Search Results

Search found 6207 results on 249 pages for 'slow'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 35/249 | < Previous Page | 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42  | Next Page >

  • ubuntu server 10 - slow and can't remove desktop environment

    - by Alex
    i'm running ubuntu server 10.10 with the desktop environment. simple page requests are taking over 5 seconds even when connecting to the server through our local network. i believe this is partially related to having the desktop environment installed, as the server worked faster (but not as fast as it should considering that it's on the local network), but tasksel fails every time (aptitude failed 100). my knowledge of networking and linux in general is limited. would really appreciate ideas on how i can troubleshoot this problem. oh also, in the system monitor, one of the processors is almost always around 100%. i doubt this is normal too....

    Read the article

  • Troubleshooting painfully slow Windows XP boot

    - by shan
    When I reboot my machine, it takes around 10-15 minutes to boot. Tried removing unused programs, disk defragmentation, check disk, but I'm not able to identify the issue. Any ideas to troubleshoot to see whether there is any failure, trying to start a service/program?

    Read the article

  • Windows Explorer slow response when disconnect from the network

    - by ITGuy24
    As a Systems Admin I have seen this issue repeatedly and it drives me crazy. Basically the problem occurs when you open My Documents or My Computer (Windows Explorer) there is a big delay ranging from 5-25 seconds before it actually opens and shows the content. Sometimes the problem continues with each subfolder you open. The problem is most common when disconnected from the network and when you have mapped drives. The most common solution for this problem is to disconnect any mapped drives or printers that are discconected/not reaachable. I have also heard that turning off "Automatically search for network folders and printers" can solve this issue but I have yet to see this work. Does anyone know of any other work arounds for this?

    Read the article

  • Slow download speeds on MacBook Pro

    - by Austin
    Just as the title says, I am getting very low download speeds on my MacBook Pro. I did a speed test at speedtest.net, and am getting 7 MbPS down, .5 up. However, I can only seem to get 270 KB PS max (averaging 100 K), whether on my school's network or on my home network, wired or wireless. I am on Mac OS X 10.5.8, with Google Chrome. My ethernet settings (under System Preferences - Network - Ethernet Connection - Advanced - Ethernet) are set to "Configure Automatically", "Speed: 100TX", "Duplex: full-duplex, flow-control", and "MTU: Standard (1500)". As far as I can tell, there are no throttles or anything between here and the ISP, so... Any ideas on why I'm getting such low download speeds?

    Read the article

  • Offline Outlook 2007 global address book slow to update

    - by munrobasher
    Outlook 2007 talking to an Exchange 2007 server. Usual set-up of personal contacts and a site wide global address book. Distribution lists are often created by IT in the global address book but it sometimes takes days for them to appear in the local offline copy. Performing a manual download of the address book doesn't help. Problem doesn't occur with non-offline mode of Outlook 2007. Any ideas? Server or client side issue? Cheers, Rob.

    Read the article

  • mysql INNODB inserts very slow

    - by 133794m3r
    The database's schema is as follows. CREATE TABLE `items` ( `id` mediumint( 8 ) unsigned NOT NULL AUTO_INCREMENT , `name` varchar( 45 ) NOT NULL , `main_type` tinyint( 4 ) NOT NULL , `rarity` tinyint( 4 ) NOT NULL , `stack_size` smallint( 6 ) NOT NULL , `sub_type` tinyint( 4 ) NOT NULL , `cost` mediumint( 8 ) unsigned NOT NULL , `ilvl` smallint( 6 ) unsigned NOT NULL DEFAULT '0', `flavor_text` varchar( 250 ) NOT NULL , `rlvl` tinyint( 3 ) unsigned NOT NULL , `final` tinyint( 4 ) NOT NULL DEFAULT '0', PRIMARY KEY ( `id` ) ) ENGINE = InnoDB DEFAULT CHARSET = ascii; Now, doing an insert on this table takes 0.22 seconds. I don't know why it's taking so long to do a single row insert. Reads are really really fast something like 0.005 seconds. With using the example configuration from here dev mysql innodb it averages ~0.002 to ~0.005 seconds. Why it takes more than 100x more time to do a single insert makes no sense to me. My computer is as follows. OS:Debian Sid x86-x64, Mysql 5.1, RAM:4GB ddr2, cpu 2.0Ghz dual core, HDD 7200RPM 32MB cache 640GB. Why it's taking almost 100x as much time for a SELECT * FROM items; vs INSERT INTO items ...; will never make any sense to me. It's still a small table at only 70 rows, and took that long even when it had 0 rows.

