Search Results

Search found 24568 results on 983 pages for 'high load'.

Page 4/983 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

• High quality / high speed dvd reader for Mac Pro

  - by deadprogrammer

  I have a high end Mac pro, but one thing in is that I'm unhappy with is a DVD drive. It's a Hitachi GH41N. Apple calls it a "superdrive", but it's anything but. The damn thing makes an amazing amount of noise, and isn't too fast either. What I want is a state of the art, fast, quiet DVD reader, preferably not even a burner. What should I get?

  Read the article

• Request bursting from web application Load Tests

  - by MaseBase

  I'm migrating our web and database hosting to a new environment on all new machines. I've recently performed a Load Test using WAPT to generate load from multiple distributed clients. The server has plenty of room to handle the traffic load, but I'm seeing an odd pattern of incoming traffic during the load tests. Here is the gist of our setup: Firewall server running MS Forefront TMG 2010 on Win 2k8 server Request routing done by IIS Application Request Routing on firewall machine Web server is a Hyper-V VM on the Database server (which is the host OS) These machines are hefty with dual-CPU's with six cores (12 total procs) Web server running IIS 7.5 Web applications built in ASP.NET 2.0, with 1 ISAPI filter (Url Rewrite) in front What I'm seeing during the load tests is that the requests all come through in bursts. Even though I have 7 different distributed clients sending traffic loads, the requests come through about 300-500 requests at a time. The performance monitor shows nearly all of the counters moving through this pattern, where a burst of requests comes in the req/sec jumps to 70, the queued requests jumps to 500, the current requests jumps up, the CPU jumps up, everything. Then once it's handled that group of requests, it has a lull for nearly 10 seconds where nearly nothing is happening. 0-5 req/sec, 0 queued requests, minimal CPU usage. Then after 10 seconds of inactivity, another burst comes through, spiking all of the counters once again. What I can't figure out is why the requests are coming through in bursts when I know that the load being generated is not sent that way, especially considering the various load-generating clients sending traffic all in different intervals with random think time's between each request. Is there something in the layers between Hyper-V or perhaps in the hardware which might cause this coalesce of requests together? Here is what i'm looking at, the highlighted metric is Requests/sec, but the others critical counter go with it: Requests Queued (which I'd obviously like to keep as close to 0 as possible). Any ideas on this?

  Read the article

• Software load balancing fail-over vs hardware

  - by SmartLemon

  Please correct me, but my understanding is that with software load balancing a service must be run on each server while there is one DS that notifies the other servers that a server has gone down and that they should consume that servers load. With hardware load balancing what happens in a fail-over? Could someone explain? Is there advantages with using hardware load balancing when it comes to fail-over, or is there advantages with software? Or do they both have their pros and cons?

  Read the article

• No clue for high load average on top

  - by Oz.

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

  Read the article

• Perform action based on load avg

  - by sfx

  I'm running some web applications on an debian server and have to struggle with ddos attacks sometimes. It's eating up all my resources and I can't ssh anymore into the server. An idea was to drop all connections if the load avg is too high, so there are still resources for me and accept new connections if the load avg is low enough. Since this has to work under heavy load I'm afraid a cronjob wouldn't be fast enough or take too much resources. tl;dr: Is there a way to configure the behavior if the load avg is above a specific threshold?

  Read the article

• How do I throttle a command in a terminal window?

