Search Results

Search found 4822 results on 193 pages for 'ram prasad'.

Page 44/193 | < Previous Page | 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51  | Next Page >

• Is my computer slow due to lack of swap

  - by Kristian Jensen

  A few months ago, I installed Ubuntu 12.04 alongside with Windows 7 on my Asus EEE-PC 1015bx. It has a tendency of freezing and when trying to investigate I found that a swap partition of only 256 MB had been created. The Asus EEE-PC 1015bx is born with 1 GByte RAM only and it is not possible to add further or exchange the existing 1 GByte with a larger card. When looking at the system monitor, it looks like all swap is being utilized along with 70-75% of the RAM, even with very few applications running. Can the lack of much swap space be the reason for my computer running slowly and at times freezing? How can I add a swap partition? Or should I add a swap file instead? At the moment, I see two partitions when viewing the system monitor: one 28.6 GByte ext4 partition which must be the one containing Ubuntu and one 100 GByte fuseblk partition which I assume is the one holding Windows. It shows that I have 18.6 GByte free space on the ext4 partition. Can I "take a bite" from the ext4 partition and convert this into a swap partition? I was thinking something like 3 GBytes for swap considering my limited RAM. I hope that someone can guide me through. Thank you. 20th Oct 2012 - Further details Thank you for below answer which I find very useful. I am certainly considering switching to one of your suggested shells as I can see from the Internet that many have posted that these require much fewer resources than ubuntu. It seems to me that lubuntu is the perfect match for my very limited computer. I will have to wait a few days, though, as I am presently limited by a very slow and restricted Internet connection via satellite. But will lubuntu install as simply another shell replacing unity or will it replace ubuntu all together? Will the software that I have installed under ubuntu still be accessible in lubuntu? And can I return to ubuntu if required? Regarding the actual question of swap: When I run gparted, it shows me that there is one ntfs partition of 100 GBytes from where it boots and the before mentioned ext4 partition of 28.6 GBytes is not mentioned. Could it be that my ubuntu installation resides inside this 100 GBytes ntfs partiotion? And if so, can I take a bite of this for my swap partition? Realising that gparted is shown in Danish, I hope that you can make out what I mean. System monitoring shows below details: Once again I sincerely hope that you can help. Thank you.

  Read the article

• Ubuntu Lagging even LXDE freezes

  - by Anas Ismail Khan

  Laptop, i3, Ram: 2GB. Using 14.04LTS... and it lags like hell. Even if i open more than 4 tabs in Chrome, it freezes, and often I have no choice but to restart and multi-tasking is kinda difficult and at times impossible. Now there's whole thing about Lubuntu and LXDE that are suposed to be super-fast.. installed LXDE.. mind, not lubuntu-desktop. just LXDE. And it too freezes every now and then, and trust this.. when it freezes, it does so worse than Unity.. ESPECIALLY when i start PCManFM... and mount a disk or two... Any ideas as to why this is happening.. The minimum requirements for Unity are supposed to be 1Gig RAM.. and people are running it fine even on 512 MB...

  Read the article

• Screen Corruption in half the screen only

  - by Guy DAmico

  About 50% of the my NATTY desktop screen is corrupted. Once that happens I can re-boot as many times as I want but the problem continues. If I logout and then into WINDOWS for a day I may be successful and boot UBUNTU with a good screen. The desktop is formatted correctly, there's no pixelation, rather there is a fine grained white crosshatch pattern covering the entire screen. If I open any application the screen corruption worsens eventually to the point I can no longer make out anything. I ran ram memory test w/o any errors. I have no display issues when running WINDOWS 7. Any ideas. My computer is a Dual Boot stock DELL 5150 w/3gig of ram an on board video.

  Read the article

• Performance required to improve Windows Experience Index?

