Search Results

Search found 6587 results on 264 pages for 'slow motion'.

Page 38/264 | < Previous Page | 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45  | Next Page >

• 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

• 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

• 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

• 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

• 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 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

• 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 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

• 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

• Problem with slow hard disk

  - by Makis Arvin

  We bought some new PCs in my company with the new iCore 7 and 8GB memory and the following hard disk: WESTERN DIGITAL WD8000AARS 800GB CAVIAR GREEN SATA2 The problem we have is that after installing windows XP64 SP2 the write speed of the hard disk is extremely low!. The windows system monitor shows that the Average Disk queue length is always at 100% and a winzip extract of 350mb takes about 8min. Is there any idea on where to start looking for the cause of that? Thanks

  Read the article

• isa 2004 - banned site rule cause slow internet

  - by Holian

  Hi Gods, We have windows server 2003 with isa 2004. Our clients uses internet with proxy. We have two isa rule: order name action protocolls from/listener to condition 1. trafic ALLOW all outbound all networks all networks all users 2. FTP ALLOW FTP Server EXTERNAL/INTERNAL/Local host 10.1.1.1 So we have to "bann" a few webpage (like facebook, youtube...etc...), so we make a new rule 0. banned DENY HTTP internal denied pages all users In the denied pages we have the *.facebook.com domain set. After we enable this rule, the entire internet slows down. The banning rule works well, redirect to an internal site, but the other sites.... If i open a page..it normally takes 3-10 sec to load, but after this rule this time is: 2-4 minutes. In the monitor / logging menu we got a few FAILED CONNECTION ATTEMPT like: Log type: Web Proxy (Forward) Status: 304 Not Modified Rule: All local traffic Source: Internal ( 10.1.1.1:0 ) Destination: External ( 172.24.28.22:3128 ) Request: GET http://www.konyvelozona.hu/wp-content/uploads/nyugdijas-holgy-2.jpg Filter information: Req ID: 17270b72 Protocol: http User: anonymous Additional information Client agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 8.0; Windows NT 5.1; Trident/4.0; .NET CLR 2.0.50727; .NET CLR 3.0.4506.2152; .NET CLR 3.5.3072... Object source: Verified Cache Processing time: 9047 Cache info: 0x18801002 MIME type: - In the event log we got a few log: Description: The Web Proxy filter failed to bind its socket to 10.1.1.1 port 80. This may have been caused by another service that is already using the same port or by a network adapter that is not functional. To resolve this issue, restart the Microsoft Firewall service. The error code specified in the data area of the event properties indicates the cause of the failure. The failure is due to error: 0x8007271d The Web Proxy filter failed to bind its socket to 127.0.0.1 port 80. This may have been caused by another service that is already using the same port or by a network adapter that is not functional. To resolve this issue, restart the Microsoft Firewall service. The error code specified in the data area of the event properties indicates the cause of the failure. The failure is due to error: 0x8007271d If i tpye: netstat -o -n -a | findstr 0.0:80 then i got, tcp 0.0.0.0:80 0.0.0.0:0 LISTEN 4 udp 0.0.0.0:8031 *.* 2780 udp 0.0.0.0:8082 *.* 2780 Some month ago we installed XMAP, but now we only use mysql. Apache service stopped. In the Xamp port check menu i see: Service POrt Status Apache (http) 80 Process: System Maybee this is the problem? I dont know what should i do now... Thank you folks.