  - by To Do

  I needed to run convert with a lot of images at the same time. The command took quite a while but this doesn't bother me. The issue is that this command rendered my computer unusable while the command was running (for about 15 minutes). So is it possible to throttle the command by limiting resources (processor and memory) to the command, directly from the command line? This can only work if I add something to the same line before pressing Enter because once I start the process the computer slows so much that it is impossible for example to switch to "System monitor" and reduce priority. Edit: top and iotop results I managed to run top and sudo iotop >iotop.txt while doing one of these convert operations. (The iotop.txt file produced is difficult to read) Results of top: PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 14275 username 20 0 4043m 3.0g 1448 D 7.0 80.4 0:16.45 convert Results of iotop: [?1049h[1;24r(B[m[4l[?7h[?1h=[39;49m[?25l[39;49m(B[m[H[2JTotal DISK READ: 1269.04 K/s | Total DISK WRITE:[59G0.00 B/s (B[0;7m TID PRIO USER DISK READ DISK WRITE SWAPIN(B[0;1;7m IO(B[0;7m COMMAND [3;2H(B[m2516 be/4 username 350.08 K/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % zeitgeist-datahub 7394 be/4 username 568.88 K/s 0.00 B/s 77.41 % 0.00 % --rendere~.530483991[5;1H14275 idle username 350.08 K/s 0.00 B/s 37.49 % 0.00 % convert S~f test.pdf[6;2H2048 be/4 root[6;24H0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % [kworker/3:2] [5G1 be/4 root[7;24H0.00 B/s 0.00 B/s 0.00 % 0.00 % init Furthermore, even after the process ends, the computer does not return to the previous performance. I found a way around this by running sudo swapoff -a followed by sudo swapon -a

  Read the article

• Cheapest High Available Web Server [closed]

  - by xyz

  I would like to create a high-available setup (e.g. a small cluster) for a webserver, i.e. it will run Apache, PHP and MySQL. There will be between 2-8 small websites running with only very little traffic and workload. High availability is however very important. I don't want to be dependent on 1 datacenter, so there must be a minimum of 2 servers placed in different datacenters, and if one server goes down, the user must experience no or only a minimum of downtime - and no data loss. I have considered Amazon AWS using their Elastic Load Balancing, since it is possible to buy 2 EC2 instances in 2 availability zones and set up load balancing and RDS (Multi-AZ). However this seems rather expensive. Using the AWS price calculator http://calculator.s3.amazonaws.com/calc5.html it totals to 185$/month the first year (including the free tier). Are my calculations incorrect or is there a cheaper way to make this HA setup? Best regards

  Read the article

• How to setup Wordpress High Availability

  - by Ketam

  I have installed Galera Cluster on 3 cluster + 1 management. I wanted to make it like this, Server1: Home (www.domain.com) Server2: For BBpress/Forum (Forum Tab Menu will forward to forum.domain.com) Server3: BuddyPress Activity (Social Tab Menu will forward to social.domain.com) The purpose I am doing this is to distribute my resource and load balancing each other at same time. However, I have difficulty to setup Apache Load-Balancing/mod_proxy/clustering or any suitable to have high availability WordPress. Any best suggestion/solution to make high availability WordPress? Or how to? And another question is I tried to copy whole WordPress files & folders to Server2 connecting to local database (same data inside since it is already on Galera Cluster) but the page blank. Any advice? OS: Centos 6.2 Thanks in advanced.

  Read the article

• a load balancing scenario using HAProxy and keepalived shows no performance advantage

  - by chakoshi

  Hi, I am trying to setup a load balanced web server scenario, using two HAproxy load balancers and two debian web servers following this guide http://www.howtoforge.com/setting-up-a-high-availability-load-balancer-with-haproxy-keepalived-on-debian-lenny. the setup is working but the results of simple performance benchmarking is not what I expected. I tried apache benchmark tool to send lots of requests to servers (one time directly testing one of the web servers and the other time testing through the load balancer) using the command "ab -n 1000000 -c 500 http://IP/index.html", but the test results shows better performance for the single server without load balancer. can any one tell me if I'm going wrong on some thing?