    Read the article

  • Network card very slow, only on Windows

    - by J Penguin
    This only happens to 1 of my machine, and only when booting into Windows 7. No matter what network card I put in, Windows would default its mode to 10Mbps full duplex. Transfer speed is approximately 1 MB/s. If I set it to 100Mbps, the transfer drops to 100-200K/s. If I set it to 1000Mbps, the connection is lost completely. I've tried swapping in different cards, both PCI-E and PCI. I'v etried update the windows, I've tried reinstalling the drivers... On this very same machine, if I boot into Fedora, it can use the card at its full capacity 1000Mbps transfering 80+ MB/s And all the cards work just fine when plugging into other machines on the same network. I'm very curious. What could be the reason for this? The only different software that this machine has is virtual box with a VPN emulator, but disabling that VPN doesn't seem to do anything. I would like to get this fixed, hopefully, without reinstalling windows _< Will that be possible?

    Read the article

  • Windows XP is logging slow in domain

    - by wasim
    My office machine has starting to take long time to boot up. I don't know whether I did something wrong because till last week it was working like a charm. I am running windows XP connected with domain on Windows 2003 server.

    Read the article

  • Slow performance over network (Ubuntu)

    - by Filipe Santos
    i did setup this NodeJs TCP Server and tested it with a message flooder. Just to see how the performance of the server is. While the message throughput is great if i run the server and the message flooder on the same computer (ubuntu), the throughput dramaticaly decreases if i start the server on computer1(ubuntu1) and the message flooder on computer2(also ubuntu). Both PC are on the same network. In fact, they are directly connected to each other. I started searching the internet for reasons and i suppose i need to tune TCP on both Ubuntu-pcs but until now i haven't been successfull at all. Has anyone experienced such problems, or could someone help me out? Thanks Here the flooding code: var net=require('net') var client = net.createConnection(5000, "10.0.0.2") client.addListener("connect", function(){ for(var i = 0; i < 1000; i++) { client.write("message "); } })

    Read the article

  • RDP Connection to Windows 7 stays really slow

    - by Pavlo
    I have an Issue with connecting to Windows 7 via RDP. I can open an RDP Session, but regardless of any settings, the responce times are really long. This in particulary is the case when opening a web page in a browser. I've tried IE, Firefox and Google Chrome. I also use RDP connection to a Windows 2008 Server from the same client machine, and the speed is very normal with all features turned on. We have Gigabit Ethernet here. So I think it can not be the client's fault. What concerns Windows 7 Machine, I've tried shutting all the sraphic features off and turning the color levels to 256 colors. Result - the same. If I work locally on the machine - I can not see any lags. What else have I tried: Using old RDP 5 Client from Microsoft Setting network autotuninglevel as seen here Do You have some ideas? Thanks in advance! Update the problem seems to be with rendering window contents. All the window borders and pannes are rendered pretty quickly, but the content shows up very slowly. Also mouse movements are recognised by the Win 7 box only after some period. Are there some hidden settings in the RDP, where one could turn some advanced features off or turn some caching on? I use Bitmap Caching, but this apparently doesn't help.