  Read the article

• hyperv machine guest loads slow

  - by Dani Avni

  this is by far one of the strangest things I have seen. I have a win 2008R2 cluster with a CSV. the CSV itself is on an iSCSI storage (hitachi HUS 110) basic config of the two hosts in the cluster is Dell R610 Win 2008 R2 with all patches 64GB 1 NIC for host access 2 NICs for guest access 2 NICs for iSCSI these machine work great and I can load a 2008R2 test guest machine on them in less than 90 seconds after the above config is running for over a year, I now need to add a new host. now the host is Dell R620 (Still intel but different CPU) Win 2008 R2 with all patches 64GB 1 NIC for host access 2 NICs for guest access 2 NICs for iSCSI I added this new host to the domain and to the cluster, I gave it access to the CSV and I tried loading the same guest machine that loads in 90 seconds in the other hosts. the machine loads in about 6 minutes. no matter how many times I try this the old hosts load the machine in about 90 seconds and this new host in around 6 minutes to eliminate any problems with the iSCSI connection, I added a new LUN and directly accessed it from the new host and I was working at around 300MB/s so no problem there. I also tested the connection between the other hosts and the new one and network is working fine there too. to eliminate problems in HyperV, I copied the machine to the local disk of the new host and it loaded in less than 20 seconds. now is the point were things get a lot stranger: in my tests I tried installing a fresh windows guest machine to the CSV from the new host. I noticed that while the fresh windows was installing, my test guest was loading in less than 90 seconds even on the new host (I repeated this a few times). If I paused the fresh install guest and tried loading the test guest again it loaded in 6 minutes. and again after I resumed the guest installation the test guest loaded fast. after the fresh windows was also loaded, I ran tests loading the fresh window and my test machine. each one of them loaded in about 5 minutes when I tried loading them separately. however when I started both of them in the same time they both loaded in around 2.5 minutes it seems that the iSCSI disk access is only working if it is under some load (although I never got to above 10% utilization according to the task manager) does anyone have any idea what could be the problem?

  Read the article

• Slow LAN transfer from 3rd party computer

  - by Chris

  Hi Everyone, I've got an odd problem that I'm not really sure where to start the troubleshooting process. I have a 'server' with Windows Server 2008R2 (64-bit) installed and it has a couple of hard drives. If I Remote Desktop into the server and transfer files from one HD to the other, all it fine. If however, I use my workstation (Windows 7 64bit) and open up a shared resource on the server and transfer a file from one hard drive on the server to another HD on the server (not using Remote Desktop, just Windows explorer/Network places), the transfer crawls... It takes about 5mins to discover files/calculate the transfer and then starts transferring at speeds like 56KB/s - 200KB/s. Both machines have Marvel GigE network ports with a TrendNet 8-port green GigE switch. I've set Jumbo packets to 9K on both machines...

  Read the article

• Windows Server 2012 Hyper-V very slow

  - by Matt Taylor

  I have been running several Hyper-V VMs on Windows Server 2008 R2 for the past couple of years and enjoying perfectly adequate performance for my testing/development/r&d environments. I'm a software developer so my hardware knowledge is basic however I built the rig using: •Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R Intel X58 (Socket 1366) DDR3 Motherboard •Intel Core i7 960 3.20GHz (Bloomfield) (Socket LGA1366) •24GB triple channel RAM The host OS is running on an OCZ SSD and all the VMs are running on a 2TB Marvell SATA3 RAID 0 array consisting of 2 Western Digital Caviar Black 7,200rpm drives. I have tested the speed of the 2TB drive and appear to be getting less than 3Mbs but it can adequately run a 4 VM farm including a DC, (SQL) database and IIS application servers. I recently upgraded the SSD on which the host runs to a 256GB OCZ Vertex 4 and took the opportunity to upgrade to Windows Server 2012 and installed the Hyper-V role. I tried importing one of my existing Windows Server 2008 R2 VMs (and converted it to .vhdx) plus I have tried creating a brand new Windows Server 2008 R2 VM but both are running extremely slowly and I can see nothing obvious using the host and guest Task Manager/Resource Monitor tools. In both cases the VM has 8GB RAM (fixed), 4 CPUs, fixed size HD (not expanding) and is using an external virtual network running on a separate NIC to the host. I have upgraded the BIOS to the latest available version and checked the virtualization settings. I have run out of "obvious" (to a developer) things to check/configure and my next option will be to re-install the host OS but before I do I would very much appreciate any advice from any experts out there. Thanks

  Read the article

• Mysql replication, Slow resyncing of slave after an error

  - by James Hackett

  I have a slave that got an error about a months or so ago and got way behind the master. I fixed the error and now playing catchup with the master but its going very slowly. Its going at 1.3x real time. I was using less that 10% of the db resources when these writes were first happening so the speed of the server shouldn't be an issue. Is there any settings I can switch to help the slave catch up with the master?

