PC trying to write the file to a folder within the user's "Temporary Internet Files" folder with FAST I/O DISALLOWED errors. Can't find a lot of useful information on that message online though. What causes the FAST I/O DISALLOWED errors? And would that make opening attachments so incredibly slow that opening a < 1MB file can take a matter of minutes? UPDATE: Discovered that this isn't just an issue with Outlook. Other files being accessed over the network show the same FAST I/O DISALLOWED errors in Process Monitor. The problem is just more noticeable with Outlook, because although other applications take a while to open files it isn't a matter of minutes.

  Read the article

• Atlassian Crucible very slow on large repository

  - by Mitch Lindgren

  Hi everyone, My company has been running a trial of Atlassian Crucible for some months now. For repositories where it's working properly, users have given very positive feedback about the tool. The problem I'm having is that we have several different projects, each with its own repository, and some of those repositories are very large. One repository in particular has a large number of branches and probably around 9,000 files per branch. Browsing that repository in Crucible is extremely slow. Crucible is running on a CentOS VM. The VM has 4GB of RAM, and I've set Crucible's maximum at 3GB, of which it is currently using 2GB. I've brought this up in a support ticket with Atlassian, and they suggested the following: In particular because you have a rather large SVN repository you will likely find that Fisheye will be creating a large index file on disk. To help improve performance a few things you can try are: Increasing the available memory available to Fisheye (see the document above). Migrating to an external database: confluence.atlassian.com/display/FISHEYE/Migrating+to+an+External+Database Excluding files and directories from your index that aren't needed: confluence.atlassian.com/display/FISHEYE/Allow+(Process) (Sorry for not hyperlinking; don't have the rep.) I've tried all of these things to an extent, but so far none have helped greatly. I was originally running Crucible on a Windows box with 2GB of RAM using the built in HSQL DB. Moving to MySQL on CentOS saw a performance increase for some repositories, and made Crucible much more stable, but did not seem to help much with our biggest repository. There are only so many files/branches I can exclude from indexing while maintaining the tool's usefulness. That being the case, does anyone have any tips on how to speed up Crucible on large repositories, without investing in insanely powerful hardware? Thanks! Edit: To clarify, since I didn't mention it explicitly above, I am using FishEye.

  Read the article

• PHP running too slow, always showing "504 Gateway Time-out"

  - by komase

  PHP running too slow, always showing "504 Gateway Time-out" My server spec: Dual core ATOM 330 CPU 2GB RAM Use nginx with PHP in fastcgi use eaccelerator CPU 74.3%id RAM used: 350MB of 2GB I have lots of sites in my server, with cron running every minutes all time, even on some minutes, double or triple cron running at same time. All my sites cron is heavy, usually the cron running more than one minutes. my nginx.conf has become too big until nginx refuse to start because too many sites in it. it has been solved by increasing server_names_hash_max_size. Im planning to add more sites in my server Now, opening my website always showing 504 Gateway Time-out. I have tested many eaccelerator and PHP setting, but this 504 Gateway Time-out still happen. the 504 Gateway Time-out will dissappeared when cron is disabled I have no idea: is this because not enough processor power? And what should I do? upgrade my processor? --------added this is top for my CPU just now: Cpu(s): 17.5%us, 3.8%sy, 0.1%ni, 71.6%id, 6.9%wa, 0.1%hi, 0.1%si, 0.0%st

  Read the article

• Why is uploading to S3 so slow?

  - by Tom Marthenal

  I am using s3cmd to upload to S3: # s3cmd put 1gb.bin s3://my-bucket/1gb.bin 1gb.bin -> s3://my-bucket/1gb.bin [1 of 1] 366706688 of 1073741824 34% in 371s 963.22 kB/s I am uploading from Linode, which has an outgoing bandwidth cap of 50 Mb/s according to support (roughly 6 MB/s). Why am I getting such slow upload speeds to S3, and how can I improve them? Update: Uploading the same file via SCP to an m1.medium EC2 instance (SCP from my Linode to the instance's EBS drive) gives about 44 Mb/s according to iftop (any compression done by the cipher is not a factor). Traceroute: Here's a traceroute to the server it's uploading to (according to tcpdump). # traceroute s3-1-w.amazonaws.com. traceroute to s3-1-w.amazonaws.com. (72.21.194.32), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets 1 207.99.1.13 (207.99.1.13) 0.635 ms 0.743 ms 0.723 ms 2 207.99.53.41 (207.99.53.41) 0.683 ms 0.865 ms 0.915 ms 3 vlan801.tbr1.mmu.nac.net (209.123.10.9) 0.397 ms 0.541 ms 0.527 ms 4 0.e1-1.tbr1.tl9.nac.net (209.123.10.102) 1.400 ms 1.481 ms 1.508 ms 5 0.gi-0-0-0.pr1.tl9.nac.net (209.123.11.62) 1.602 ms 1.677 ms 1.699 ms 6 equinix02-iad2.amazon.com (206.223.115.35) 9.393 ms 8.925 ms 8.900 ms 7 72.21.220.41 (72.21.220.41) 32.610 ms 9.812 ms 9.789 ms 8 72.21.222.141 (72.21.222.141) 9.519 ms 9.439 ms 9.443 ms 9 72.21.218.3 (72.21.218.3) 10.245 ms 10.202 ms 10.154 ms 10 * * * 11 * * * 12 * * * 13 * * * 14 * * * 15 * * * 16 * * * 17 * * * 18 * * * 19 * * * 20 * * * 21 * * * 22 * * * 23 * * * 24 * * * 25 * * * 26 * * * 27 * * * 28 * * * 29 * * * 30 * * * The latency looks reasonable, at least until the server stopped responding to ping requests.