    Read the article

  • Apache on Win32: Slow Transfers of single, static files in HTTP, fast in HTTPS

    - by Michael Lackner
    I have a weird problem with Apache 2.2.15 on Windows 2000 Server SP4. Basically, I am trying to serve larger static files, images, videos etc. The download seems to be capped at around 550kB/s even over 100Mbit LAN. I tried other protocols (FTP/FTPS/FTP+ES/SCP/SMB), and they are all in the multi-megabyte range. The strangest thing is that, when using Apache with HTTPS instead of HTTP, it serves very fast, around 2.7MByte/s! I also tried the AnalogX SimpleWWW server just to test the plain HTTP speed of it, and it gave me a healthy 3.3Mbyte/s. I am at a total loss here. I searched the web, and tried to change the following Apache configuration directives in httpd.conf, one at a time, mostly to no avail at all: SendBufferSize 1048576 #(tried multiples of that too, up to 100Mbytes) EnableSendfile Off #(minor performance boost) EnableMMAP Off Win32DisableAcceptEx HostnameLookups Off #(default) I also tried to tune the following registry parameters, setting their values to 4194304 in decimal (they are REG_DWORD), and rebooting afterwards: HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\AFD\Parameters\DefaultReceiveWindow HKLM\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Services\AFD\Parameters\DefaultSendWindow Additionally, I tried to install mod_bw, which sets the event timer precision to 1ms, and allows for bandwidth throttling. According to some people it boosts static file serving performance when set to unlimited bandwidth for everybody. Unfortunately, it did nothing for me. So: AnalogX HTTP: 3300kB/s Gene6 FTPD, plain: 3500kB/s Gene6 FTPD, Implicit and Explicit SSL, AES256 Cipher: 1800-2000kB/s freeSSHD: 1100kB/s SMB shared folder: about 3000kB/s Apache HTTP, plain: 550kB/s Apache HTTPS: 2700kB/s Clients that were used in the bandwidth testing: Internet Explorer 8 (HTTP, HTTPS) Firefox 8 (HTTP, HTTPS) Chrome 13 (HTTP, HTTPS) Opera 11.60 (HTTP, HTTPS) wget under CygWin (HTTP, HTTPS) FileZilla (FTP, FTPS, FTP+ES, SFTP) Windows Explorer (SMB) Generally, transfer speeds are not too high, but that's because the server machine is an old quad Pentium Pro 200MHz machine with 2GB RAM. However, I would like Apache to serve at at least 2Mbyte/s instead of 550kB/s, and that already works with HTTPS easily, so I fail to see why plain HTTP is so crippled. I am using a Kerio Winroute Firewall, but no Throttling and no special filters peeking into HTTP traffic, just the plain Firewall functionality for blocking/allowing connections. The Apache error.log (Loglevel info) shows no warnings, no errors. Also nothing strange to be seen in access.log. I have already stripped down my httpd.conf to the bare minimum just to make sure nothing is interfering, but that didn't help either. If you have any idea, help would be greatly appreciated, since I am totally out of ideas! Thanks! Edit: I have now tried a newer Apache 2.2.21 to see if it makes any difference. However, the behaviour is exactly the same. Edit 2: KM01 has requested a sniff on the HTTP headers, so here comes the LiveHTTPHeaders output (an extension to Firefox). The Output is generated on downloading a single file called "elephantsdream_source.264", which is an H.264/AVC elementary video stream under an Open Source license. I have taken the freedom to edit the URL, removing folders and changing the actual servers domain name to www.mydomain.com. Here it is: LiveHTTPHeaders, Plain HTTP: http://www.mydomain.com/elephantsdream_source.264 GET /elephantsdream_source.264 HTTP/1.1 Host: www.mydomain.com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.2; WOW64; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/6.0.2 Accept: text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,*/*;q=0.8 Accept-Language: de-de,de;q=0.8,en-us;q=0.5,en;q=0.3 Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate Accept-Charset: ISO-8859-1,utf-8;q=0.7,*;q=0.7 Connection: keep-alive HTTP/1.1 200 OK Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 20:55:16 GMT Server: Apache/2.2.21 (Win32) mod_ssl/2.2.21 OpenSSL/0.9.8r PHP/5.2.17 Last-Modified: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 20:20:09 GMT Etag: "c000000013fa5-29cf10e9-493b311889d3c" Accept-Ranges: bytes Content-Length: 701436137 Keep-Alive: timeout=15, max=100 Connection: Keep-Alive Content-Type: text/plain LiveHTTPHeaders, HTTPS: https://www.mydomain.com/elephantsdream_source.264 GET /elephantsdream_source.264 HTTP/1.1 Host: www.mydomain.com User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.2; WOW64; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/6.0.2 Accept: text/html,application/xhtml+xml,application/xml;q=0.9,*/*;q=0.8 Accept-Language: de-de,de;q=0.8,en-us;q=0.5,en;q=0.3 Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate Accept-Charset: ISO-8859-1,utf-8;q=0.7,*;q=0.7 Connection: keep-alive HTTP/1.1 200 OK Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 20:56:57 GMT Server: Apache/2.2.21 (Win32) mod_ssl/2.2.21 OpenSSL/0.9.8r PHP/5.2.17 Last-Modified: Thu, 28 Oct 2010 20:20:09 GMT Etag: "c000000013fa5-29cf10e9-493b311889d3c" Accept-Ranges: bytes Content-Length: 701436137 Keep-Alive: timeout=15, max=100 Connection: Keep-Alive Content-Type: text/plain