  - by Ian Boyd

  Is there a guide on the metrics required to obtain a certain Windows Experience Index? A Microsoft guy said in January 2009: On the matter of transparency, it is indeed our plan to disclose in great detail how the scores are calculated, what the tests attempt to measure, why, and how they map to realistic scenarios and usage patterns. Has that amount of transparency happened? Is there a technet article somewhere? If my score was limited by my Memory subscore of 5.9. A nieve person would suggest: Buy a faster RAM Which is wrong of course. From the Windows help: If your computer has a 64-bit central processing unit (CPU) and 4 gigabytes (GB) or less random access memory (RAM), then the Memory (RAM) subscore for your computer will have a maximum of 5.9. You can buy the fastest, overclocked, liquid-cooled, DDR5 RAM on the planet; you'll still have a maximum Memory subscore of 5.9. So in general the knee-jerk advice "buy better stuff" is not helpful. What i am looking for is attributes required to achieve a certain score, or move beyond a current limitation. The information i've been able to compile so far, chiefly from 3 Windows blog entries, and an article: Memory subscore Score Conditions ======= ================================ 1.0 < 256 MB 2.0 < 500 MB 2.9 <= 512 MB 3.5 < 704 MB 3.9 < 944 MB 4.5 <= 1.5 GB 5.9 < 4.0GB-64MB on a 64-bit OS Windows Vista highest score 7.9 Windows 7 highest score Graphics Subscore Score Conditions ======= ====================== 1.0 doesn't support DX9 1.9 doesn't support WDDM 4.9 does not support Pixel Shader 3.0 5.9 doesn't support DX10 or WDDM1.1 Windows Vista highest score 7.9 Windows 7 highest score Gaming graphics subscore Score Result ======= ============================= 1.0 doesn't support D3D 2.0 supports D3D9, DX9 and WDDM 5.9 doesn't support DX10 or WDDM1.1 Windows Vista highest score 6.0-6.9 good framerates (e.g. 40-50fps) at normal resoltuions (e.g. 1280x1024) 7.0-7.9 even higher framerates at even higher resolutions 7.9 Windows 7 highest score Processor subscore Score Conditions ======= ========================================================================== 5.9 Windows Vista highest score 6.0-6.9 many quad core processors will be able to score in the high 6 low 7 ranges 7.0+ many quad core processors will be able to score in the high 6 low 7 ranges 7.9 8-core systems will be able to approach 8.9 Windows 7 highest score Primary hard disk subscore (note) Score Conditions ======= ======================================== 1.9 Limit for pathological drives that stop responding when pending writes 2.0 Limit for pathological drives that stop responding when pending writes 2.9 Limit for pathological drives that stop responding when pending writes 3.0 Limit for pathological drives that stop responding when pending writes 5.9 highest you're likely to see without SSD Windows Vista highest score 7.9 Windows 7 highest score Bonus Chatter You can find your WEI detailed test results in: C:\Windows\Performance\WinSAT\DataStore e.g. 2011-11-06 01.00.19.482 Disk.Assessment (Recent).WinSAT.xml <WinSAT> <WinSPR> <DiskScore>5.9</DiskScore> </WinSPR> <Metrics> <DiskMetrics> <AvgThroughput units="MB/s" score="6.4" ioSize="65536" kind="Sequential Read">89.95188</AvgThroughput> <AvgThroughput units="MB/s" score="4.0" ioSize="16384" kind="Random Read">1.58000</AvgThroughput> <Responsiveness Reason="UnableToAssess" Kind="Cap">TRUE</Responsiveness> </DiskMetrics> </Metrics> </WinSAT> Pre-emptive snarky comment: "WEI is useless, it has no relation to reality" Fine, how do i increase my hard-drive's random I/O throughput? Update - Amount of memory limits rating Some people don't believe Microsoft's statement that having less than 4GB of RAM on a 64-bit edition of Windows doesn't limit the rating to 5.9: And from xxx.Formal.Assessment (Recent).WinSAT.xml: <WinSPR> <LimitsApplied> <MemoryScore> <LimitApplied Friendly="Physical memory available to the OS is less than 4.0GB-64MB on a 64-bit OS : limit mem score to 5.9" Relation="LT">4227858432</LimitApplied> </MemoryScore> </LimitsApplied> </WinSPR> References Windows Vista Team Blog: Windows Experience Index: An In-Depth Look Understand and improve your computer's performance in Windows Vista Engineering Windows 7 Blog: Engineering the Windows 7 “Windows Experience Index”

  Read the article

• ATI Radeon HD 5750 and lagging in games and youtube videos

  - by Morten Fjord Christensen

  I have a X-ONE W-601 desktop pc: 3,1GHz AMD QuadCore Athlon II 645 X4 8 GB DDR3 RAM 1000 GB Harddisk 7200RPM ATI Radeon HD5750 with 1GB DDR5 RAM I'm running Ubuntu 11.10 64-bit and have installed the proprietary driver, but still games lag and videos a little bit. Been googling around and seen that it has something to do with the older drivers from AMD and KMS, but no guide helped me correctly through to make my graphic card work smoothly. I don't know if this helps but "fglrxinfo" in terminal shows: display: :0 screen: 0 OpenGL vendor string: ATI Technologies Inc. OpenGL renderer string: ATI Radeon HD 5700 Series OpenGL version string: 4.1.11005 Compatibility Profile Context And the driver check command shows: [ 51.184] (II) ATI Proprietary Linux Driver Version Identifier:8.88.7 Any help appreciated :D