  Read the article

• Puppet file transfer slow

  - by Noodles

  I have a puppet master and slaves in different datacenters. The latency between them is ~40ms. When I run "puppet agent --test" on a slave to apply the latest manifest it takes ~360 seconds to finish. After doing some digging I can see the main cause of the slow down is file transfers. It seems it's taking ~10 seconds to transfer each file. The files are only small (configuration files) so I can't understand why they would take so long. This is an example of a file in my manifest: file { "/etc/rsyncd.conf" : owner => "root", group => "root", mode => 644, source => "puppet:///files/rsyncd/rsyncd.conf" } Running puppet-profiler I see this: 10.21s - File[/etc/rsyncd.conf] It also seems I cannot update more than one server at once using puppet. If I run two servers at the same time then puppet takes twice as long. I have changed the puppet master from using webrick to mongrel, but this doesn't seem to help. This is making deploying changes painful. A simple config change can take an hour to roll out to all servers.

  Read the article

• Windows Server 2008 network speed slow, Xen 3.4.3 HVM ISO

  - by Elliot.Bradshaw

  I've setup a VM running Windows Server 2008 on a host node running Xen 3.4.3-5 and the following kernel: 2.6.18-308.1.1.el5xen #1 SMP Wed Mar 7 05:38:01 EST 2012 i686 i686 i386 GNU/Linux The network speed on the VM is very slow--using the online speed tests I can only get it up to 8-9mbps. The line is 100mbps burstable and the host node has no problem achieving those speeds. If it setup a VM running CentOS, it too has no problems achieving those speeds. I've done some pretty exhaustive troubleshooting, but nothing has helped: New VM installations of Win2k8 do have the same network problem. Upgrading to most recent kernel-xen did not help (2.6.18-308.1.1.el5xen). Upgrading from xen 3.4.0 to xen 3.4.3-5 did not help. Disabling Windows firewall, etc did not help. Changing network card device config from auto negotiation to manually be 100mbps full duplex did not help. Changing the network receive buffer packet size did not help (tried all combos from 64k to 8k). At this point I'm pretty much out of ideas--any help would be appreciated!

  Read the article

• BlazeDS first response is VERY SLOW

  - by chibban

  Hi everyone, I have a very strange an annoying problem: I have an appliaction written in Flex 3, with BlazeDS 3.2 and Java in the backend. I'm actually using a portal (liferay) to display portlets that contain Flex movies. When I hit a refresh button on my page, all the Flex movies send a RemoteObject request to the server (using BlazeDS), which should go to java classes and invoke a method (standard BlazeDS usage I 'm guessing). I'm experiencing VERY slow response (14 minutes) on the first hit, while the following hits are much faster. I've enabled the BlazeDS logging (logging level="All") and I also have debug prints coming from my java classes. I also use the "showBusyCursor" attribute for the RemoteObject - so I can see indication of the request being sent from the flex movie. Here is what I see: I hit the refresh button Each movie invokes a RemoteObject request I see a busy sign - in all the movies I see nothing in the log - no BlazeDS prints and no Java prints Wait 14 minutes or so I see BlazeDS prints followed by Java prints I see data populating my flex movies. The really weird thing is that I have the same "application" installed in 4 different computers (on my laptop and in 3 other unix machines), 3 of these installations work well (good response times) and only 1 has the issue I'm describing. I've tried many things, but everything failed. I'd be really happy to get some advice on this. Thanks

  Read the article

• Very slow write performance on Debian 6.0 (AMD64) with DMCRYPT/LVM/RAID1

  - by jdelic

  I'm seeing very strange performance characteristics on one of my servers. This server is running a simple two-disk software-RAID1 setup with LVM spanning /dev/md0. One of the logical volumes /dev/vg0/secure is encrypted using dmcrypt with LUKS and mounted with the sync and noatimes flag. Writing to that volume is incredibly slow at 1.8 MB/s and the CPU usage stays near 0%. There are 8 crpyto/1-8 processes running (it's a Intel Quadcore CPU). I hope that someone on serverfault has seen this before :-(. uname -a 2.6.32-5-xen-amd64 #1 SMP Tue Mar 8 00:01:30 UTC 2011 x86_64 GNU/Linux Interestingly, when I read from the device I get good performance numbers: reading without encryption: $ dd if=/dev/vg0/secure of=/dev/null bs=64k count=100000 100000+0 records in 100000+0 records out 6553600000 bytes (6.6 GB) copied, 68.8951 s, 95.1 MB/s reading with encryption: $ dd if=/dev/mapper/secure of=/dev/null bs=64k count=100000 100000+0 records in 100000+0 records out 6553600000 bytes (6.6 GB) copied, 69.7116 s, 94.0 MB/s However, when I try to write to the device: $ dd if=/dev/zero of=./test bs=64k 8809+0 records in 8809+0 records out 577306624 bytes (577 MB) copied, 321.861 s, 1.8 MB/s Also, when I read I see CPU usage, when I write, the CPU stays at almost 0% usage. Here is output of cryptsetup luksDump: LUKS header information for /dev/vg0/secure Version: 1 Cipher name: aes Cipher mode: cbc-essiv:sha256 Hash spec: sha1 Payload offset: 2056 MK bits: 256 MK digest: dd 62 b9 a5 bf 6c ec 23 36 22 92 4c 39 f8 d6 5d c1 3a b7 37 MK salt: cc 2e b3 d9 fb e3 86 a1 bb ab eb 9d 65 df b3 dd d9 6b f4 49 de 8f 85 7d 3b 1c 90 83 5d b2 87 e2 MK iterations: 44500 UUID: a7c9af61-d9f0-4d3f-b422-dddf16250c33 Key Slot 0: ENABLED Iterations: 178282 Salt: 60 24 cb be 5c 51 9f b4 85 64 3d f8 07 22 54 d4 1a 5f 4c bc 4b 82 76 48 d8 a2 d2 6a ee 13 d7 5d Key material offset: 8 AF stripes: 4000 Key Slot 1: DISABLED Key Slot 2: DISABLED Key Slot 3: DISABLED Key Slot 4: DISABLED Key Slot 5: DISABLED Key Slot 6: DISABLED Key Slot 7: DISABLED