    Read the article

  • Why is my mono/XSP site loading slow?

    - by acidzombie24
    I have two sites on the same server. One is loading perfectly and incredibly fast. The other is an equally complex site except a bit less javascript and 0 images. Its taking several seconds to load and there is a 1 in 3 chance that i get a Http500 error. WTF I grabbed the lastest 2.6.? version of mono, mod_mono and xsp (libgdiplus-2.6.7, xsp-2.6.5, mod_mono-2.6.3 and mono 2.6.7) This is whats in apache error.log [Mon Jan 03 19:33:40 2011] [error] (70014)End of file found: read_data failed [Mon Jan 03 19:33:40 2011] [error] Command stream corrupted, last command was 1 [Mon Jan 03 19:34:52 2011] [error] (70014)End of file found: read_data failed [Mon Jan 03 19:34:52 2011] [error] (70014)End of file found: read_data failed [Mon Jan 03 19:34:52 2011] [error] Command stream corrupted, last command was 1 [Mon Jan 03 19:34:52 2011] [error] Command stream corrupted, last command was 1 this is the page error Internal Server Error The server encountered an internal error or misconfiguration and was unable to complete your request. Please contact the server administrator, webmaster@localhost and inform them of the time the error occurred, and anything you might have done that may have caused the error. More information about this error may be available in the server error log. Apache/2.2.9 (Debian) PHP/5.2.6-1+lenny9 with Suhosin-Patch mod_mono/2.6.3 Server

    Read the article

  • SQL Server 2005 SP3 Express Backups Incredibly Slow

    - by Adam Robinson
    I'm attempting to troubleshoot an issue with one of our customers who's using SQL Server 2005 SP3 Express to house their application data. The automatic backups that we perform when upgrading our application are timing out after 30 minutes, and I've been sitting and watching the backup take place in SSMS for about 20 minutes now and it's only gotten to 30%. The database is only slightly over 1GB, so I'm baffled as to what could be causing this sort of horrible performance. The machine is a 1.87GHz Xeon with 3GB of RAM running Windows Server 2003 R2. While that's hardly a powerful box, this seems ridiculous. Does anyone have any idea why these backups could be taking so long and, more importantly, how I can do something about it?