  Read the article

• Not getting GUI mode on ubuntu 12.04 desktop edition after installation on vmware workstation 7

  - by Salil Naik

  I installed Ubuntu 12.04 desktop edition on my PC using VMWare workstation 7. I assigned 1GB RAM and 20 GB Hard disk to Ubuntu. While starting Ubuntu virtual machine, It is not starting up with GUI mode. In is prompting me my Login ID in textual mode always. After waiting for long time as well the GUI mode is not appearing. I tried running sudo apt-get install updates sudo apt-get install xinit sudo apt-get install ubuntu-desktop Honestly, i don't know the meaning of all these.I am very new to ubuntu.Please help me here what to do? Below is my Laptop configuration OS: Genuine Windows 7 Home Basic(64 bit) RAM: 3 GB Processor: Intel core i3 Regards Salil

  Read the article

• How are minimum system requirements determined?

  - by Michael McGowan

  We've all seen countless examples of software that ships with "minimum system requirements" like the following: Windows XP/Vista/7 1GB RAM 200 MB Storage How are these generally determined? Obviously sometimes there are specific constraints (if the program takes 200 MB on disk then that is a hard requirement). Aside from those situations, many times for things like RAM or processor it turns out that more/faster is better with no hard constraint. How are these determined? Do developers just make up numbers that seem reasonable? Does QA go through some rigorous process testing various requirements until they find the lowest settings with acceptable performance? My instinct says it should be the latter but is often the former in practice.

  Read the article

• Object Oriented programming on 8-bit MCU Case Study

  - by Calvin Grier

  I see that there's a lot of questions related to OO Programming here. I'm actually trying to find a specific resource related to embedded OO approaches for an 8 bit MCU. Several years back (maybe 6) I was looking for material related to Object Oriented programming for resource constrained 8051 microprocessors. I found an article/website with a case history of a design group that used a very small RAM part, and implemented many Object based constructs during their C design and development. I believe it was an 8051. The project was a success, and managed to stay inside the very small ROM/RAM they had available. I'm attempting to find it again, but Google can't locate it. The article was well written, and recommended a "mixed" approach using C methods for inheritance and encapsulation - if I recall correctly. Can anyone help me locate this article?

  Read the article

• XNA: Huge Tile Map, long load times

  - by Zach

  Recently I built a tile map generator for a game project. What I am very proud of is that I finally got it to the point where I can have a GIANT 2D map build perfectly on my PC. About 120000pixels by 40000 pixels. I can go larger actually, but I have only 1 draw back. #1 ram, the map currently draws about 320MB of ram and I know the Xbox allows 512MB I think? #2 It takes 20 mins for the map to build then display on the Xbox, on my PC it take less then a few seconds. I need to bring that 20 minutes of generating from 20 mins to how ever little bit I can, and how can a lower the amount of RAM usage while still being able to generate my map. Right now everything is stored in Jagged Arrays, each piece generating in a size of 1280x720 (the mother piece). Up to the amount that I need, every block is exactly 40x40 pixels however the blocks get removed from a List or regenerated in a List depending how close the mother piece is to the player. Saving A LOT of CPU, so at all times its no more then looping through 5184 some blocks. Well at least I'm sure of this. But how can I lower my RAM usage without hurting the size of the map, and how can I lower these INSANE loading times? EDIT: Let me explain my self better. Also I'd like to let everyone know now that I'm inexperienced with many of these things. So here is an example of the arrays I'm using. Here is the overall in a shorter term: int[][] array = new int[30][]; array[0] = new int[] { 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2 }; array[1] = new int[] { 1, 3, 3, 3, 3, 1, 0, 0, 0, 0, 1, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2 }; that goes on for around 30 arrays downward. Now for every time it hits a 1, it goes and generates a tile map 1280x720 and it does that exactly the way it does it above. This is how I loop through those arrays: for (int i = 0; i < array.Length; i += 1) { for (int h = 0; h < array[i].Length; h += 1) { } { Now how the tiles are drawn and removed is something like this: public void Draw(SpriteBatch spriteBatch, Vector2 cam) { if (cam.X >= this.Position.X - 1280) { if (cam.X <= this.Position.X + 2560) { if (cam.Y >= this.Position.Y - 720) { if (cam.Y <= this.Position.Y + 1440) { if (visible) { if (once == 0) { once = 1; visible = false; regen(); } } for (int i = Tiles.Count - 1; i >= 0; i--) { Tiles[i].Draw(spriteBatch, cam); } for (int i = unWalkTiles.Count - 1; i >= 0; i--) { unWalkTiles[i].Draw(spriteBatch, cam); } } else { once = 0; for (int i = Tiles.Count - 1; i >= 0; i--) { Tiles.RemoveAt(i); } for (int i = unWalkTiles.Count - 1; i >= 0; i--) { unWalkTiles.RemoveAt(i); } } } else { once = 0; for (int i = Tiles.Count - 1; i >= 0; i--) { Tiles.RemoveAt(i); } for (int i = unWalkTiles.Count - 1; i >= 0; i--) { unWalkTiles.RemoveAt(i); } } } else { once = 0; for (int i = Tiles.Count - 1; i >= 0; i--) { Tiles.RemoveAt(i); } for (int i = unWalkTiles.Count - 1; i >= 0; i--) { unWalkTiles.RemoveAt(i); } } } else { once = 0; for (int i = Tiles.Count - 1; i >= 0; i--) { Tiles.RemoveAt(i); } for (int i = unWalkTiles.Count - 1; i >= 0; i--) { unWalkTiles.RemoveAt(i); } } } } If you guys still need more information just ask in the comments.