  Read the article

• High load average, low CPU and IO (Centos 5.7)

  - by Ben

  A Drupal 7 site with CiviCRM, after running smoothly for a year on a 1&1 VPS suddenly became unresponsive. Now pages eventually load, but can take more than a minute. Looking at resource use in Virtuozzo, the load average carries a warning, and has remained above 1. While I understand this isn't particularly high, this is a change from when the site was working. Here is a typical snapshot of top: top - 03:10:32 up 3:21, 1 user, load average: 1.16, 1.22, 1.30 Tasks: 43 total, 1 running, 42 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 0.1%us, 0.1%sy, 0.1%ni, 99.7%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Mem: 2097152k total, 1015112k used, 1082040k free, 0k buffers Swap: 0k total, 0k used, 0k free, 0k cached CPU idle level never seems to go much below 70%. wa is virtually always at 0. There appears to be lots of free memory. And here is some vmstat output, again showign wa at 0, plenty of free memory, and an idle CPU: procs -----------memory---------- ---swap-- -----io---- --system-- -----cpu------ r b swpd free buff cache si so bi bo in cs us sy id wa st 2 0 0 1100872 0 0 0 0 2783 23672 0 538 1 0 99 0 0 1 0 0 1100872 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 101754 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 1100872 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 103133 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 1100872 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 102080 0 0 100 0 0 1 0 0 1100872 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 99881 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 1100872 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 105187 0 0 100 0 0 I've spoken to 1&1 but they don't have any ideas as to what could be causing the high load average. Instead they suggested an upgrade :) I've looked for processes that might be causing this, examined MySQL showprocesslist, and restarted the container with no result. Does anyone have more troubleshooting suggestions or insights?

  Read the article

• SQL Server replication and load balance

  - by Ahmed Galal

  I'm running a web service that serves a mobile app on IIS 8 and SQL Server 2014, my service has a massive load and i'm trying to improve performance, most of the load is happening on SQL. i don't think i have a bottleneck, my processor and ram is up to the max and i think my code is not that bad, am already using memcached and other stuff to avoid hitting SQL too much. i know i can always upgrade the server hardware but i already have a spare server that i would like to use, so i was thinking to split the SQL load on the 2 servers. What i was thinking of is to setup replication on the other server and do some load balancing, but am not sure how to do the load balance. I know i can adjust my code to hit the other server for some queries but i was hoping to find a solution that avoid changing my code. So my question is, What are the ways of doing load balancing between 2 SQL servers ? I would appreciate suggestions or best practices or some directions. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Load balancing with puppet

  - by Gonçalo Queirós

  Hi there. Im trying to setup a loadbalancing system. My load balancer (nginx) has a conf file where i should list all IP's of the upstream servers. I could put the IP's on the conf manually, but this ways i would need to change the conf file every time i add/remove an upstream server. For now i came up with two different ideas, but i don't like much of neither: 1 - Have every upstream machine to use Exported Resources to create a file with it's IP..Then the load balancer server will have an "include conf_directory/*", and load all the files created by the upstrem servers. Since the load balancer is using nginx this can be done, but if i wan't latter on to configure something that doesn't have the "include" on the conf files, this solution will not work. 2 - If the config doesn't support the "include" command, then we could have again, every upstream server use the Exported Resources to create a filw with its IP, and latter on, the load balancer execute a command that would pick every file and generate the config Both versions addopt the same techinque, the difference is that version 2 is used when the server (that needs to have a conf generated) doesn't recognize a command like "include" inside its own conf. Now, my question is, is there any way to do this in a different form? I suspect that there is, since puppet is made to manage multiple servers, it seems a bit strange not have a easy way to configure load balancers.