    Read the article

  • Always use one slow connection in preference of a "faster" one

    - by billc.cn
    In Windows, there's this automatic metric thing where the metric is selected according to the declared speed of the link. I now have a gigabit LAN routed to a 2MB DSL service and a HSDPA mobile broadband connection. The former is always chosen for Internet packets even though the latter is actually faster. I tried setting the mobile broadband's interface metric to 1 and raising its priority in the advanced settings of the adapter settings, but this does not seem to affect the metric of the default route. The default route to the Ethernet interface always have a lower metric than the mobile broadband interface. Am I missing something here?

    Read the article

  • Extremely slow network directory subfolder listing from QNAP NAS in OS X

    - by Josh Newman
    Having an issue where I have a folder on a QNAP NAS (TS-439P II+) with over 68,000 subfolders within it. I can browse it quickly and almost instantaneously within Windows 7 via samba, however in OSX 10.6.8, it takes nearly 10+ minutes to display the subfolders, using both samba and AFP. Hoping there is an easy solution - we can't break the folders into smaller subfolders due to a requirement of proprietary software that accesses the sub folders. I've tried the fixes suggested here, which don't seem to help: http://www.macwindows.com/snowleopard-filesharing.html#030311b

    Read the article

  • Slow file copying/network browsing in Windows 7

    - by tomp
    The file copying on local discs and network shares, and browsing shared folders is much slower on the Windows 7 than it was on Windows XP. I'm sure everyone encountered this problem, I personally have seen it on many different computers. What would you recommend to speed up these operations?

    Read the article

  • wireless problem: Internet slow connection or limited connectivity

    - by jack
    Hi I have no idea on this problem. My wireless connection doesn't work sometimes. I find it's due to my XP and I have no problem with my Win 7 machine. The problem is - Internet Connection a bit slower than usual Limit connectivity issue I use netsh reset for resetting network configurations but it helps sometimes or not help at all. Any ideas? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • Google products are excessively slow

    - by Sixfoot Studio
    Hi, We're running Windows 2000 for our office server. For years now we have had the problem where everthing Google takes an excessively long time to do anything. Gmail hangs, Analytics takes forever, Google docs times out. I have been back and forth with our ISP on this matter and they are convinced it has something to do with our server. This does not happen when I am at home so the problem either lays with our server or with the ISP. Here is a screencast to show you what I mean. http://www.screencast.com/users/jamesvanderhoven/folders/Jing/media/f7ffce9a-0250-4112-b79d-7dc58c2c8b0a Has anyone else experienced this kind of problem and is there a way to resolve this please? Many thanks!

    Read the article

  • Slow SSD Read on Server 2008 SP2

    - by Ruben L.
    Im using a Intel X25-M 80G with the latest firmware. on XP /w using IDE and WIN7 using AHCI I get read speeds up to 250MB/S. But when running it with Server 2008 SP1 or SP2 on AHCI, I get read speeds around 180MB/S. Ive updated drivers for 2008, tested with writecache on/off. Any input would be appreciated. thanks!

    Read the article

  • First requests are painfully slow

    - by winSharp93
    I am running Redmine under IIS using Zoo. Installation was done using the Web Platform Installer and the default configuration has not been touched. However, when using the application, the first requests take very long to complete (sometimes more than one minute). During that time, the ruby.exe causes some CPU load (about 15%). According to the log files, it's mainly the views taking that long to render: Started GET "/redmine/login" for IP at 2012-09-04 09:54:08 +0200 Processing by AccountController#login as HTML Rendered account/login.html.erb within layouts/base (42150.5ms) Completed 200 OK in 43508ms (Views: 43008.5ms | ActiveRecord: 0.0ms) Rendered account/login.html.erb within layouts/base (42435.1ms) Completed 200 OK in 44100ms (Views: 43523.3ms | ActiveRecord: 0.0ms) After the initial delay, further request times are totally acceptable. Any ideas on how to speed up the warmup time?

    Read the article

  • WiFi & GbE Slow while Both Active.