  Read the article

• Installed Ubuntu In a low Specs PC and it is too slow, even with LXDE

  - by Herudae

  I'm new with Linux and started with Ubuntu 11.10, I installed it in my PC (Core2Duo 2Ghz, 512Mb Ram DDR2, integrated video in Motherboard), I know the requirements for Unity are 1Gb Ram so I decided to download a Desktop environment more lightweight, so I Installed LXDE, it loads very fast, compared to the 3.5 min from login screen to open desktop in Unity, but it freezes every time I open a single program, I can't even navigate in Internet, it freezes, sometimes for a pair of minutes and the graph at bottom right is all green as if iyt were using 100% CPU, it happens with every program. As additional data it takes 3+ min to get from boot system selection screen to Login screen and 3.5 Min more to get into Ubuntu with Unity, with LXDE it turns to 30 secs aproximately. Is Ubuntu + LXDE Desktop Environment Package = Lubuntu? or should I download Lubuntu directly instead? I installed some other desktop environments, as Gnome but it doesn't log in, the screen just turns grey. Should I get an older Ubuntu version? I'm thinking about uninstalling Ubuntu but I'll try to deplete the options, thanks for your support.

  Read the article

• What You Said: How You Monitor Your Computer

  - by Jason Fitzpatrick

  Earlier this week we asked you to share your computer monitoring tips and tricks, now we’re back to share the wealth. Read on to see how your fellow reader monitor their gear. One of the more popular monitoring tools, thanks in part to the amount of things beyond just hardware it can monitor, in the comments was Rainmeter. Lee writes: I don’t really monitor my computer constantly, only when something is hanging up and I need to see what’s causing it. That being said, I do have Rainmeter so I can quickly see how much RAM or CPU is being used. For anything more detailed, I just go into the task manager and sort by RAM or CPU. Shinigamibob uses a wider range of tools to get a more in-depth look at difference aspects of his computer: 7 Ways To Free Up Hard Disk Space On Windows HTG Explains: How System Restore Works in Windows HTG Explains: How Antivirus Software Works

  Read the article

• Why get dedicated hosting? [closed]

  - by user176105

  Possible Duplicate: How to find web hosting that meets my requirements? I just finished writing a website and I'm about to publish it. I was looking at hosting options and I was about to get regular hosting from godaddy, which is about $6 a month with unlimited bandwidth, 150 gb of data, 500 emails and 25 mysql databases. The other option is dedicated servers, which range a lot in price, but are around $200 a month. Why would someone choose dedicated servers? Is it becuase they max the limits of regular hosting or is it because the ram/cpu is shared on regular hosting? If the latter, what will happen if a lot of users come to my site and max the ram/cpu?

  Read the article

• Cloud hosting vs self hosting price

  - by yes123

  I was looking at some cloud hosting price. Consider an entry level self hosted server: PRICE: 40€ ---------- CPU: i5 (4x 2.66 GHz) RAM: 16GB hard disk: 2TB Bandwidth: 10TB/month with 100Mbps Now consider an equivalent on a cloud structure... (for example phpfog) PRICE: 29$ -------------- RAM: 613MB (LOL WUT?) CPU: 2 Burst ECUs Storage: 10GB (WUT?) Basically with cloud, to have the same hardware of your entry level dedicated server you have to pay 300-400€... Is it normal? I am missing something?