  Read the article

• nginx redirect what is not coming from load balancing

  - by dawez

  I have nginx on SERVER1 that is acting as load balancing between SERVER1 and SERVER2 in SERVER1 I have the upstreams for the load balancing defined as : upstream de.server.com { # similar upstreams defined also for other languages # SELF SERVER1 server 127.0.0.1:8082 weight=3 max_fails=3 fail_timeout=2; # other SERVER2 server otherserverip:8082 max_fails=3 fail_timeout=2; } The load balancing config on SERVER1 is this one: server { listen 80; server_name ~^(?<LANG>de|es|fr)\.server\.com; location / { proxy_pass http://$LANG.server.com; proxy_set_header Host $host; proxy_set_header X-Real-IP $remote_addr; proxy_set_header X-Forwarded-For $proxy_add_x_forwarded_for; # trying to pass a variable in the header to SERVER2 proxy_set_header Is-From-Load-Balancer 1; } } Then in server 2 I have: server { listen 8082; server_name localhost; root /var/www/server.com/public; # test output values add_header testloadbalancer $http_is_from_load_balancer; add_header testloadbalancer2 not_load_bal; ## other stuff here to process the request } I can see the "testloadbalancer" in the response header is set to 1 when the request is coming from the load balancing, it is not present when from a direct access: SERVER2:8082 . I would like to bounce back to the SERVER1 all the direct requests that are sent to SERVER2, but keep the ones from the load balancing. So this should forbid direct access to SERVER2:8082 and redirect to SERVER1:80 .

  Read the article

• High Load - Low IO - Low CPU usage

  - by devup

  I have a system whose load is rather high. As you can see from the top output below, CPU usage and I/O is negligible: top - 17:31:59 up 4 days, 2:34, 2 users, load average: 1.00, 0.99, 1.00 Tasks: 71 total, 1 running, 70 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 2.0%us, 2.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 95.9%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Mem: 960720k total, 707288k used, 253432k free, 67328k buffers Swap: 2811896k total, 2644k used, 2809252k free, 528928k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 15310 root 20 0 2512 1128 888 R 2.1 0.1 0:00.05 top I would appreciate any assistance with isolating the cause(s) of high load for when I/O and CPU are not factors.

  Read the article

• apache2 + mod_fastcgi + suexec + php5.2 = unstable on high load

  I am hosting several (~30) different sites on one server with apache2+fastcgi+suexec+php5. Sites have different loads and different execution times of their scripts (some of them process request for 5-7 seconds, some <1sek). Sometimes when single site receives very high load (all php instances of this site are created and used) - whole apache server hangs. Apache (worker mpm) creates new processes up to the upper limit. It looks like it is starting to queue ALL new request for EVERY site, not only the one that has high load and quickly achieves process limits... restart of apache solves the problem... config: FastCgiConfig -singleThreshold 1 -multiThreshold 10 -listen-queue-depth 30 -maxProcesses 80 -maxClassProcesses 12 -idle-timeout 30 -pass-header HTTP_AUTHORIZATION -pass-header If-Modified-Since -pass-header If-None-Match (earlier have default -listen-queue-depth = 100, but it didn't change anything...) Any suggestions? Another question - how is implemented this listen queue? is it one queue for whole apache, or unique queue for every defined php apllication (suexec site)? I would like to achieve something like this: when one site receives high load and its queue is full - server bounces next request, but only for this one site.. Other sites should work properly...