    - by Mark Tomlin
    I'm having a problem with my WiFi network connection when I use my wired GbE connection concurrently on my Laptop. I'm using my WiFi for Internet access, and general web surfing and I'm using my GbE connection to connect to my PlayStation so I can stream media. The WiFi connection is via a Linksys 610N connected to my Cable Modem. Where as the GbE connection is a direct connection from my Ethernet port to the Ethernet port of the PS3 via a Cat-5 cable (no router in between this connection). As soon as I connect the cable from the PS3 to my Ethernet port on my Laptop the WiFi connection slows to a halt, but then allows for a connection to the web as normal but at much slower speeds for the things like BitTorrent that stops completely. It seems to me that Windows can't handle both connections at once. It will have both active but it can only accept and send packets on one device at one time. I can get WiFi connections to work to go to websites and the like, but once I use my GbE connection to share media between my Laptop and my PS3 the Wifi connection dies out and I no longer have access to the internet. I setup my connection on the PS3 and the Laptop following the insturctions posted here: http://forums.finalgear.com/problems/s14e01-ps3-size-problem-40642/#post1188132 And the following is the results of my ipconfig. Windows IP Configuration Host Name . . . . . . . . . . . . : dygear Primary Dns Suffix . . . . . . . : Node Type . . . . . . . . . . . . : Hybrid IP Routing Enabled. . . . . . . . : No WINS Proxy Enabled. . . . . . . . : No Ethernet adapter WiFi: Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Intel(R) PRO/Wireless 3945ABG Network Connection Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-19-**-**-**-** Dhcp Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : Yes Autoconfiguration Enabled . . . . : Yes IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.111 Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0 Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1 DHCP Server . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1 DNS Servers . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.1 167.206.254.2 167.206.254.1 Lease Obtained. . . . . . . . . . : Wednesday, May 19, 2010 08:55:30 Lease Expires . . . . . . . . . . : Thursday, May 20, 2010 08:55:30 Ethernet adapter LAN: Connection-specific DNS Suffix . : Description . . . . . . . . . . . : Broadcom NetXtreme Gigabit Ethernet Physical Address. . . . . . . . . : 00-16-**-**-**-** Dhcp Enabled. . . . . . . . . . . : No IP Address. . . . . . . . . . . . : 192.168.1.50 Subnet Mask . . . . . . . . . . . : 255.255.255.0 Default Gateway . . . . . . . . . : Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Linux software RAID6: rebuild slow