  Read the article

• new xp install, but it moves slow

  - by doug

  hi there I just installed new XP windows OS on a old laptop. I did also all the updates I was asked for. I installed also, the latest driver updates from the official laptop producer site. Now, when I try to use that laptop to talk on Yahoo! Messenger, the sound quality is very bad, and I barely hear what the other person is saying. Before I was reinstalling the XP the laptop were working fine. do you have any tips for me? What software utilities to try in order to improve it's performance? what software utilities to install in order to test it's performances?

  Read the article

• slow DNS resolution

  - by Ehsan

  I have a DNS server that resolves all queries for an internal group of servers. It is a bind on CentOS 5.5 (same as RHEL5) and I have set it up to allow recursion and resolve direction without any forwarders. The problem I am facing is that it takes a freakishly long amount of time to resolve a name for the first time. (in the magnitudes of 20 sec) This causes clients to give timeout. When I set it to forward all to Google's public DNS, i.e. 8.8.8.8+8.8.4.4, it works very nicely (within a second). I tried monitoring the traffic on the net to see why it is doing this: [root@ns1 ~]# tcpdump -nnvvvA -s0 udp tcpdump: listening on eth0, link-type EN10MB (Ethernet), capture size 65535 bytes 23:06:36.137797 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 35903, offset 0, flags [none], proto: UDP (17), length: 60) 172.17.1.10.36942 > 172.17.1.4.53: [udp sum ok] 19773+ A? www.paypal.com. (32) E..<[email protected]... .....N.5.(6.M=...........www.paypal.com..... 23:06:36.140594 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 56477, offset 0, flags [none], proto: UDP (17), length: 71) 172.17.1.4.6128 > 192.35.51.30.53: [udp sum ok] 10105 [1au] A? www.paypal.com. ar: . OPT UDPsize=4096 (43) E..G....@........#3....5.3fR'y...........www.paypal.com.......)........ 23:06:38.149756 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 13078, offset 0, flags [none], proto: UDP (17), length: 71) 172.17.1.4.52425 > 192.54.112.30.53: [udp sum ok] 54892 [1au] A? www.paypal.com. ar: . OPT UDPsize=4096 (43) [email protected]&.....6p....5.3.q.l...........www.paypal.com.......)........ 23:06:40.159725 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 43016, offset 0, flags [none], proto: UDP (17), length: 71) 172.17.1.4.24059 > 192.42.93.30.53: [udp sum ok] 11205 [1au] A? www.paypal.com. ar: . OPT UDPsize=4096 (43) E..G....@..@.....*].]..5.3..+............www.paypal.com.......)........ 23:06:41.141403 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 35904, offset 0, flags [none], proto: UDP (17), length: 60) 172.17.1.10.36942 > 172.17.1.4.53: [udp sum ok] 19773+ A? www.paypal.com. (32) E..<.@..@..@... .....N.5.(6.M=...........www.paypal.com..... 23:06:42.169652 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 64, id 44001, offset 0, flags [none], proto: UDP (17), length: 60) 172.17.1.4.9141 > 192.55.83.30.53: [udp sum ok] 1184 A? www.paypal.com. (32) E..<[email protected].#..5.(...............www.paypal.com..... 23:06:42.207295 IP (tos 0x0, ttl 54, id 38004, offset 0, flags [none], proto: UDP (17), length: 205) 192.55.83.30.53 > 172.17.1.4.9141: [udp sum ok] 1184- q: A? www.paypal.com. 0/3/3 ns: paypal.com. NS ns1.isc-sns.net., paypal.com. NS ns2.isc-sns.com., paypal.com. NS ns3.isc-sns.info. ar: ns1.isc-sns.net. AAAA 2001:470:1a::1, ns1.isc-sns.net. A 72.52.71.1, ns2.isc-sns.com. A 38.103.2.1 (177) E....t..6./A.7S......5#..................www.paypal.com..................ns1.isc-sns.net..............ns2.isc-sns...............ns3.isc-sns.info..,.......... ..p.............,..........H4G..I..........&g.. (this goes on for a few more seconds) If you look carefully, you will see that the first 3-4 root servers did not respond at all. This wastes 7-8 seconds, until one of them responded. Do you think I have setup something wrong here? Interestingly, when I dig directly from the root servers that did not respond, the always respond very fast (showing the firewall/nat is not the issue here). E.g. dig www.paypal.com @192.35.51.30 works perfectly, consistently, and very fast. What do you think about this mystery?