  Read the article

• Reasons for either 32-bit or 64-bit as development machine

  - by vartec

  I'm about to make a new Linux install, which will be primarily used for programming. I've seen benchmarks showing speed improvement of 64-bit version, however, I have hard time of telling how much these benchmarks translate to improvement in every day usage. And of course there are other aspects to consider. Usage I have in mind: mainly programming Python, with occasional C, C++ and Java; IDEs, which are using Java platforms (Eclipse and IntelliJ); on very rare occasions having to compile for 32-bit platform; not planning to have more than 64GB of RAM anytime soon (and I don't mind using PAE kernels); machine in question has 4GB RAM and Athlon II X2; What are pros and cons of choosing either i386 or x86_64 distro?

  Read the article

• Why is my laptop so sluggish? Or Damn You Facebook and Twitter! Or All Hail Chrome!

  - by John Conwell

  In the past three weeks, I've noticed that my laptop (dual core 2.1GHz, 2Gb RAM) has become amazingly sluggish.  I only uses for communications and data lookup workflows, so the slowness was tolerable.  But today I finally got fed up with the suckyness and decided to get to the root of the problem (I do have strong performance roots after all). It actually didn't take all that long to figure it out.  About a year ago I converted to Google Chrome (away from FireFox).  One of the great tools Chrome has is a "Task Manager" tool, that gives you Windows Task Manager like details for all the tabs open in the browser (Shift + Esc).  Since every tab runs in its own process, its easy from Task Manager (both Windows or Chrome) to identify and kill a single performance offending tab.  This is unlike IE, where you only get aggregate data about all tabs open.  Anyway, I digress.  Today my laptop sucked.  Windows Task Manager told me that I had two memory hogging Chrome tabs, but couldn't tell me which web page those tabs are showing.  Enter Chrome Task Manager which tells you the page title, along with CPU, memory and network utilization of each tab.  Enter my amazement.  Turns out Facebook was using just shy of half a Gb of RAM.  Half a Gigabyte!  That's 512 Megabytes!524,288 Kilobytes! 536,870,912 Bytes!  Or 4,294,967,296 Bits!  In other words, that's a frackin boat load of memory.  Now consider that Facebook is running on pretty much 96.3% (statistics based on absolutely nothing) of every house hold desktop, laptop, netbook, and mobile device in America, that is pretty horrific! And I wasn't playing any Facebook games like FarmWars or MafiaVille.  I just had my normal, default home page up showing me who just had breakfast, or just got finished with their morning run. I'm sorry...let me say that again...HALF A GIG OF RAM!  That is just unforgivable. I can just see my mom calling me up:  Mom: "John...I think I need a new computer.  Mine is really slow these days" John: "What do you have running?" Mom: "Oh, just Facebook" John: "Ok, close Facebook and tell me how fast your computer feels" Mom: "Well...I don't know how fast it is.  All I do is use Facebook" John: "Ok Mom, I'll send you a new computer by Tuesday" Oh yea...and the other offending web page?  It was Twitter, using a quarter of a Gigabyte. God I love social networks!

  Read the article

• Help with Kodak esp 3250 printer driver on Lubuntu 12.1 SOLVED!

  - by user108608

  First my system: pentium 4 -don't remember the speed-, 1g ram, dual boot to separate physical drives, Fdos and Lubuntu 12.1 second my lan: I have four computers operating for the same printer. 1. Intel quad core i5, 4g ram, running Windoze 7 64 bit, printer connected and shared from here. Kodak ESP 3250 2. Gateway 17" laptop running Windoze 7 32bit 3. Asus tablet (small laptop) running Lumbutu 12.1 4. My dual boot system running Fdos and Lubuntu 12.1 The problem: I downloaded c2esp_25c-1_i386.deb, tried to install it using DEBI Package Installer, it loads the files, looks for cups driver and ends with an error: "Dependancy is not satisfiable: libcupsdriver1 (=1.4.0)" What do I do now? Is there some place that I can get the correct cups driver? further information: The Asus tablet was running Ubuntu 12.1 (very slowly and with a few crashes) and could print from the lan printer with no problems. Is there something in Ubuntu that can be loaded into Lubuntu? noobee user hoping for answers, Paul

  Read the article

• How can I receive more traffic? My VPS fails!!!

  - by Vic

  I have a web site - photo gallery. About 400 photos. Site on Gallery 3. mySQL. Hosted on VPS from myhosting.com (CPU 1792 MHz, 2048 MB RAM). Everything seems to be ok, but there is one big problem. Once traffic reaches ~ 20 people (online) - website start loading really really slow. Actually website can't be loaded about 30-60 sec. What should I do? Buy more RAM / CPU on the same VPS? Move to a dedicated server or maybe myhosting.com just sucks? What do you recommend?

  Read the article

• How are minimum system requirements determined?