  Read the article

• Windows 7 Loading Very Slow

  - by Adnan

  Hi guys, I've had a problem that only started to occur yesterday. When I boot into Windows 7 and log on to my user account, the computer gets very laggy and slow for at least 5 minutes. Icons take ages to load, and everything is rendered unclickable. This happens for about five minutes after which everything goes back to normal. I tried restarting a few times to see if this is a recurring problem, and it is. I ran a full system scan with Microsoft Security Essentials and found nothing wrong, and I also defragmented the disk to increase performance. However, the problem still exists. Edit: For the past day, I've been trying to install Ubuntu on the same laptop. When installing it on a partition didn't work, I decided to use Wubi. Could this somehow be the problem? Also, my hard drive gets hot a lot, so could the heat be affecting the hard drive and maybe making it defective? Any help on this issue would be greatly, greatly appreciated.

  Read the article

• MySQL Server Is Slow

  - by user2853965746

  I have two MySQL servers and one was just recently setup. The one I just recently setup is a bit slower than my older one, which kind of bothers me because I don't want my clients to be upset with the speed difference when I launch the new one. The older server runs on Ubuntu (~13.04 I believe) and the new one is on Debian 6. Both servers are 2GB ram, but my newer server is has an SSD, so I thought it might be the same speed if not faster. Anyway, the speed difference isn't too much (both are still under a second, but still noticeable). Whenever I select 50 rows from the user table on my older server (SELECT * FROM users LIMIT 50), I get the results in 0.003 s. There is 100,000+ accounts in that table. Whenever running the same command on the same table with only six dev accounts, it takes 0.069 s. It may not seem like a lot, but it's noticeable when you're used to a fast response. I added skip-name-resolve to the config and it didn't seem to help. Basically I'm asking if anyone knows what can cause a MySQL server to be slow in Debian 6? Should I just drop it and switch to Ubuntu like the older server (I don't think the OS is the problem, but you never know)? The older server is under a lot of use too, it's used a lot for web api's on my website. A lot of connections and stuff, and it still remains fast.

  Read the article

• Slow performance on VMWare Linux server after Tomcat install

  - by Loftx

  We have a VMWare ESXi 4.1 server hosting a number of Linux and Windows guests. Recently a new Linux guest was added to this server and seemed to be performing well. Tomcat and some other applications on this server were then installed which seem to have caused the server to run really slowly without any obvious resource issues. Slow performance include: The time taken to bring up the password prompt over ssh takes a few seconds when it was previously instantaneous. The time taken to unzip a zip file which was previously a few seconds now takes around 30 seconds The time taken to compile vmware tools has increased by similar factors Both the VMWare console and monitoring commands don't report any issues with high CPU or memory usage but something is obviously slowing the server down somehow. Does anyone have any ideas what may be causing this issue and how it can be resolved? Thanks, Tom Edit As per your questions I’ve looked at some of the performance indicators on both the VM host and VM guest indicated. Firstly I tried reserving the full amount of memory (3gb) for this VM – no other machines on this server have any memory reservation. The swap in rate and swap out rate for the VM host and guest are now both zero. Balloon memory on the guest is zero and on the host is 3.5gb (total memory on the host is 12gb) The swap rate for the guest is also zero. Swap used by the host is 200mb on average. Compression and decompression rates for the host and guest are zero. Command aborts for the host are zero. Read latency is very low – maximum 10ms average 0.8ms. Write latency is higher – a few spikes to 170ms but mostly around 25ms – is this bad? Queue command latency is zero . Physical disk read latency averages 5ms but often 10ms Physical disk write latency averages 15ms but is often 20ms I hope this helps - let me know if you need any more information.

  Read the article

• Eclipse: Slow startup time

  - by ct2k7

  Hello, I've got Eclipse 3.6.1 on my MacBook Air (2010), and I'm getting slowish startup times. Well, slow, compared to my Desktop, which is somewhat less powerful and a few years old). The startup generally takes 15 seconds, and of this, 4 is spent just on the Eclipse splash screen, before Eclipse loads anything. No projects are open at startup. Here's a copy of my eclipse.ini. -startup ../../../plugins/org.eclipse.equinox.launcher_1.1.0.v20100507.jar --launcher.library ../../../plugins/org.eclipse.equinox.launcher.cocoa.macosx.x86_64_1.1.1.R36x_v20100810 -showsplash org.eclipse.platform --launcher.XXMaxPermSize 512m --launcher.defaultAction openFile -vmargs -Xms256m -Xmx512m -Xdock:icon=../Resources/Eclipse.icns -XstartOnFirstThread -Dorg.eclipse.swt.internal.carbon.smallFonts -Dosgi.requiredJavaVersion=1.6 -Xverify:none -XX:+UseConcMarkSweepGC -XX:+CMSClassUnloadingEnabled -XX:+CMSPermGenSweepingEnabled -XX:+UnlockExperimentalVMOptions -XX:+AggressiveOpts -XX:+StringCache -XX:+UseFastAccessorMethods -XX:+UseLargePages -XX:LargePageSizeInBytes=4m -XX:AllocatePrefetchLines=1 -XX:AllocatePrefetchStyle=1 -Dide.gc=true The problem doesn't seem to be related to plugins - I've disabled the ones which I don't need, and regardless of this configuration or whether all of them are selected on startup, it only takes 1second to load the plugins. I'm running Eclipse 3.6.1 Cocoa x64 build (vanilla) with the Zend Studio plugin. The machine has 4GB RAM, an SSD with over 64% free space, 1.6GHz (4MB L2 Cache). OS is Mac OS X 10.6.6, latest Java available, 1.6. For comparison, my Desktop, an old P4 3GHZ (512K L2 Cache) with a 7200RPM drive, under 40% free space, Eclipse (same config) loads in under 7 seconds, consistently. Note, this one is a Windows machine, with latest Java installed.

  Read the article

• Networking - intermittent, slow speeds

  - by jack

  Hi all I'm a novice when it comes to networking. I live in a large two storey building that used to be a school and we have an internet connection with BT (british telecoms provider), the connection speed is 12Mb.. Basically our connection is slow and very intermittent and I was wondering if anybody here could provide some help or ideas. There are about 11 people in the building who could be online at any time. We have a router on the ground floor which is bog standard supplied by BT. To provide Broadband access to the 1st and 2nd floors, we used an old switch that the school left, we have a cable running from the router on the first floor to the switch which connects to a wireless router which is configured as a bridge on the 2nd floor supplying broadband access to the 1st and 2nd floors. Additionally we have 3 computers that are connected via the switch through the ethernet sockets left by the school on the ground floor. The router we use on the 2nd floor came in a pack of 2 and cost about £15 (bought by another person). Sometimes the connection is perfectly fine, i.e. early hours of the morning or when everybody is out, we have rang BT who say that the connection cannot cope with the numbers of people online, plus I'm not sure whether each person is streaming etc. Can anybody offer any advice?

  Read the article

• Very slow browsing shared folder XP client/host

  - by Ickster

  I have a pretty straightforward setup where I'm storing media files on an XP pro machine, and sharing the folder to be accessed by other XP pro machines around the house. (Typically, there's only one client accessing the share at a time, although there may be several with the share mounted.) It's been working just fine for years, but I've recently started having some problems. A couple of days ago, the host PC had power disconnected while it was running. It was restarted and everything seemed fine initially, but since then browsing the shared folder from client machines has been extremely slow and actually reading data is all but impossible. The problem exists in every access method I've tried: Windows Explorer, VLC dialogs, command line, etc. My first thought was that the disk was experiencing problems, but there are no problems viewing the files locally on the host machine. My second thought was that there was a network problem on the host machine, so I removed and reinstalled drivers for the NIC with no change. My third thought was that there might've been a problem elsewhere on the network, so I swapped out hardware to no avail. I'm regrouping and trying to come up with a methodical approach to figuring out what might be wrong. I would of course be thrilled if you can suggest specific problems (Microsoft KB articles, etc.) that I might check, but I'm not expecting a silver bullet. If you can help me outline an approach to identify the problem (including recommended tools, e.g., disk checkers, network analyzers, etc.) I'd greatly appreciate it.

  Read the article

• Very slow connection to xserve via afp or smb

  - by Mhoffman13

  Help. File transfer and connection speed to our Xserve are painfully slow from newly purchased iMacs. The Xserve is only used as a file server, its running 10.4.11. The problem seems to be only happening on brand new iMacs running 10.6.3. When connected either over afp or smb copying files is many times slower than usual. Other machines on the network running either 10.4 or 10.5 have a normal connection speed. To try to rule out OS incompatibility I connected the new iMac running 10.6 to another computer running 10.4 over the network. The file transfer speed was fast as normal. So it seems the problems lies with the X serve (maybe). The afp logs either access or error don't show anything unusual. One thing that did look different was when the imac was connected to the Xserve the user had its id listed as its IP address. The other machines connected, had the id of broadcasthost. I also noticed that when connected from the new iMac I can only see one of the mirrors. When any other computer connects both mirrors are shown. Tried a restart of the Xserve but the problem persists. Thanks in advance for any advice

  Read the article

• Copy from CDROM is very slow in Ubuntu

  - by ???

  I'm using the command to copy CDROM image: # dd if=/dev/sr0 of=./maverick.iso But it's very slow, at about 350k bytes/sec. I've searched the google, and try the command # hdparm -vi /dev/sr0 /dev/sr0: HDIO_DRIVE_CMD(identify) failed: Bad address IO_support = 1 (32-bit) readonly = 0 (off) readahead = 256 (on) HDIO_GETGEO failed: Inappropriate ioctl for device Model=DVD-ROM UJDA775, FwRev=DA03, SerialNo= Config={ Fixed Removeable DTR<=5Mbs DTR>10Mbs nonMagnetic } RawCHS=0/0/0, TrkSize=0, SectSize=0, ECCbytes=0 BuffType=unknown, BuffSize=unknown, MaxMultSect=0 (maybe): CurCHS=0/0/0, CurSects=0, LBA=yes, LBAsects=0 IORDY=yes, tPIO={min:180,w/IORDY:120}, tDMA={min:120,rec:120} PIO modes: pio0 pio1 pio2 pio3 pio4 DMA modes: sdma0 sdma1 sdma2 mdma0 mdma1 mdma2 UDMA modes: udma0 udma1 *udma2 AdvancedPM=no Drive conforms to: ATA/ATAPI-5 T13 1321D revision 3: ATA/ATAPI-1,2,3,4,5 * signifies the current active mode Seems like DMA is already on. And a device test gives: # hdparm -t /dev/sr0 /dev/sr0: Timing buffered disk reads: 2 MB in 6.58 seconds = 311.10 kB/sec # sudo hdparm -tT /dev/sr0 /dev/sr0: Timing cached reads: 2 MB in 2.69 seconds = 760.96 kB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: m 4 MB in 5.19 seconds = 789.09 kB/sec The CD-ROM device and disc should be okay because I can copy it very fast in Windows, using UltraISO utility. So I guess there is something not configured right in Ubuntu, is it?

  Read the article

• Windows Explorer slow to open networked computer, fast to navigate once opened

  - by Scott Noyes

  I open Windows Explorer and enter an IP for a computer on my home network (\\192.168.1.101). It takes 30 seconds or more to present a list of the shared folders. It does not appear to be an initial handshaking/authentication thing; even if I allow the view to load and then immediately load the same again, it is always slow. Once they appear, navigating through folders and opening files is fast. Also, navigating directly to a folder (\\192.168.1.101\My Music) is fast, even if it's the first connection since a restart. Using \\computerName instead of the IP address gives exactly the same results. Pings return in 1ms. net view \\computerName (or \ipAddress) returns the list of shared folders fast. This makes me suspect an Explorer issue rather than a network issue. Suspecting that the remote computer was being automatically indexed or something, I went into Tools-Folder Options-View and unchecked "Automatically search for network folders and printers," but that made no difference. De-selecting the "Folders" icon near the address bar makes no difference. Adding the IP address and computer name to the hosts file makes no difference. Both computers involved are laptops running Windows XP. Both have WiFi and cable adapters. Mine is not connected via cable. The result is the same whether the target is plugged in to the cable or not (although the IP address changes - 192.168.1.101 over cable, 192.168.1.103 over WiFi.) We are using DHCP assigned by the router.

  Read the article

• Slow boot for OS and external devices

  - by Derek Van Cuyk

  I have been having this problem intermittently but as of yesterday, it has become more consistent. It originally started when I rebooted my PC at home and the OS (Windows 8) sat in a loop appearing to do nothing while loading. I figured since this was a new installation, that something may have just become corrupted and I decided to reinstall. So I tried to boot off of the thumb drive which had the installation iso and encountered pretty much the same issue. Same with the DVD drive. So, I rebooted once again and left it to load the entire night just to see if it ever would and sure enough this morning, Windows had finally loaded. Authentication had the same roblem albeit not quite as long (took about 5 minutes to authenticate). However, once I was in, everything appeared to be working fine and as quick as normal with the exception of when I tried to scan the C drive for any errors, which ran unbearably slow (45 minutes and before I left for work and was not finished scanning a 64GB SSD drive). I mention that I have had this issue but never when loading the OS. Before it occurred when trying to install windows 7 from a different DVD drive than the one I have now. It took me about 3 hours to do it since I had to wait sometimes 30+ min for each step to finish processing. Does anyone have an idea as to what can cause this? I am assuming it is the motherboard since it is responsible for communication with all the devices I'm having issues with but I cannot find anyone else who has had a problem like this and don't want to drop more money on a MB if it isn't the problem. Hardware: Motherboard: Asus M4A78T-E Socket AM3/ AMD 790GX/ Hybrid CrossFireX Hard Drive: Kingston SSDNow V+180 64GB Micro SATA II 3GB/S 1.8 Inch Solid State Drive SVP180S2/64G Optical Drive: Samsung Blu-Ray Combo Internal 12XReadable and DVD-Writable Drive with Lightscribe SH-B123L/BSBP Thanks, Derek

  Read the article

• flowchart for debugging a slow/unresponsive server

  - by davidosomething

  So the server is slow: Roll back to the previous known working build - Success? Code problem - Fail? Go on. Ping ip address - Success? maybe a DNS problem, go on. - Fail? Server or connection problem, go on. Ping and tracert your domain.com from inside your network - previous success - fail: DNS problem - success? go on. - previous fail and: - Fail? Go on, could be you or network. - Success? Go on. Try it from outside your network (http://centralops.net/co/) - Fail? The server's network connection sucks. - Success? If inside network was fail, your network sucks. Check the server load: CPU/RAM usage. Is it overloaded? - Yes. Who's the culprit? Kill some processes/reboot. - No? Go on. what other steps should i add?

  Read the article

• Dedicated virtual setup is slow with WordPress

  - by kovshenin

  Hey. I'm running a Fedora linux server on the Amazon EC2 platform. I'm pretty sure there's something wrong with my configuration as it seems to be very slow. SSH sometimes takes over 30 seconds to connect, a WordPress generated web page could take 5 seconds to load, and it could take 20 seconds to load, which is pretty awkward. MySQL queries are all executed in less than a second, so I don't think that's the case. I'm not really sure where the issue lies, but a simple page written in PHP loads instantly. A fresh WordPress installation starts lagging. Same works perfect on grid hosting at MediaTemple for instance, so I'm pretty sure I missed something. If you could please direct me to the right tools and articles which would help me out. Thanks so much! Fedora Core 8, php 5.2.6, MySQL 5.0.45, OpenSSH 4.7p1, OpenSSL 0.9.8b. PHP is configured as a module to Apache 2.2.9, all websites based on virtual hosts. I have some on-going php scripts running from time to time in the background via cron. Thanks.

  Read the article

• .NET 2.0 Application now running slow on IIS 7.5

  - by Valien

  I recently moved (and still in testing) an application from a Windows 2003 Server (Physical box) running IIS 6.x to a Windows 2008 R2 Standard (VM) IIS 7.5 server. The application is a .NET framework 2.0 application and is running under a 2.0 App Pool. This site works great except for one thing: Takes forever to get a request back. I've been tracking it with Chrome Inspect Element and it queries the site and can take up to 45 seconds to answer. Now when it does the page(s) render instantly but it's that initial request that's killing it. I see no error logs or issues with the application or Windows Event Viewer or even IIS logs so not sure where to start looking next. Some new changes was that previously the app resided behind a Pix firewall and now is behind a larger network environment in a DMZ zone (and I believe NetScaler is also being used to manage the network). I do not have rights/abilities to look at the network itself but can contact the Data center folks to look deeper into this but I wanted to make sure it's not my application that might be causing the slowdown or IIS. In summary: .NET 2.0 application works great in IIS 6.x Application moved to an IIS 7.5 server and now slow on rendering but when it does render responds back with pages instantly. Edit for solution Found out that it was the SOAP calls that were slowing the site down. In the new datacenter my application cannot request SOAP calls and so they time out after 40-45 seconds or so. Now trying to find out if I can install a proxy server to redirect this...

  Read the article

• Slow filesystem access

  - by danneh3826

  I'm trying to diagnose a slow filesystem issue on a server I look after. It's been ongoing for quite some time, and I've run out of ideas as to what I can try. Here's the thick of it. The server itself is a Dell Poweredge T310. It has 4 SAS hard drives in it, configured at RAID5, and is running Citrix XenServer 5.6. The VM is a (relatively) old Debian 5.0.6 installation. It's given 4 cores, and 4Gb's of RAM. It has 3 volumes. A 10Gb volume (ext3) for the system, 980Gb volume (xfs) for data (~94% full), and another 200Gb volume (xfs) for data (~13% full). Now here's the weird thing. Read/write access to the 980Gb volume is really slow. I might get 5Mb/s out of it if I'm lucky. At first I figured it was actually disk access in the system, or at a hypervisor level, but ruled that out entirely as other VMs on the same host are running perfectly fine (a good couple hundred Mb/s disk r/w access). So then I started to target this particular VM. I started thinking it was XFS, but to prove it I wasn't going to attempt to change the filesystem on the 980Gb drive, with years and years of billions of files on there. So I provisioned the 200Gb drive, and did the same read/write test (basically dd), and got a good couple hundred Mb/s r/w access to it. So that ruled out the VM, the hardware, and the filesystem type. There's also a lot of these in /var/log/kern.log; (sorry, this is quite long) Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564689] httpd: page allocation failure. order:5, mode:0x4020 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564693] Pid: 7318, comm: httpd Not tainted 2.6.32-4-686-bigmem #1 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564696] Call Trace: Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564705] [<c1092a4d>] ? __alloc_pages_nodemask+0x476/0x4e0 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564711] [<c1092ac3>] ? __get_free_pages+0xc/0x17 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564716] [<c10b632e>] ? __kmalloc+0x30/0x128 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564722] [<c11dd774>] ? pskb_expand_head+0x4f/0x157 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564727] [<c11ddbbf>] ? __pskb_pull_tail+0x41/0x1fb Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564732] [<c11e4882>] ? dev_queue_xmit+0xe4/0x38e Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564738] [<c1205902>] ? ip_finish_output+0x0/0x5c Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564742] [<c12058c7>] ? ip_finish_output2+0x187/0x1c2 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564747] [<c1204dc8>] ? ip_local_out+0x15/0x17 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564751] [<c12055a9>] ? ip_queue_xmit+0x31e/0x379 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564758] [<c1279a90>] ? _spin_lock_bh+0x8/0x1e Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564767] [<eda15a8d>] ? __nf_ct_refresh_acct+0x66/0xa4 [nf_conntrack] Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564773] [<c103bf42>] ? _local_bh_enable_ip+0x16/0x6e Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564779] [<c1214593>] ? tcp_transmit_skb+0x595/0x5cc Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564785] [<c1005c4f>] ? xen_restore_fl_direct_end+0x0/0x1 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564791] [<c12165ea>] ? tcp_write_xmit+0x7a3/0x874 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564796] [<c121203a>] ? tcp_ack+0x1611/0x1802 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564801] [<c10055ec>] ? xen_force_evtchn_callback+0xc/0x10 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564806] [<c121392f>] ? tcp_established_options+0x1d/0x8b Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564811] [<c1213be4>] ? tcp_current_mss+0x38/0x53 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564816] [<c1216701>] ? __tcp_push_pending_frames+0x1e/0x50 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564821] [<c1212246>] ? tcp_data_snd_check+0x1b/0xd2 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564825] [<c1212de3>] ? tcp_rcv_established+0x5d0/0x626 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564831] [<c121902c>] ? tcp_v4_do_rcv+0x15f/0x2cf Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564835] [<c1219561>] ? tcp_v4_rcv+0x3c5/0x5c0 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564841] [<c120197e>] ? ip_local_deliver_finish+0x10c/0x18c Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564846] [<c12015a4>] ? ip_rcv_finish+0x2c4/0x2d8 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564852] [<c11e3b71>] ? netif_receive_skb+0x3bb/0x3d6 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564864] [<ed823efc>] ? xennet_poll+0x9b8/0xafc [xen_netfront] Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564869] [<c11e40ee>] ? net_rx_action+0x96/0x194 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564874] [<c103bd4c>] ? __do_softirq+0xaa/0x151 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564878] [<c103be24>] ? do_softirq+0x31/0x3c Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564883] [<c103befa>] ? irq_exit+0x26/0x58 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564890] [<c118ff9f>] ? xen_evtchn_do_upcall+0x12c/0x13e Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564896] [<c1008c3f>] ? xen_do_upcall+0x7/0xc Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564899] Mem-Info: Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564902] DMA per-cpu: Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564905] CPU 0: hi: 0, btch: 1 usd: 0 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564908] CPU 1: hi: 0, btch: 1 usd: 0 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564911] CPU 2: hi: 0, btch: 1 usd: 0 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564914] CPU 3: hi: 0, btch: 1 usd: 0 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564916] Normal per-cpu: Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564919] CPU 0: hi: 186, btch: 31 usd: 175 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564922] CPU 1: hi: 186, btch: 31 usd: 165 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564925] CPU 2: hi: 186, btch: 31 usd: 30 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564928] CPU 3: hi: 186, btch: 31 usd: 140 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564931] HighMem per-cpu: Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564933] CPU 0: hi: 186, btch: 31 usd: 159 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564936] CPU 1: hi: 186, btch: 31 usd: 22 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564939] CPU 2: hi: 186, btch: 31 usd: 24 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564942] CPU 3: hi: 186, btch: 31 usd: 13 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564947] active_anon:485974 inactive_anon:121138 isolated_anon:0 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564948] active_file:75215 inactive_file:79510 isolated_file:0 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564949] unevictable:0 dirty:516 writeback:15 unstable:0 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564950] free:230770 slab_reclaimable:36661 slab_unreclaimable:21249 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564952] mapped:20016 shmem:29450 pagetables:5600 bounce:0 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564958] DMA free:2884kB min:72kB low:88kB high:108kB active_anon:0kB inactive_anon:0kB active_file:5692kB inactive_file:724kB unevictable:0kB isolated(anon):0kB isolated(file):0kB present:15872kB mlocked:0kB dirty:8kB writeback:0kB mapped:0kB shmem:0kB slab_reclaimable:5112kB slab_unreclaimable:156kB kernel_stack:56kB pagetables:0kB unstable:0kB bounce:0kB writeback_tmp:0kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564964] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 698 4143 4143 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564977] Normal free:143468kB min:3344kB low:4180kB high:5016kB active_anon:56kB inactive_anon:2068kB active_file:131812kB inactive_file:131728kB unevictable:0kB isolated(anon):0kB isolated(file):0kB present:715256kB mlocked:0kB dirty:156kB writeback:0kB mapped:308kB shmem:4kB slab_reclaimable:141532kB slab_unreclaimable:84840kB kernel_stack:1928kB pagetables:22400kB unstable:0kB bounce:0kB writeback_tmp:0kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564983] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 27559 27559 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.564995] HighMem free:776728kB min:512kB low:4636kB high:8760kB active_anon:1943840kB inactive_anon:482484kB active_file:163356kB inactive_file:185588kB unevictable:0kB isolated(anon):0kB isolated(file):0kB present:3527556kB mlocked:0kB dirty:1900kB writeback:60kB mapped:79756kB shmem:117796kB slab_reclaimable:0kB slab_unreclaimable:0kB kernel_stack:0kB pagetables:0kB unstable:0kB bounce:0kB writeback_tmp:0kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.565001] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0 0 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.565011] DMA: 385*4kB 16*8kB 3*16kB 9*32kB 6*64kB 2*128kB 1*256kB 0*512kB 0*1024kB 0*2048kB 0*4096kB = 2900kB Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.565032] Normal: 21505*4kB 6508*8kB 273*16kB 24*32kB 3*64kB 0*128kB 0*256kB 0*512kB 0*1024kB 0*2048kB 0*4096kB = 143412kB Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.565054] HighMem: 949*4kB 8859*8kB 7063*16kB 6186*32kB 4631*64kB 727*128kB 6*256kB 0*512kB 0*1024kB 0*2048kB 0*4096kB = 776604kB Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.565076] 198980 total pagecache pages Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.565079] 14850 pages in swap cache Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.565082] Swap cache stats: add 2556273, delete 2541423, find 82961339/83153719 Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.565085] Free swap = 250592kB Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.565087] Total swap = 385520kB Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.575454] 1073152 pages RAM Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.575458] 888834 pages HighMem Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.575461] 11344 pages reserved Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.575463] 1090481 pages shared Sep 4 10:16:59 uriel kernel: [32571790.575465] 737188 pages non-shared Now, I've no idea what this means. There's plenty of free memory; total used free shared buffers cached Mem: 4247232 3455904 791328 0 5348 736412 -/+ buffers/cache: 2714144 1533088 Swap: 385520 131004 254516 Though now I see the swap is relatively low in size, but would that matter? I've been starting to think about fragmentation, or inode usage on that large partition, but a recent fsck on it showed is as only like 0.5% fragmented. Which leaves me with inode usage, but how much of an effect really would a large inode table or filesystem TOC have? I've love to hear people's opinions on this. It's driving me potty! df -h output; Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on /dev/xvda1 9.5G 6.6G 2.4G 74% / tmpfs 2.1G 0 2.1G 0% /lib/init/rw udev 10M 520K 9.5M 6% /dev tmpfs 2.1G 0 2.1G 0% /dev/shm /dev/xvdb 980G 921G 59G 94% /data

  Read the article

• Preventing h/w RAID cards from dropping slow JBOD disks

  - by Kevin

  I'm considering buying a used SAS h/w RAID card for externally attaching HDDs to an HP ProLiant I'm setting up. However, I only require RAID functionality on some of the drives. Theoretically it should be simple to JBOD the other drives, but some of them are inexpensive SATA disks and probably cannot have TLER disabled. I'd like to know, prior to actually ordering a RAID card, whether typically RAID cards would still enforce dropping of disks that do not respond within a few seconds, even if the disk is in a JBOD, and whether there is any way to disable this. Ideally it would be nice to be able to select certain SAS ports that will be pass-through, bypassing the RAID engine entirely and just acting as an HBA for those ports. I know I could buy a separate SAS HBA but that seems like a waste of $ and is also impractical as it's a 1U server so space is extremely limited. My question then is whether the functionality I'm looking for (pass-through on certain ports or at least JBOD drives not getting themselves dropped due to slow response) is typical of proper h/w RAID cards such as PERC 5/E etc. I've browsed through the latter's manual but unfortunately, as with most user manuals, it states the obvious and doesn't state the unobvious. Thanks for any info, Kevin

  Read the article

• System Slow After Uprading Ubuntu

  - by Aragon N

  I have an Ubuntu network machine which has release of 10.04.1 LTS Lucid. On this system I have Apache, PostgreSQL and django. For some app. development I have to install PGP and php-curl. Due to being on network, I have exported a VMware machine to the Internet and firstly I have upgraded the system and then installed php5 packages on it. I don't know is it all about django or apache configuration. Maybe some Apache settings had changed. In this case in apache where I have to look at ? After all replacing it with its old place, I see that the new system query is slow according to another. Old system query time : 140 ms New system query time : 9.11 s I have checked /etc/network interface and it seems there is no problem. I have checked /etc/resolv.conf and it seems OK I have checked /etc/nsswitch.conf and only host section is different from old one which old system has hosts: files mdns4_minimal [NOTFOUND=return] dns mdns4 and then I have checked time host -t A services.myapp.com and I got real 0m0.355s user 0m0.010s sys 0m0.020s and I have checked apache2 HostnameLookups : find /etc/apache2/ -type f | xargs grep -i HostnameLookups It returned : /etc/apache2/apache2.conf:# HostnameLookups: Log the names of clients or just their IP addresses /etc/apache2/apache2.conf:HostnameLookups Off and now what can I have to check for boosting my system as before?

  Read the article

• Windows is very slow with my new SSD

  - by Maksym H.

  I have a laptop HP probook 4520s with Core i5 M480 @ 2.67Ghz, 4Gb RAM, 640 GB HDD Radeon HD 6370m 1GB video card. It would seem like a good stack for work, right? But My HDD has crashed after everyday walking with laptop about 1 year. After buying my new SSD (Patriot memory - Torqx II 128 Gb SATA II) and installing new Windows 8 from scratch - it was amazing fast. But I had only install windows updates, and I feel that the speed become the same as my old HDD, after install other software for my work, it becomes so slow, so when I use my PC with old lower configuration and it really works better than my awesome laptop... I checked that TRIM and AHCI mode are turned on. So why's that? I asked for help in Patriot Memory support, they suggested to send them ATTO test results, done, sent. Here is the response: "Thank you very much for the attached results. Looking at the results, I can see that your SSD speed is a lot lower than it should be. Can you tell me your system specs?" Until they checked my email, I re-installed Windows 8 to Windows 7 and it was again perfect, but the story repeats it becomes slower and slower after every installing new software. Check out some screenshots.. (sorry for the screenshot with russian TaskManager, I hope you will recognize those parameters accordingly with your english or other lang TaskManager) So the main issue that something everytime loads the disc on 100% and the response time is jumping around 1000-3000 ms. Why am I asking about Windows? Because I tried to install Linux Mint (x86) and It just flies. So great performance independent on how many programs I have installed. Only Windows (any 7 or 8) has this problem. So guys, I appreciate any ideas about how to fix that and may be answers of main question - "why is it so.?" Thanks!

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35  | Next Page >