    - by Ole Tange
    I am trying to find the bottleneck in the rebuilding of a software raid6. ## Pause rebuilding when measuring raw I/O performance # echo 1 > /proc/sys/dev/raid/speed_limit_min # echo 1 > /proc/sys/dev/raid/speed_limit_max ## Drop caches so that does not interfere with measuring # sync ; echo 3 | tee /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches >/dev/null # time parallel -j0 "dd if=/dev/{} bs=256k count=4000 | cat >/dev/null" ::: sdbd sdbc sdbf sdbm sdbl sdbk sdbe sdbj sdbh sdbg 4000+0 records in 4000+0 records out 1048576000 bytes (1.0 GB) copied, 7.30336 s, 144 MB/s [... similar for each disk ...] # time parallel -j0 "dd if=/dev/{} skip=15000000 bs=256k count=4000 | cat >/dev/null" ::: sdbd sdbc sdbf sdbm sdbl sdbk sdbe sdbj sdbh sdbg 4000+0 records in 4000+0 records out 1048576000 bytes (1.0 GB) copied, 12.7991 s, 81.9 MB/s [... similar for each disk ...] So we can read sequentially at 140 MB/s in the outer tracks and 82 MB/s in the inner tracks on all the drives simultaneously. Sequential write performance is similar. This would lead me to expect a rebuild speed of 82 MB/s or more. # echo 800000 > /proc/sys/dev/raid/speed_limit_min # echo 800000 > /proc/sys/dev/raid/speed_limit_max # cat /proc/mdstat md2 : active raid6 sdbd[10](S) sdbc[9] sdbf[0] sdbm[8] sdbl[7] sdbk[6] sdbe[11] sdbj[4] sdbi[3](F) sdbh[2] sdbg[1] 27349121408 blocks super 1.2 level 6, 128k chunk, algorithm 2 [9/8] [UUU_UUUUU] [=========>...........] recovery = 47.3% (1849905884/3907017344) finish=855.9min speed=40054K/sec But we only get 40 MB/s. And often this drops to 30 MB/s. # iostat -dkx 1 sdbc 0.00 8023.00 0.00 329.00 0.00 33408.00 203.09 0.70 2.12 1.06 34.80 sdbd 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sdbe 13.00 0.00 8334.00 0.00 33388.00 0.00 8.01 0.65 0.08 0.06 47.20 sdbf 0.00 0.00 8348.00 0.00 33388.00 0.00 8.00 0.58 0.07 0.06 48.00 sdbg 16.00 0.00 8331.00 0.00 33388.00 0.00 8.02 0.71 0.09 0.06 48.80 sdbh 961.00 0.00 8314.00 0.00 37100.00 0.00 8.92 0.93 0.11 0.07 54.80 sdbj 70.00 0.00 8276.00 0.00 33384.00 0.00 8.07 0.78 0.10 0.06 48.40 sdbk 124.00 0.00 8221.00 0.00 33380.00 0.00 8.12 0.88 0.11 0.06 47.20 sdbl 83.00 0.00 8262.00 0.00 33380.00 0.00 8.08 0.96 0.12 0.06 47.60 sdbm 0.00 0.00 8344.00 0.00 33376.00 0.00 8.00 0.56 0.07 0.06 47.60 iostat says the disks are not 100% busy (but only 40-50%). This fits with the hypothesis that the max is around 80 MB/s. Since this is software raid the limiting factor could be CPU. top says: PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 38520 root 20 0 0 0 0 R 64 0.0 2947:50 md2_raid6 6117 root 20 0 0 0 0 D 53 0.0 473:25.96 md2_resync So md2_raid6 and md2_resync are clearly busy taking up 64% and 53% of a CPU respectively, but not near 100%. The chunk size (128k) of the RAID was chosen after measuring which chunksize gave the least CPU penalty. If this speed is normal: What is the limiting factor? Can I measure that? If this speed is not normal: How can I find the limiting factor? Can I change that?

    Read the article

  • HP DL185 - very slow disk read speed

    - by fistameeny
    Hi, I have a HP DL185 G6 Server (12 disk model) with the following spec: Quad Core Xeon 2.27GHz 6GB RAM HP P212 RAID controller with battery backup 2 x 128GB 15K SAS 3.5" (RAID-1 for the operating system) 4 x 750GB 7.5K SAS 3.5" (RAID-5 for the data, 2TB usable space) The operating system is Ubuntu Server 9.10. Both drives have been formatted as EXT4. We are finding that read speed of the RAID-5 array is poor. Disk test results below: sudo hdparm -tT /dev/cciss/c0d1p1 /dev/cciss/c0d1p1: Timing cached reads: 15284 MB in 2.00 seconds = 7650.18 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 74 MB in 3.02 seconds = 24.53 MB/sec For info, the RAID-1 array performs as follows: sudo hdparm -tT /dev/cciss/c0d0p1 /dev/cciss/c0d0p1: Timing cached reads: 15652 MB in 2.00 seconds = 7834.26 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 492 MB in 3.01 seconds = 163.46 MB/sec We thought this was because with no battery, read/write cache is disabled. We have bought and installed the battery backup and have used the HP bootable CD to change the cache settings to 50% read / 50% write and check cache is enabled on the drives and the controller. Is there something I'm missing?

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42  | Next Page >