  Read the article

• SQL Management Studio is painfully slow on 32-bit Windows 7

  - by Sergei

  I've been having issues running anything in SQL Management Studio on Win 7. Basically, doing anything through the Management Studio interfaces completely freezes it up for a few minutes. Running a query is nearly impossible because it takes nearly 2 minutes just for the IDE to parse it and another minute to run it when the query itself completes instantaneously outside of the IDE. I'm not even going to go into the query designer. Anything with heavy user interaction such as editing a row in the result set where i have to click a cell freezes up the front-end. I tried reinstalling to no avail. Also tried running in compatibility mode without any difference whatsoever. Anybody had a similar experience? I'm running SQL Management Studio 2008 version 10.0.2531.0 on 32-bit Windows 7. Connecting to a remote SQL Server instance (2008 R2). Thanks.

  Read the article

• SSL Handshake negotiation on Nginx terribly slow

  - by Paras Chopra

  I am using Nginx as a proxy to 4 apache instances. My problem is that SSL negotiation takes a lot of time (600 ms). See this as an example: http://www.webpagetest.org/result/101020_8JXS/1/details/ Here is my Nginx Conf: user www-data; worker_processes 4; events { worker_connections 2048; use epoll; } http { include /etc/nginx/mime.types; default_type application/octet-stream; access_log /var/log/nginx/access.log; sendfile on; keepalive_timeout 0; tcp_nodelay on; gzip on; gzip_proxied any; server_names_hash_bucket_size 128; } upstream abc { server 1.1.1.1 weight=1; server 1.1.1.2 weight=1; server 1.1.1.3 weight=1; } server { listen 443; server_name blah; keepalive_timeout 5; ssl on; ssl_certificate /blah.crt; ssl_certificate_key /blah.key; ssl_session_cache shared:SSL:10m; ssl_session_timeout 5m; ssl_protocols SSLv2 SSLv3 TLSv1; ssl_ciphers RC4+RSA:+HIGH:+MEDIUM:+LOW:+SSLv2:+EXP; ssl_prefer_server_ciphers on; location / { proxy_pass http://abc; proxy_set_header X-Real-IP $remote_addr; proxy_set_header Host $host; proxy_set_header X-Forwarded-For $proxy_add_x_forwarded_for; } } The machine is a VPS on Linode with 1 G of RAM. Can anyone please tell why SSL Hand shake is taking ages?

  Read the article

• How do you debug why Windows is slow?

  - by aaron

  I've got Vista Biz and when my machine chugs I think it is because of paging, but I never know how to verify this. Procexp doesn't seem to provide useful information because it appears that nothing is going on when the chugs happen. perfmon seems like it has the counters I need, but I'm never sure what counters I should add to cover the information I want. For perfmon, I prefer numbers that are percents, so I can gauge load. Here are the counters I have up, but they don't always seem to correlate to chugs: - % disk time (logical) - page faults/sec (an indicator of lots of paging activity) - processor/%priviliged time

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45  | Next Page >