Search Results

Search found 4769 results on 191 pages for 'nirmal ram'.

Page 45/191 | < Previous Page | 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52  | Next Page >

• PC shut downs automatically after 10-20 second. No POST screen, no beeps

  - by emzero

  I have this not-so-old computer that's not being used for a year or so. Specs: Motherboard: ASUS PN5-E SLI CPU: Intel Core2Duo E4300 RAM:2x2GB SuperTalent DDR2-800 VGA: Zogis GeForce 7950GT PSU: Vitsuba San-55-S 550w HD: No hardrives yet When I power on the computer, everything seem to start, but right away the whole system shuts down. I've removed and changed the RAM sticks, take out the VGA, everything I could think of. So what could it be causing this? The PSU? The motherboard is dead? The CPU? Any help to isolate the problem will be useful. Thanks PS: Please don't close the question, this could be helpful to anybody having a similar problem, even with different hardware. UPDATE I've removed the old thermal paste and apply a brand new one. I also cleaned every dust using a high pressure gas dust remover. Checked for bad capacitors, all of them seem ok. Opened the PSU, removed big giant dust balls, cleaned with high pressure dust remover. Still the same problem, but now it stays powered on for almost 20 seconds maybe. But no POST screen, no beeps at all, nothing. So I suspect it's a motherboard or PSU failure. Unfortunately I don't have an energy tester to test the PSU... Don't know what else to try. I don't have another 775-motherboard to test the CPU, RAM and VGA with it.

  Read the article

• High load average due to high system cpu load (%sys)

  - by Nick

  We have server with high traffic website. Recently we moved from 2 x 4 core server (8 cores in /proc/cpuinfo), 32 GB RAM, running CentOS 5.x, to 2 x 4 core server (16 cores in /proc/cpuinfo), 32 GB RAM, running CentOS 6.3 Server running nginx as a proxy, mysql server and sphinx-search. Traffic is high, but mysql and sphinx-search databases are relatively small, and usually everything works blazing fast. Today server experienced load average of 100++. Looking at top and sar, we noticed that (%sys) is very high - 50 to 70%. Disk utilization was less 1%. We tried to reboot, but problem existed after the reboot. At any moment server had at least 3-4 GB free RAM. Only message shown by dmesg was "possible SYN flooding on port 80. Sending cookies.". Here is snippet of sar 11:00:01 CPU %user %nice %system %iowait %steal %idle 11:10:01 all 21.60 0.00 66.38 0.03 0.00 11.99 We know that this is traffic issue, but we do not know how to proceed future and where to check for solution. Is there a way we can find where exactly those "66.38%" are used. Any suggestions would be appreciated.

  Read the article

• How CPU communicates with HW

  - by b-gen-jack-o-neill

  Good day. I am new here, but I could not find answer to my question using google, so I help I do not violate any rules. So, basically, all I want to ask is, how CPU comminucates with other HW, such as printers, Graphic card, sound card, LAN card etc. I know, that for basic system I/O, you can use BIOS interrupts. INT 10h I believe is for display output. But, what I would like to know is, what actually happens when you execute instruction int 10h. From desription of int instruction, it should jump to routine, which is stored on adress pointed by adress stored in iterrupt table. But how does this routine get into the RAM? Does BIOS save that routines to the RAM? And what actually that routine does? I mean, CPU can only acess RAM, right? So how can now acess some other HW? Is there some special instrucion for it? Or is CPU somehow connected to BIOS, and than BIOS actually does the work? And the last thing, does even OS like Windows or GNU/Linux use BIOS interrupts, or can OS acess HW directly? Thanks.

  Read the article

• MySQL consuming all system memory on INSERT ... SELECT

  - by siete

  The mysql daemon is getting killed because Linux is reaching out of memory: Oct 24 07:41:23 <hostname> kernel: [82297.673701] Out of memory: kill process 13816 (mysqld) score 1839626 or a child There is a link with some workaround on this. That only happen when executing a query INSERT ... SELECT with a very huge resulset. MySQLTuner script displays that maximum theorical memory is less than 8GB, but top and munim shows that is getting over all RAM and swap available: [--] Total buffers: 560.0M global + 72.2M per thread (100 max threads) [OK] Maximum possible memory usage: 7.6G (43% of installed RAM) I'm tried to tune some options with not results, there are the relevant ones: skip-locking max_connections = 100 key_buffer_size = 512M max_allowed_packet = 32M table_open_cache = 2000 open_files_limit = 3000 sort_buffer_size = 16M read_buffer_size = 16M read_rnd_buffer_size = 8M myisam_sort_buffer_size = 64M thread_cache_size = 4 query_cache_size = 16M query_cache_limit = 2M thread_concurrency = 4 join_buffer_size = 32M tmp_table_size = 32M max_heap_table_size = 32M query_cache_limit = 8M bulk_insert_buffer_size = 64M myisam_max_sort_file_size = 50GB myisam_mmap_size = 10GB And there is a system resume: OS: Linux Debian "Squeeze" 6.0.8 (upgraded yesterday) RAM: 18GB Swap: 18GB MySQL: 5.1.72-2 (official Debain release) At this moment, update or change OS or MySQL version is not possible, there is any option that can help and i missed? Sorry by my english, and thank you in advance! Edit: I'm only using MyISAM tables, and cannot change to InnoDB.

  Read the article

• Is it possible for a faulty processor to cause audio static/noise?

  - by Tom

  I have a Core 2 Extreme processor I received from a friend and have set up an XBMC box using it. However, I constantly get audio static whenever playing any music or videos. Here is a video of the sound: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SqKQkxYRVA4 I have tried replacing everything short of the case and the processor, including cables, audio interfaces, operating systems, ram, etc, leading me to think it might be either the case shorting out the motherboards I have tried or a faulty processor. Is it possible for a faulty processor to cause audio static/noise? Any feedback would be appreciated. Edit - Here's a list of things I have tried: Reinstalling OS Installing/upgrading/repairing PulseAudio/Alsa Installing alternate OSes, straight Ubuntu, Lubuntu, Xubuntu, Arch, Mint, Windows 7 Switching audio from the external card to internal Optical, audio out through HDMI, audio out through headphones Different ports on receiver (my main desktop sounds fine on the same sound system) Different optical cables Unplugging everything unnecessary from the motherboard (1 HD, 1 Stick of Ram, 1 Keyboard) Swapping out ram Swapping out the motherboard Replacing the Graphics Card (was replaced due to fan being noisy, not specifically for this problem) Different harddrives Swapping power supply Disabling onboard audio Switching Power Cable Plugging in through surge protector Plugging into different outlet on separate circuit

  Read the article

• Reduce "Metafile" memory usage?

  - by Jay Conrod

  My work computer (Windows 7 64-bit) spends a lot of time swapping memory when I switch between programs. This surprises me since I have 4 GB of RAM, and the programs I use aren't particularly RAM hungry (Outlook, Emacs, p4win, Firefox, various build tools). I downloaded RAMMap, and it shows over a gigabyte of memory used by "Metafile". From the Sysinternals blog: Metafile is part of the system cache and consists of NTFS metadata. NTFS metadata includes the MFT as well as the other various NTFS metadata files. ... In the MFT each file attribute record takes 1k and each file has at least one attribute record. Add to this the other NTFS metadata files and you can see why the Metafile category can grow quite large on servers with lots of files. So I understand what the "Metafile" data is... I work on large builds comprising hundreds of thousands of files (none are that big, but they add up to several gigabytes). My question is how can I reduce the amount of memory used by "Metafile"? I'm not actively using all those files at once, so why does Windows need to keep info in RAM? Restarting my machine every time I sync a new build is really annoying.

  Read the article

• SQL Server becomes slow after restart

  - by Tobi DM

  I already posted this one on stackoverflow but someone gave me the hint to that I might have more luck on serverfault. We use SQL Server 2005 on an Windwos Server 2008. Ther Server has 48 GB RAM. SQL Server is configured to use 40 GB RAM. There is only one database hosted (About 70 GB). The only app beside SQL Server is our App-Server which connects the clients to the database. Now we encounter the following problem: After a restart of the server our the performance is great. The server grabs the 40 GB RAM wich it is allowed to and then runs fast as hell. But after about 4 weeks the system becomes slower and slower. The execution of statements (seen in the profiler) is raising slowly. But I cannot see that there is something going wrong on the server. CPU usage is at about 20% I/O also seems to be no Problem The process monitor does also not show that there are strange apps or something like that. Eventlog does also have no interessting messages No open transactions or blockings to see We do not use cursors in our app We tried already the following things without effect: Droped the cache by using the statements DBCC FreeProcCache DBCC FREESYSTEMCACHE('ALL') DBCC DropCleanbuffers Restarted the Appserver we are using. Restart the sql server service But nothing did help exept restarting the whole server. Any ideas?

  Read the article

• Completely unintuitive Apache/PHP memory-freeing behavior

  - by David

  Okay, this one's weird. I have a Turnkey Linux server with a gig of dedicated RAM. It's running WP3.2 with a boatload of plug-ins. It's a new site, so it has very limited traffic (other than search engines, maybe 20 hits a week). Now, for a few weeks, every few days, it would max out on main RAM, start eating up virtual RAM, and then crash. It's had this behavior for a while and I've been trying to figure out which element was causing the crash. Nine days ago, I pointed my external server monitor to this server. I wrote a 5-line HTML file (not PHP and not WP) that the server monitor accesses every minute, to see if the server is up. So, now, nine days later, the server has been rock solid, up all the time, no memory leak at all. I changed NOTHING on the server itself to see this behavior change. Have you EVER seen anything like this? All the server monitor is doing is retrieving a single, super-simple HTML file and all the memory leak problems have gone away. Weird, eh?

  Read the article

• Hibernate between OS X and Bootcamp Win 7

  - by Willem

  Wouldn't it be great if someone wrote a guide or an app which allowed you to switch instantly between OS X and Windows using Hibernate in both OS:s? Windows 7 already has an option "Hibernate" which allows you to boot back to your OS X partition, but OS X does not exactly offer the same. However, there are possibilities here. It seems that the recent Mac's have 3 different kinds of sleeping mode: Sleep: Low power consumption, RAM still active. Legacy Safe Sleep: No power consumption(?), writes RAM to disk and shuts down (is this the same as Hibernate?) Safe Sleep: Writes RAM to disk and enters sleep mode. If battery level drops too low it goes into Hibernate (is this Hibernate the same as #2 in this list? This is the Hibernate I will be referring to int he rest of this post) It seems that I am unable to force my MacBook Pro (Late 2011) OS X 10.7.3 into a true hibernate using either command line or apps that are supposed to do this. I believe the Mac should show that white loading bar whilst waking up if it was truly put into hibernate (which it does not). But I can get this white bar to show by letting my battery level drop to 0% so there is obviously a system function for it (obviously, duh! :). When Win 7 goes into hibernate it shuts down completely and you can then boot into OS X on startup. On OS X however, hibernate forces you to wake up into OS X. Can you hack this so that you're allowed to select boot partition after OS X hibernates? Would it be possible to use the true hibernate system functionalities of Win 7 and OS X to create a kind of instant switching between the two? Imagine this on a quick SATA-3 SSD like my 180GB Intel 520. Thanks / Willem

  Read the article

• How do I prevent a tar pipe from causing swapping?

  - by Jeff Shattock

  I have a rather large filesystem that I need to transfer from one Linux server to another. I figured the best way to do this was via a tar/netcat pipe arrangment, something like tar c . | pv | nc blah blah blah And it works great, the network stays fairly saturated, life is good. Until the source machine starts swapping. The files are on a raid on the source system, so the read speed is much faster than the write speed on the other end. Since the dest machine hasnt picked up the data yet, the source machine needs to stick it somewhere, so into RAM it goes, until there is no more free RAM. It then starts swapping, which is horribly painful since that machine has its OS installed on a somewhat slow CF card. Both machines have 4GB of physical ram, 64 bit Ubuntu 9.04 server. GigE link between them. How do I prevent this swapping? Can I put a "speed-limit" on the tar or netcat process so that the transfer speed doesn't overwhelm the write throughput on the destination end? The man pages didn't list anything, but there might be something I'm overlooking.