  - by Michael McGowan

  We've all seen countless examples of software that ships with "minimum system requirements" like the following: Windows XP/Vista/7 1GB RAM 200 MB Storage How are these generally determined? Obviously sometimes there are specific constraints (if the program takes 200 MB on disk then that is a hard requirement). Aside from those situations, many times for things like RAM or processor it turns out that more/faster is better with no hard constraint. How are these determined? Do developers just make up numbers that seem reasonable? Does QA go through some rigorous process testing various requirements until they find the lowest settings with acceptable performance? My instinct says it should be the latter but is often the former in practice.

  Read the article

• Frequent GUI pauses in Ubuntu 13.04 / Unity / Intel HD4000

  - by Simon

  I'm experiencing very frequent (and regular) GUI pauses on my system. Every 30 seconds (pretty much exactly) the GUI will freeze for maybe .25 to .5 seconds. The mouse stops moving, keys stop echoing and a stopwatch timer briefly pauses. I'm using the Intel Graphics driver available from: https://download.01.org/gfx/ubuntu/13.04/main I've looked in a few places and tried a few things for a solution: I've checked cron and anacron for scheduled processes. I've disabled background processes (eg mysql, postgres, apache) not that these were doing anything anyway I've checked the following posts and tried the suggestions there: Unity GUI pauses/freezes for less than a few seconds How to go about troubleshooting frequent system pauses I've watched the system using top and System Monitor and there are no spikes (or even blips) of cpu usage when the pauses occur. There are no obvious error messages in dmesg or syslog There is loads of free RAM (8GB+) and no swap usage If it helps it's a ZooStorm i5 laptop with a HD4000 GPU, 16GB Ram and an SSD. Any help / suggestions would be very gratefully received.

  Read the article

• Oracle NoSQL Database Exceeds 1 Million Mixed YCSB Ops/Sec

  - by Charles Lamb

  We ran a set of YCSB performance tests on Oracle NoSQL Database using SSD cards and Intel Xeon E5-2690 CPUs with the goal of achieving 1M mixed ops/sec on a 95% read / 5% update workload. We used the standard YCSB parameters: 13 byte keys and 1KB data size (1,102 bytes after serialization). The maximum database size was 2 billion records, or approximately 2 TB of data. We sized the shards to ensure that this was not an "in-memory" test (i.e. the data portion of the B-Trees did not fit into memory). All updates were durable and used the "simple majority" replica ack policy, effectively 'committing to the network'. All read operations used the Consistency.NONE_REQUIRED parameter allowing reads to be performed on any replica. In the past we have achieved 100K ops/sec using SSD cards on a single shard cluster (replication factor 3) so for this test we used 10 shards on 15 Storage Nodes with each SN carrying 2 Rep Nodes and each RN assigned to its own SSD card. After correcting a scaling problem in YCSB, we blew past the 1M ops/sec mark with 8 shards and proceeded to hit 1.2M ops/sec with 10 shards.  Hardware Configuration We used 15 servers, each configured with two 335 GB SSD cards. We did not have homogeneous CPUs across all 15 servers available to us so 12 of the 15 were Xeon E5-2690, 2.9 GHz, 2 sockets, 32 threads, 193 GB RAM, and the other 3 were Xeon E5-2680, 2.7 GHz, 2 sockets, 32 threads, 193 GB RAM.  There might have been some upside in having all 15 machines configured with the faster CPU, but since CPU was not the limiting factor we don't believe the improvement would be significant. The client machines were Xeon X5670, 2.93 GHz, 2 sockets, 24 threads, 96 GB RAM. Although the clients had 96 GB of RAM, neither the NoSQL Database or YCSB clients require anywhere near that amount of memory and the test could have just easily been run with much less. Networking was all 10GigE. YCSB Scaling Problem We made three modifications to the YCSB benchmark. The first was to allow the test to accommodate more than 2 billion records (effectively int's vs long's). To keep the key size constant, we changed the code to use base 32 for the user ids. The second change involved to the way we run the YCSB client in order to make the test itself horizontally scalable.The basic problem has to do with the way the YCSB test creates its Zipfian distribution of keys which is intended to model "real" loads by generating clusters of key collisions. Unfortunately, the percentage of collisions on the most contentious keys remains the same even as the number of keys in the database increases. As we scale up the load, the number of collisions on those keys increases as well, eventually exceeding the capacity of the single server used for a given key.This is not a workload that is realistic or amenable to horizontal scaling. YCSB does provide alternate key distribution algorithms so this is not a shortcoming of YCSB in general. We decided that a better model would be for the key collisions to be limited to a given YCSB client process. That way, as additional YCSB client processes (i.e. additional load) are added, they each maintain the same number of collisions they encounter themselves, but do not increase the number of collisions on a single key in the entire store. We added client processes proportionally to the number of records in the database (and therefore the number of shards). This change to the use of YCSB better models a use case where new groups of users are likely to access either just their own entries, or entries within their own subgroups, rather than all users showing the same interest in a single global collection of keys. If an application finds every user having the same likelihood of wanting to modify a single global key, that application has no real hope of getting horizontal scaling. Finally, we used read/modify/write (also known as "Compare And Set") style updates during the mixed phase. This uses versioned operations to make sure that no updates are lost. This mode of operation provides better application behavior than the way we have typically run YCSB in the past, and is only practical at scale because we eliminated the shared key collision hotspots.It is also a more realistic testing scenario. To reiterate, all updates used a simple majority replica ack policy making them durable. Scalability Results In the table below, the "KVS Size" column is the number of records with the number of shards and the replication factor. Hence, the first row indicates 400m total records in the NoSQL Database (KV Store), 2 shards, and a replication factor of 3. The "Clients" column indicates the number of YCSB client processes. "Threads" is the number of threads per process with the total number of threads. Hence, 90 threads per YCSB process for a total of 360 threads. The client processes were distributed across 10 client machines. Shards KVS Size Clients Mixed (records) Threads OverallThroughput(ops/sec) Read Latencyav/95%/99%(ms) Write Latencyav/95%/99%(ms) 2 400m(2x3) 4 90(360) 302,152 0.76/1/3 3.08/8/35 4 800m(4x3) 8 90(720) 558,569 0.79/1/4 3.82/16/45 8 1600m(8x3) 16 90(1440) 1,028,868 0.85/2/5 4.29/21/51 10 2000m(10x3) 20 90(1800) 1,244,550 0.88/2/6 4.47/23/53