  Read the article

• High CPU from httpd process

  - by KHWeb

  I am currently getting high CPU on a server that is just running a couple of sites with very low traffic. One of the sites is in still development going live soon. However, this site is very very slow...When browsing through its pages I can see that the CPU goes from 30% to 100% for httpd (see top output below). I have tuned httpd & MySQL, Apache Solr, Tomcat for high performance, and I am using APC. Not sure what to do from here or how to find the culprit as I have a bunch of messages on the httpd log and have been chasing dead ends for some time...any help is greatly appreciated. Server: AuthenticAMD, Quad-Core AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 2352, RAM 16GB Linux 2.6.27 64-bit, Centos 5.5 Plesk 9.5.4, MySQL 5.1.48, PHP 5.2.17 Apache/2.2.3 (CentOS) DAV/2 mod_jk/1.2.15 mod_ssl/2.2.3 OpenSSL/0.9.8e-fips-rhel5 PHP/5.2.17 mod_perl/2.0.4 Perl/v5.8.8 Tomcat6-6.0.29-1.jpp5, Tomcat-native-1.1.20-1.el5, Apache Solr top 17595 apache 20 0 1825m 507m 10m R 100.4 3.2 0:17.50 httpd 17596 apache 20 0 1565m 247m 9936 R 83.1 1.5 0:10.86 httpd 17598 apache 20 0 1430m 110m 6472 S 54.5 0.7 0:08.66 httpd 17599 apache 20 0 1438m 124m 12m S 37.2 0.8 0:11.20 httpd 16197 mysql 20 0 13.0g 2.0g 5440 S 9.6 12.6 297:12.79 mysqld 17617 root 20 0 12748 1172 812 R 0.7 0.0 0:00.88 top 8169 tomcat 20 0 4613m 268m 6056 S 0.3 1.7 6:40.56 java httpd error_log [debug] prefork.c(991): AcceptMutex: sysvsem (default: sysvsem) [info] mod_fcgid: Process manager 17593 started [debug] proxy_util.c(1854): proxy: grabbed scoreboard slot 0 in child 17594 for worker proxy:reverse [debug] proxy_util.c(1967): proxy: initialized single connection worker 0 in child 17594 for (*) [debug] proxy_util.c(1854): proxy: grabbed scoreboard slot 0 in child 17595 for worker proxy:reverse [debug] proxy_util.c(1873): proxy: worker proxy:reverse already initialized [notice] child pid 22782 exit signal Segmentation fault (11) [error] (43)Identifier removed: apr_global_mutex_lock(jk_log_lock) failed [debug] util_ldap.c(2021): LDAP merging Shared Cache conf: shm=0x7fd29a5478c0 rmm=0x7fd29a547918 for VHOST: example.com [info] APR LDAP: Built with OpenLDAP LDAP SDK [info] LDAP: SSL support available [info] Init: Seeding PRNG with 256 bytes of entropy [info] Init: Generating temporary RSA private keys (512/1024 bits) [info] Init: Generating temporary DH parameters (512/1024 bits) [debug] ssl_scache_shmcb.c(374): shmcb_init allocated 512000 bytes of shared memory [debug] ssl_scache_shmcb.c(554): entered shmcb_init_memory() [debug] ssl_scache_shmcb.c(576): for 512000 bytes, recommending 4265 indexes [debug] ssl_scache_shmcb.c(619): shmcb_init_memory choices follow [debug] ssl_scache_shmcb.c(621): division_mask = 0x1F [debug] ssl_scache_shmcb.c(623): division_offset = 96 [debug] ssl_scache_shmcb.c(625): division_size = 15997 [debug] ssl_scache_shmcb.c(627): queue_size = 2136 [debug] ssl_scache_shmcb.c(629): index_num = 133 [debug] ssl_scache_shmcb.c(631): index_offset = 8 [debug] ssl_scache_shmcb.c(633): index_size = 16 [debug] ssl_scache_shmcb.c(635): cache_data_offset = 8 [debug] ssl_scache_shmcb.c(637): cache_data_size = 13853 [debug] ssl_scache_shmcb.c(650): leaving shmcb_init_memory()

  Read the article

• high resolution on small screen size

  - by vishesh

  I have recently got an intel ultrabook,but its screen size is 13.3' and the native resolution is 1600X900.So the problem is that the letters that appear on screen are very small.Reducing resolution blurs the display and making everything bigger also doesn't feel very good.is there a way to get around this problem without changing hardware. I am even ok with this high resolution but I am concerned about the harmful effects it might have on my eyes in long term. Any advice will be very useful.Please help

  Read the article

• Why not have a High Level Language based OS? Are Low Level Languages more efficient?