  Read the article

• using i7 "gamer" cpu in a HPC cluster

  - by user1219721

  I'm running WRF weather model. That's a ram intensive, highly parallel application. I need to build a HPC cluster for that. I use 10GB infiniband interconnect. WRF doesn't depends of core count, but on memory bandwidth. That's why a core i7 3820 or 3930K performs better than high-grade xeons E5-2600 or E7 Seems like universities uses xeon E5-2670 for WRF. It costs about $1500. Spec2006 fp_rates WRF bench shows $580 i7 3930K performs the same with 1600MHz RAM. What's interesting is that i7 can handle up to 2400MHz ram, doing a great performance increase for WRF. Then it really outperforms the xeon. Power comsumption is a bit higher, but still less than 20€ a year. Even including additional part I'll need (PSU, infiniband, case), the i7 way is still 700 €/cpu cheaper than Xeon. So, is it ok to use "gamer" hardware in a HPC cluster ? or should I do it pro with xeon ? (This is not a critical application. I can handle downtime. I think I don't need ECC?)

  Read the article

• Serious 64-bit laptop

  - by Daniel Gehriger

  For the past couple of years, I have been using an IBM Thinkpad T60p for daily work (software development, desktop & embedded). I am extremely satisfied with this machine, due to its robustness. It also has a few features I depend on: a high resolution display: 15.0" TFT FlexView display with 1600x1200 (UXGA); excellent keyboard; decent graphics and CPU performance. Some of the software I develop benefits from larger amounts of RAM, and 3GB (Windows 7 32-bit) or 4GB (Windows 7 64-bit on T60p) are no longer sufficient. My customers run desktop computers with 20GB and more, and I need to have at least 8GB to at least be able to run reasonable test cases. So I'm shopping around for a new laptop, but I'm struggling to find anything that matches my requirements: must run Windows 7 64-bit Pro or higher; must support at least 8GB of RAM (more is better) high screen resolution! While I prefer 4:3 I can live with wide screen. But I really hope to find something with a vertical screen resolution similar to what I have now... portable, so < 16" but = 14" I realize that FlexView isn't available anymore, but I'd like to avoid a glossy screen if possible. decent (not more) graphics performance, ideally hybrid (I'm doing a lot of CAD, never games). good keyboard reasonable CPU -- but I'm still fine with my current Core 2 Duo, so that shouldn't be too complicated. The T60p fits all those requirements, except the 8GB of RAM. Can you help me find a current notebook that would match most of them? I don't mind changing brand. Thanks!

  Read the article

• when to upgrade server to include more cores, versus more processors, versus additional server?

  - by gkdsp

  The server hosting market is separated into single, double, qual, etc., processors, where each processor has several cores, or CPUs. My company will offer a Linux-based web application that relies on an Apache web server and a middle tier for business logic. The middle tier is used to crunch math, and return result to a client. Many clients may access the application simultaneously. The company will start with one processor having 4 cores. I'm trying to understand how the app uses the cores and then how to scale the application as business grows, in terms of servers/processors/cores. For example, I'd assume initially one core would be used for Apache, and the other 3 used to process client's requests for math crunching... Question 1: does that mean, with the 3 cores available, I can handle 3 separate client requests simultaneously (e.g. 1 for each of 3 cores)? I mean, except for the shared RAM, is this effectively like having 3 individual machines (from pt of view or processing client requests simulaneously)? Or, only one client's request may be processed at any one time, but that client's request is divided up into up to 3 cores depending on the type of process running that does the math crunching and whether or not it can take advantage of multi threading (so the # of cores impacts how fast any one client request completes)? I'm confused about what the cores mean to the application here. Question 2: As the business grows and more client requests need to be processed, should the server be upgraded to (A) a new machine with more cores, (B) a new machine with two processors, 4 cores each, or (C) keep the original server and add another server with a single processor? Which route provides the most efficient way to scale the application, in terms of processing more client requests per time interval? Is the choice, for example, limited by RAM (when you need more RAM than box can handle it's time to add another server), or something else? Question 3: Is the total number of client requests processed simultaneously equal to the number of cores times the number of servers (minus the one core for Apache)?

  Read the article

• Can applications use all of the memory in Windows 8?

  - by Barleyman

  Windows 7 (and Windows Vista) have a built-in limit of not being able to use the last 25% of RAM. You will get a low memory warning when you get close to the limit. Even if you disable that warning, applications will run out of memory and crash since the OS will refuse to allocate memory from that last 25%. That was fine when Vista was designed, when machines had 1 GB of total memory, but is pretty daft for today's 8 GB machines. Yes, the system will run cache, etc. on that extra 2 GB, but running out of memory when you have "merely" 2 GB left.... NB: this has nothing to do with the page file. If you limit the page file to a sensible size like 2 GB, you will still see this behavior. The system will cram the page file to the last byte while refusing to touch that 1/4th of the RAM. Does Windows 8 change this behavior? Is there now some fixed minimum free RAM requirement, like 512 MB, or is it still 25%? Can you actually adjust the low memory limit?

  Read the article

• i7-980X at 70% speed

  - by Buxley

  Hi we bought a nice computer to use to solve optimization problems. Intel i7-980X@3,33 GHz with 12 GB of Team Group 1600 MHz DDR3 RAM. When we use Gurobi the computer uses all 12 cores at maximum in the beginning of the solve. However after a while (about 8 hrs) it all cores jump between 65 and 85% When I solve the same models on an i7 930 all cores are at a near 100% level even after longer solution times. We first thought that the Hard disk was the bottleneck since Gurobi writes out nodefiles after the memorylimit is used. However since the new computer have 12 GB of RAM we put the memorylimit to 7 GB so the solver only used the RAM and still with the same performance in the processor. Any ideas about the bottleneck? As I said earlier it works at 100% for the first hours or so . Thanks very much for any answers! Our plan was to overclock it but we can't even get it to work at normal speed yet!

  Read the article

• i7 x980 at 70% speed

  - by Buxley

  Hi we bought a nice computer to use to solve optimization problems. intel i7 X980@3,33 Mhz with 12 Gb of Team Group 1600 MHz ddr3 Ram. When we use Gurobi The Computer uses all 12 cores at maximum in the beginning of the solve. However after a while (about 8 hrs) it all cores jump between 65 and 85% When I solve the same models on an I7 930 all cores are at a near 100% level even after longer solution times. we first thought that the Harddisk was the bottleneck since Gurobi writes out nodefiles after the memorylimit is used. However since the new computer have 12 GB of Ram we put the memorylimit to 7 GB so the solver only used the RAM and still with the same performance in the processor. Any Ideas about the bottleneck? As I said earlier it works at 100% for the first hours or so . Thanks very much for any answers! Our plan was to overclock it but we can't even get it to work at normal speed yet!

  Read the article

• MysqlTunner and query_cache_size dilemma

  - by wbad

  On a busy mysql server MySQLTuner 1.2.0 always recommends to add query_cache_size no matter how I increase the value (I tried up to 512MB). On the other hand it warns that : Increasing the query_cache size over 128M may reduce performance Here are the last results: >> MySQLTuner 1.2.0 - Major Hayden <[email protected]> >> Bug reports, feature requests, and downloads at http://mysqltuner.com/ >> Run with '--help' for additional options and output filtering -------- General Statistics -------------------------------------------------- [--] Skipped version check for MySQLTuner script [OK] Currently running supported MySQL version 5.5.25-1~dotdeb.0-log [OK] Operating on 64-bit architecture -------- Storage Engine Statistics ------------------------------------------- [--] Status: +Archive -BDB -Federated +InnoDB -ISAM -NDBCluster [--] Data in InnoDB tables: 6G (Tables: 195) [--] Data in PERFORMANCE_SCHEMA tables: 0B (Tables: 17) [!!] Total fragmented tables: 51 -------- Security Recommendations ------------------------------------------- [OK] All database users have passwords assigned -------- Performance Metrics ------------------------------------------------- [--] Up for: 1d 19h 17m 8s (254M q [1K qps], 5M conn, TX: 139B, RX: 32B) [--] Reads / Writes: 89% / 11% [--] Total buffers: 24.2G global + 92.2M per thread (1200 max threads) [!!] Maximum possible memory usage: 132.2G (139% of installed RAM) [OK] Slow queries: 0% (2K/254M) [OK] Highest usage of available connections: 32% (391/1200) [OK] Key buffer size / total MyISAM indexes: 128.0M/92.0K [OK] Key buffer hit rate: 100.0% (8B cached / 0 reads) [OK] Query cache efficiency: 79.9% (181M cached / 226M selects) [!!] Query cache prunes per day: 1033203 [OK] Sorts requiring temporary tables: 0% (341 temp sorts / 4M sorts) [OK] Temporary tables created on disk: 14% (760K on disk / 5M total) [OK] Thread cache hit rate: 99% (676 created / 5M connections) [OK] Table cache hit rate: 22% (1K open / 8K opened) [OK] Open file limit used: 0% (49/13K) [OK] Table locks acquired immediately: 99% (64M immediate / 64M locks) [OK] InnoDB data size / buffer pool: 6.1G/19.5G -------- Recommendations ----------------------------------------------------- General recommendations: Run OPTIMIZE TABLE to defragment tables for better performance Reduce your overall MySQL memory footprint for system stability Increasing the query_cache size over 128M may reduce performance Variables to adjust: *** MySQL's maximum memory usage is dangerously high *** *** Add RAM before increasing MySQL buffer variables *** query_cache_size (> 192M) [see warning above] The server has 76GB ram and dual E5-2650. The load is usually below 2. I appreciate your hints to interpret the recommendation and optimize the database configs.

  Read the article

• Laptop freezing every few seconds, including screen + sound

  - by zenstealth

  Just a few days ago, my Windows 7 HP dv4170us (1.76Ghz CPU, 1GB Ram) laptop started to freeze every other second where everything on screen and and sound (such as a song playing in iTunes) would just freeze until I bash it violently (without actually breaking the laptop) or wait for a couple of more seconds. I think it started one night when I noticed that a USB mouse of mine stopped working, and it displayed random "Device was not recognized" errors. I just unplugged the mouse and ignored it. Skip forward to the next day, is started freezing, and as of today I can't get my computer to not keep freezing. I tried to backup my files onto an external hdd, but it almost corrupted the drive. I ran 4 complete virus scans using MSSE and MalwareBytes (both quick and full scans), and they all came up clean. In the Task manager, the CPU usage is on a constant max, and so is the RAM (if I have just a few apps running, I only have like 30Mb of free RAM left). Also, on the outside of my laptop, right above where the CPU is located, it's very, very hot. I suspect that something is wrong internally within inside of the computer, but I'm not sure. It also does the same thing when booted into Ubuntu.Does anyone know what could be wrong with it?

  Read the article

• mysql - moving to a lower performance server, how small can I go?