  Read the article

• 1000baseT/Full Supported and Advertised but not working!

  - by user11973

  Hello, i'm using a AT3IONT-I motherboard with integrated card. If I ethtool it to 1000 full duplex it wont work! Here is sudo ethtool eth0: Supported ports: [ TP ] Supported link modes: 10baseT/Half 10baseT/Full 100baseT/Half 100baseT/Full 1000baseT/Full Supports auto-negotiation: Yes Advertised link modes: 10baseT/Half 10baseT/Full 100baseT/Half 100baseT/Full 1000baseT/Full Advertised pause frame use: Symmetric Receive-only Advertised auto-negotiation: Yes Speed: 100Mb/s Duplex: Full Port: Twisted Pair PHYAD: 0 Transceiver: internal Auto-negotiation: on MDI-X: Unknown Supports Wake-on: pumbg Wake-on: g Current message level: 0x00000033 (51) Link detected: yes here is sudo lshw -C network: *-network description: Ethernet interface product: RTL8111/8168B PCI Express Gigabit Ethernet controller vendor: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. physical id: 0 bus info: pci@0000:04:00.0 logical name: eth0 version: 03 serial: bc:ae:c5:8b:7d:33 size: 100MB/s capacity: 1GB/s width: 64 bits clock: 33MHz capabilities: pm msi pciexpress msix vpd bus_master cap_list rom ethernet physical tp 10bt 10bt-fd 100bt 100bt-fd 1000bt-fd autonegotiation configuration: autonegotiation=on broadcast=yes driver=r8168 driverversion=8.021.00-NAPI duplex=full ip=192.168.0.2 latency=0 link=yes multicast=yes port=twisted pair speed=100MB/s resources: irq:42 ioport:e800(size=256) memory:f8fff000-f8ffffff memory:f8ff8000-f8ffbfff memory:fbff0000-fbffffff And lspci -nn: 00:00.0 Host bridge [0600]: nVidia Corporation MCP79 Host Bridge [10de:0a82] (rev b1) 00:00.1 RAM memory [0500]: nVidia Corporation MCP79 Memory Controller [10de:0a88] (rev b1) 00:03.0 ISA bridge [0601]: nVidia Corporation MCP79 LPC Bridge [10de:0aad] (rev b3) 00:03.1 RAM memory [0500]: nVidia Corporation MCP79 Memory Controller [10de:0aa4] (rev b1) 00:03.2 SMBus [0c05]: nVidia Corporation MCP79 SMBus [10de:0aa2] (rev b1) 00:03.3 RAM memory [0500]: nVidia Corporation MCP79 Memory Controller [10de:0a89] (rev b1) 00:03.5 Co-processor [0b40]: nVidia Corporation MCP79 Co-processor [10de:0aa3] (rev b1) 00:04.0 USB Controller [0c03]: nVidia Corporation MCP79 OHCI USB 1.1 Controller [10de:0aa5] (rev b1) 00:04.1 USB Controller [0c03]: nVidia Corporation MCP79 EHCI USB 2.0 Controller [10de:0aa6] (rev b1) 00:06.0 USB Controller [0c03]: nVidia Corporation MCP79 OHCI USB 1.1 Controller [10de:0aa7] (rev b1) 00:06.1 USB Controller [0c03]: nVidia Corporation MCP79 EHCI USB 2.0 Controller [10de:0aa9] (rev b1) 00:08.0 Audio device [0403]: nVidia Corporation MCP79 High Definition Audio [10de:0ac0] (rev b1) 00:09.0 PCI bridge [0604]: nVidia Corporation MCP79 PCI Bridge [10de:0aab] (rev b1) 00:0b.0 RAID bus controller [0104]: nVidia Corporation MCP79 RAID Controller [10de:0abc] (rev b1) 00:0c.0 PCI bridge [0604]: nVidia Corporation MCP79 PCI Express Bridge [10de:0ac4] (rev b1) 00:10.0 PCI bridge [0604]: nVidia Corporation MCP79 PCI Express Bridge [10de:0aa0] (rev b1) 00:15.0 PCI bridge [0604]: nVidia Corporation MCP79 PCI Express Bridge [10de:0ac6] (rev b1) 03:00.0 VGA compatible controller [0300]: nVidia Corporation ION VGA [10de:087d] (rev b1) 04:00.0 Ethernet controller [0200]: Realtek Semiconductor Co., Ltd. RTL8111/8168B PCI Express Gigabit Ethernet controller [10ec:8168] (rev 03) If i use Code: sudo ethtool -s eth0 speed 1000 duplex full autoneg off then in ethtool speed is Unknown and it doesn't work; if I set it via pre-up it wont work either... Please help!! Thanks!

  Read the article

• Why does Ubuntu delay a lot on booting?

  - by UbuntuUser2013

  I have a problem. My Ubuntu delays a lot to boot, my computer is 4GB RAM, Core2Duo 3.2Ghz This is my bootchart: http://img841.imageshack.us/img841/138/desktopmvx.png I can't understand what is the problem. Thank you. Original question in spanish: Por que tarda tanto el arranque de ubuntu? Hola les comento que tengo un problema mi ubuntu tarda demasiado arrancando, mi computadora es 4GB Ram, core2duo 3.2ghz Este es mi bootchart http://img841.imageshack.us/img841/138/desktopmvx.png No entiendo cual es el problema. Gracias!

  Read the article

• Load balancing on Ubuntu Server

  - by SabreWolfy

  I have Ubuntu 10.04.4 server (32-bit) installed on a headless quad-core machine with 2GB RAM. I'm running a command-line analysis which is analyzing a large amount of data, but which does not require a large amount of RAM. The tool does not provide any multi-threading, so the CPU load is sitting at 1.00 (or sometimes just a little over). I ran top and pressed 1 to see the load on each of the cores and noticed that "Cpu1" is always running at 100%. I thought that the load would be distributed between the cores, rather than loading one core all the time. I'm sure I've seen this load-balancing behaviour before in Ubuntu or Debian Desktop versions. Why would the Server edition work differently? The analysis will likely take several hours to run, so loading one core at 100% for many hours while the other 3 remain idle is surely not the best approach?

  Read the article

• Surface Pro 3 first impressions

  - by John Paul Cook

  I traded in my Surface 2 (the trade-in program is now over) and bought a Surface Pro 3 with an i7 processor and 8 GB of ram. I greatly prefer the 3 by 2 aspect ratio of the Surface 3. After only one day of ownership, I’ve decided to purchase a docking station. I have a 7 year old desktop with a quad core Q6600 processor overclocked to 3.0 GHz and 8 GB of ram. It has a Plextor 512 MB SSD as the primary drive. It’s a very capable machine, but it does have a little bit, and I do mean only a little bit,...(read more)

  Read the article

• kernel mem parameter

  - by Ashfame

  As a last resort to my question, I am yet to try the mem parameter of kernel to force it to use the specified amount of RAM. Short Summary - I can only see 3.2GB RAM on a 64bit OS and am not sure ifs a hardware limitation, so wants to try as I found a post on Ubuntuforums. My question is if its ok to play with my resident Ubuntu install or should I be using a live bootable usb? What values do I try (I have 6GB with only 3.2GB being usable) and how to keep it safe? I don't want to burn any of my hardware component at this point of time or make the system unbootable. Running Ubuntu 11.10 with kernel 3.0.0-13-generic

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51  | Next Page >