  - by rtindru

  Without being presumptuous, I would like you to consider the possibility of this. Most OS today are based on pretty low level languages (mainly C/C++) Even the new ones such as Android uses JNI & underlying implementation is in C In fact, (this is a personal observation) many programs written in C run a lot faster than their high level counterparts (eg: Transmission (a bittorrent client on Ubuntu) is a whole lot faster than Vuze(Java) or Deluge(Python)). Even python compilers are written in C, although PyPy is an exception. So is there a particular reason for this? Why is it that all our so called "High Level Languages" with the great "OOP" concepts can't be used in making a solid OS? So I have 2 questions basically. Why are applications written in low level languages more efficient than their HLL counterparts? Do low level languages perform better for the simple reason that they are low level and are translated to machine code easier? Why do we not have a full fledged OS based entirely on a High Level Language?

  Read the article

• Investigate high load on RHEL

  - by Adam Matan

  One of my RHEL 5 was showing high load (~4-5) on uptime. The load increased, and when it reached 6 (±), the server froze and needed restart. top-wise, the server had no significant CPU or memory issues and sar showed no increase in iowait. Therefore, the thrashing must have been related to other factors. Any ideas how to investigate this? In particular, how do I know that which processes are waiting in the queue?

  Read the article

• Disk IO causing high load on Xen/CentOS guest

  - by Peter Lindqvist

  I'm having serious issues with a xen based server, this is on the guest partition. It's a paravirtualized CentOS 5.5. The following numbers are taken from top while copying a large file over the network. If i copy the file another time the speed decreases in relation to load average. So the second time it's half the speed of the first time. It needs some time to cool off after this. Load average slowly decreases until it's once again usable. ls / takes about 30 seconds. top - 13:26:44 up 13 days, 21:44, 2 users, load average: 7.03, 5.08, 3.15 Tasks: 134 total, 2 running, 132 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 0.0%us, 0.1%sy, 0.0%ni, 25.3%id, 74.5%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.1%st Mem: 1048752k total, 1041460k used, 7292k free, 3116k buffers Swap: 2129912k total, 40k used, 2129872k free, 904740k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 1506 root 10 -5 0 0 0 S 0.3 0.0 0:03.94 cifsd 1 root 15 0 2172 644 556 S 0.0 0.1 0:00.08 init Meanwhile the host is ~0.5 load avg and steady over time. ~50% wait Server hardware is dual xeon, 3gb ram, 170gb scsi 320 10k rpm, and shouldn't have any problems with copying files over the network. disk = [ "tap:aio:/vm/dev01.img,xvda,w" ] I also get these in the log INFO: task syslogd:1350 blocked for more than 120 seconds. "echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/hung_task_timeout_secs" disables this message. syslogd D 00062E4F 2208 1350 1 1353 1312 (NOTLB) c0ef0ed0 00000286 6e71a411 00062e4f c0ef0f18 00000009 c0f20000 6e738bfd 00062e4f 0001e7ec c0f2010c c181a724 c1abd200 00000000 ffffffff c0ef0ecc c041a180 00000000 c0ef0ed8 c03d6a50 00000000 00000000 c03d6a00 00000000 Call Trace: [<c041a180>] __wake_up+0x2a/0x3d [<ee06a1ea>] log_wait_commit+0x80/0xc7 [jbd] [<c043128b>] autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x2d [<ee065661>] journal_stop+0x195/0x1ba [jbd] [<c0490a32>] __writeback_single_inode+0x1a3/0x2af [<c04568ea>] do_writepages+0x2b/0x32 [<c045239b>] __filemap_fdatawrite_range+0x66/0x72 [<c04910ce>] sync_inode+0x19/0x24 [<ee09b007>] ext3_sync_file+0xaf/0xc4 [ext3] [<c047426f>] do_fsync+0x41/0x83 [<c04742ce>] __do_fsync+0x1d/0x2b [<c0405413>] syscall_call+0x7/0xb ======================= I have tried disabling irqbalanced as suggested here but it does not seem to make any difference.