  - by pedalpete

  I've been running a site for a few years now which really isn't growing in traffic, and I want to save some money on hosting, but keep it going for the loyal users of the site and api. The database has one a nearly 4 million row table, and on a 4gb dual xeon 5320 server. When I check server stats on this server with ps -aux, i get returns of mysql running at about 11% capacity, so no serious load. The main query against mysql runs in about 0.45 seconds. I popped over to linode.com to see what kind of performance I could get out of one of their tiny boxes, and their 360mb ram XEN vps returns the same query in 20 seconds. Clearly not good enough. I've looked at the mysql variables, and they are both very similar (I've included the show variables output below, if anybody is interested). Is there a good way to decide on what size server is needed based on what I'm coming from? Is it RAM that is likely making the difference with the large table size? Is there a way for me to figure out how much ram would be ideal?? Here's the output of the show variables (though I'm not sure it is important). +---------------------------------+------------------------------------------------------------+ | Variable_name | Value | +---------------------------------+------------------------------------------------------------+ | auto_increment_increment | 1 | | auto_increment_offset | 1 | | automatic_sp_privileges | ON | | back_log | 50 | | basedir | /usr/ | | bdb_cache_size | 8384512 | | bdb_home | /var/lib/mysql/ | | bdb_log_buffer_size | 262144 | | bdb_logdir | | | bdb_max_lock | 10000 | | bdb_shared_data | OFF | | bdb_tmpdir | /tmp/ | | binlog_cache_size | 32768 | | bulk_insert_buffer_size | 8388608 | | character_set_client | latin1 | | character_set_connection | latin1 | | character_set_database | latin1 | | character_set_filesystem | binary | | character_set_results | latin1 | | character_set_server | latin1 | | character_set_system | utf8 | | character_sets_dir | /usr/share/mysql/charsets/ | | collation_connection | latin1_swedish_ci | | collation_database | latin1_swedish_ci | | collation_server | latin1_swedish_ci | | completion_type | 0 | | concurrent_insert | 1 | | connect_timeout | 10 | | datadir | /var/lib/mysql/ | | date_format | %Y-%m-%d | | datetime_format | %Y-%m-%d %H:%i:%s | | default_week_format | 0 | | delay_key_write | ON | | delayed_insert_limit | 100 | | delayed_insert_timeout | 300 | | delayed_queue_size | 1000 | | div_precision_increment | 4 | | keep_files_on_create | OFF | | engine_condition_pushdown | OFF | | expire_logs_days | 0 | | flush | OFF | | flush_time | 0 | | ft_boolean_syntax | + - For some reason, that table formats properly in the preview, but apparently not when viewing the question. Hopefully it isn't needed anyway.

  Read the article

• Experience with asymmetrical (non-identical hardware) SQL Server 2005 / Win 2003 cluster

  - by user24161

  I am reasonably good at dealing with SQL Server clusters; I am wondering if folks have experience, good or bad, using a mix of different models of servers from the same vendor in one SQL 2005 cluster. Suppose: I have one more powerful, more RAM, more shizzle box and one less powerful, less memory, less shizzle box bound together in a 2-node cluster. These would be HP DL380 and 580 machines (not that it should matter) I understand AND automate the process of managing memory for each SQL instance, so there's no memory contention when SQL instances fail over. Basically I am thinking a CLR proc will monitor the instances and self-regulate memory caps on each instance, so that they won't page or step on one another. I get the fact the instances might be slower and or under memory pressure if they share a "lesser" node, and that's OK. The business can deal with a slower instance in a server-problem scenario. Reasonable? Any "gotchas" to watch out for? More info 10/28: doing some experiments with a test cluster I find that reconfiguring max/min memory is OK PROVIDED the instance isn't already under memory pressure. If I torture the system with a huge query that demands a big chunk of RAM, and simultaneously adjust the memory allocation to a smaller value than what is being actively used, it's possible to run the instance out of memory and have it halt and restart itself (unhappy situation). Many ugly out-of-memory messages in the error log, crashing, burning... It's an extreme case, but good to know. Seems, then, that it would only be really safe to set this on startup of the instance, as in have a startup script that says "I am on node1, so my RAM settings are X or I am on node two, so they are Y," like this: http://sqlblog.com/blogs/aaron_bertrand... Update: I am testing a SQL Agent + PowerShell solution described in more detail here.

  Read the article

• Should I completely turn off swap for linux webserver?

  - by Poma

  Recently my friend told me that it is a good idea to turn off swap on linux webservers with enough memory. My server has 12 GB and currently uses 4GB (not counting cache and buffers) under peak load. His argument was that in a normal situation server will never use all of its RAM so the only way it can encounter OutOfMemory situation is due to some bug/ddos/etc. So in case swap is turned off system will run out of memory that will eventually crash the program hogging memory (most likely the web server process) and probably some other processes. In case swap is turned on it will eat both RAM and swap and eventually will result in the same crash, but before that it will offload crucial processes like sshd to swap and start to do a lot of swap operations resulting in major slowdown. This way when under ddos system may go into a completely unusable condition due to huge lags and I probably will not be unable to log in and kill webserver process or deny all incoming traffic (all but ssh). Is this right? Am I missing something (like the fact that swap partition is very useful in some way even if I have enough RAM)? Should I turn it off?

  Read the article

• What can cause the system to freeze in a way where even the reset button takes a long time to react?

  - by ThiefMaster

  What can be the reason for system freezes that are so "hard" that even the hardware reset button takes about 3 seconds until it actually resets the system (and then it actually powers down and up again instead of doing a "clean" hard reset like when pressing it during a normally running system). Since it initially happened mainly while playing videos from YouTube I suspected the graphics card - however, I replaced it recently and it did not change it. It still happens from time to time (and sometimes more often, like a few times times in the last few hours). The system is running Windows 7 - but I don't think this matters since I don't think any software, not even the OS, can actually affect the reset button's behaviour. The PC is not overheated and the freezes happen randomly. There is also no malware on the system. The CPU is an Intel Core i7-920 on a Gigabyte EX58-UD5 mainboard. What could be the cause for this problem? Faulty RAM? I did not run a full memtest86 check yet, but I wonder if there is a more likely issue than faulty RAM - checking 12G of ram does take some time after all! There are no entries in the event log - but that's what I expected since the system freezes so hard that I doubt it has time to write anything to any log.

  Read the article

• New i7 is slower than old Core 2 Duo? Why? (BIOS programming)

  - by DrChase

  I've always wondered why the companies who make BIOS' either have terrible engineering psychologists or none at all. But without wasting your time further with random speculative questions, my real question is as follows: Why does my new computer run slower than my old computer? Old Computer: Intel Core 2 Duo CPU @ 3.0 Ghz (stock) 4GB OCZ DDR2 800 RAM Wolfdale E8400 mb nVidia GeForce 8600 GT New Computer: Intel Core i7 920 @ ~3.2 Ghz 6 GB OCZ DDR3 1066 RAM EVGA x58 SLI LE motherboard nVidia GeForce GTX 275 Vista x64 Home Premium on both. "Run slower" is defined as: - poorer FPS performance in the same games, applications - takes longer to start up - general desktop usage (checking email, opening up files, running exe's) is noticeably slower At first I thought I must've not set something up in the BIOS or something. But I have no idea how to set anything in the bios except for "Dummy O.C.", which brought me to ~3.2 Ghz. But beyond that I have no idea. I've been reading stuff about "ram timing" and voltages and the like but I really have no idea about that stuff. I'm a psychologist who has a basic understanding in building his own computers, not a computer scientist. Can someone give me some wisdom that might guide me to the reason my new computer is worse than my older one? I'm sorry if this is a bad question, or not appropriate to SO. I'm just pretty frustrated now and you all have helped me in the past so I figured I'd give it a shot. Thanks for your time.

  Read the article

• Page pool memory

  - by legiwei

  I'm currently using Windows XP SP3 32 bit, using C2D E6320 with 2GB RAM. When I am playing Starcraft 2, I encounter an error where it says my system is running low on page pool memory. Starcraft graphic settings suggested a high settings for me. I do not think it has to do with my GC but with my RAM. I then made a search to try to rectify the problem. Apparently, it's something to do with my virtual memory. I then proceed to try to the suggested solution which is to temper the registry and limit the page pool memory to 384MB. However, having done so, I still could not achieved it. I've seen screenshot settings of windows XP with 2GB having 384MB of page pool memory. My default settings puts it at 195MB whereas when I try to increase the pool limit, it can only go to a max of 229MB. I tried increasing my RAM capacity to 3GB but the pool limit still remains. I like to know how to increase my page pool memory. I've tried searching for solution but to no avail other than the one that I've mentioned above (which didn't solve my problem completely).

  Read the article

• Best method to obtain current memory configuration in VBA

  - by Curtis Inderwiesche

  I am attempting to get the current users RAM configuration. I would like to use VBA to look this up and then store it in a table. I need the number of chips along with the amount of RAM on each chip. Is this possible to lookup programmatically using VBA? Do I need to use Windows Script Host?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52  | Next Page >