  Read the article

• Load-balancer options

  - by toolkit

  I am looking at a number of possible options for load-balancing. So far, I am constrained to the following options: DNS server load-balancer, balancing to a cluster of tomcat servers, with terracotta for session replication. Pros - don't have to buy new kit. Cons - DNS lb can keep directing to a broken server. Hardware load-balancer, direct to cluster of tomcat servers. Pros - could have second box for failover lb. Cons - expense. Apache server load-balancer. Pros - apache's lb polls for broken servers. Cons - apache server is single point of failure, plus need to buy another server. Are there any other options I should consider? Thanks. Update: Thanks for all the answers so far +1's all round. Not accepting an answer yet, to keep more ideas coming.

  Read the article

• High load without explanation

  - by Sebastian

  I have a very high load on my machine and don't know what is responsible or how to find out. On the machine runs a jboss appserver and mysql. Here is a top from the user at peak time: top - 16:23:01 up 101 days, 6:50, 1 user, load average: 23.42, 21.53, 24.73 Tasks: 9 total, 1 running, 8 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 17.2%us, 1.6%sy, 0.0%ni, 80.4%id, 0.1%wa, 0.1%hi, 0.7%si, 0.0%st Mem: 16440784k total, 16263720k used, 177064k free, 151916k buffers Swap: 16780872k total, 30428k used, 16750444k free, 8963648k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 27344 b 40 0 16.0g 6.5g 14m S 169 41.7 1184:09 java 6047 b 40 0 11484 1232 1228 S 0 0.0 0:00.01 mysqld_safe 6192 b 40 0 604m 182m 4696 S 0 1.1 93:30.40 mysqld 7948 b 40 0 84036 1968 1176 S 0 0.0 0:00.07 sshd 7949 b 40 0 14004 2900 1608 S 0 0.0 0:00.03 bash 7975 b 40 0 8604 1044 840 S 0 0.0 0:00.44 top The CPU usage of the java process is normal. The peaks only show up when i deployed a certain web application. Could the resulting network traffic boost the load in such way that i don't see it in top?

  Read the article

• Load balance incoming traffic

  - by justin

  Dear All Please I have the following scenario. 3 servers voip / mail / terminal one load balancing router 2 internet connections (static ip`s) My concern is to load balance incoming traffic since the outgoing traffic is being taking care by the load balancing router. For instance all offices connect to the mail server via the internet same for voip and terminal services. The mail and voip clients are set up with one of the static ip`s and the router forwards the request to the appropriate server. But obviously like this there is no fail over nor load balancing cause all requests are being directed to one internet connection. Anyone has a suggestion was thing of a dns server, does this make sens ? or maybe a hosted option ? Thanks Justin

  Read the article

• Providing high availability and failover using MySQL on EC2

  - by crb

  I would like to have a highly-available MySQL system, with automatic failover, running on Amazon EC2 instances. The standard approach to solving this is problem Heartbeat + DRBD, but I've found a lot of posts suggesting DRBD doesn't work on EC2, though none saying exactly why. Obviously, a serial heartbeat or distinct network is out of the question in the virtualised environment. It would also be good to have the different servers be in different availability zones, but we're getting into a much harder problem there. What are peoples' opinion on having a high uptime solution in "the cloud"?

  Read the article

• Most suitable high availability solution

  - by Alex Bagnolini

  My company is hosting a website in a server with IIS, SQL Server and a 3rd party windows service (written in C#, source code available for amendments). We bought a new identical server, composed by: 1x Quad Core, 12GB RAM, 4x160GB SATA Raid 5, Windows Server 2008 R2 Datacenter, Public IP. We aim to put all webpages and the 3rd party windows service in an high-availability state. After some lab-testing on how to configure Failover Clustering and Hyper-V, we have deep doubts on what the "best" solution would be, by "best" meaning maintainable and able to correctly handle a physical server failure. Any suggestion on how we should configure the two servers? We don't need all the configuration's step, just an hint on the right direction to follow.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >