Search Results

Search found 5852 results on 235 pages for 'ram kumar sharma'.

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

Page 6/235 | < Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >

  • Performance boost for MacBook: Hybrid hard drive or 4GB RAM?

    - by user13572
    I have an aluminium 13" MacBook with 2GB or RAM and 5400RPM 500GB hard drive. The main tasks I perform are developing iPhone and Mac apps in Xcode and websites in Coda. I want to improve the performance so I am considering buying 4GB of RAM or a 500GB Seagate solid-state hybrid drive. What is likely to provide the biggest performance boost?

    Read the article

  • Very high CPU and low RAM usage - is it possible to place some of swap some of the CPU usage to the RAM (with CloudLinux LVE Manager installed)?

    - by Chriswede
    I had to install CloudLinux so that I could somewhat controle the CPU ussage and more importantly the Concurrent-Connections the Websites use. But as you can see the Server load is way to high and thats why some sites take up to 10 sec. to load! Server load 22.46 (8 CPUs) (!) Memory Used 36.32% (2,959,188 of 8,146,632) (ok) Swap Used 0.01% (132 of 2,104,504) (ok) Server: 8 x Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E31230 @ 3.20GHz Memory: 8143680k/9437184k available (2621k kernel code, 234872k reserved, 1403k data, 244k init) Linux Yesterday: Total of 214,514 Page-views (Awstat) Now my question: Can I shift some of the CPU usage to the RAM? Or what else could I do to make the sites run faster (websites are dynamic - so SQL heavy) Thanks top - 06:10:14 up 29 days, 20:37, 1 user, load average: 11.16, 13.19, 12.81 Tasks: 526 total, 1 running, 524 sleeping, 0 stopped, 1 zombie Cpu(s): 42.9%us, 21.4%sy, 0.0%ni, 33.7%id, 1.9%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st Mem: 8146632k total, 7427632k used, 719000k free, 131020k buffers Swap: 2104504k total, 132k used, 2104372k free, 4506644k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 318421 mysql 15 0 1315m 754m 4964 S 474.9 9.5 95300:17 mysqld 6928 root 10 -5 0 0 0 S 2.0 0.0 90:42.85 kondemand/3 476047 headus 17 0 172m 19m 10m S 1.7 0.2 0:00.05 php 476055 headus 18 0 172m 18m 9.9m S 1.7 0.2 0:00.05 php 476056 headus 15 0 172m 19m 10m S 1.7 0.2 0:00.05 php 476061 headus 18 0 172m 19m 10m S 1.7 0.2 0:00.05 php 6930 root 10 -5 0 0 0 S 1.3 0.0 161:48.12 kondemand/5 6931 root 10 -5 0 0 0 S 1.3 0.0 193:11.74 kondemand/6 476049 headus 17 0 172m 19m 10m S 1.3 0.2 0:00.04 php 476050 headus 15 0 172m 18m 9.9m S 1.3 0.2 0:00.04 php 476057 headus 17 0 172m 18m 9.9m S 1.3 0.2 0:00.04 php 6926 root 10 -5 0 0 0 S 1.0 0.0 90:13.88 kondemand/1 6932 root 10 -5 0 0 0 S 1.0 0.0 247:47.50 kondemand/7 476064 worldof 18 0 172m 19m 10m S 1.0 0.2 0:00.03 php 6927 root 10 -5 0 0 0 S 0.7 0.0 93:52.80 kondemand/2 6929 root 10 -5 0 0 0 S 0.3 0.0 161:54.38 kondemand/4 8459 root 15 0 103m 5576 1268 S 0.3 0.1 54:45.39 lvest

    Read the article

  • Performance boast for MacBook: Hybrid hard drive or 4GB RAM?

    - by user13572
    I have an aluminium 13" MacBook with 2GB or RAM and 5400RPM 500GB hard drive. The main tasks I perform are developing iPhone and Mac apps in Xcode and websites in Coda. I want to improve the performance so I am considering buying 4GB of RAM or a 500GB Seagate solid-state hybrid drive. What is likely to provide the biggest performance boast?

    Read the article

  • After upgrading to 2008 R2 Enterprise and installing more RAM, Windows can only see 4.00 GB

    - by Tom Crane
    (I have also posted this on technet but I'm running out of ideas) I've upgraded from Windows Server 2008 R2 Standard to Enterprise in order to make use of more RAM. The server previously had 32GB of RAM. The upgrade from Standard to Enterprise, using DISM, seemed to go OK, so I powered down and installed the RAM. This a Dell Poweredge T710, I was taking it from 32GB to 72GB. The BIOS recognised the RAM, although I needed to change from "Advanced ECC" to "Optimizer" mode for it to use all of it. After rebooting, windows can see the RAM but in the system panel will display: Installed memory (RAM): 72.0 GB (4.00 GB usable) In the resource monitor, the remainder of the RAM is showing as reserved for hardware. I've tried various RAM configurations, including reverting it to the same chips and same configuration as before the upgrade, but always just 4.00 GB is showing up as usable. Following some threads on these forums I've gone into msconfig and set the maximum memory "by hand" but that doesn't fix the problem. BIOS doesn't seem to have anything that looks like memory remapping which is another suggestion that has come up. How do I make this RAM available to Windows? It was available before the upgrade, because I could use the full 32GB RAM the server had to start with. A screenshot (this is after reverting to the original RAM configuration) http://screencast.com/t/5FuzevdNb I don't know if it's related, but my remote desktop configuration has also disappeared: screencast.com/t/mYedomeQWS (the bottom half of this dialog should allow me to configure Remote Desktop, it was working before the upgrade but now it isn't).

    Read the article

  • Are these three brand new sticks of RAM really dead?

    - by David Brown
    I'm working on a Dell Dimension 4700 desktop for a friend. It came with 512MB of DDR2 RAM (two sticks of 256MB). One morning, it started blue screening on startup with no helpful error messages. It refused to boot into any form of Windows installation, including Safe Mode, original recovery disk, and my custom Windows PE disk. It did boot into the Ultimate Boot CD, so I ran memtest86, which reported errors everywhere. I removed one stick of RAM and the system booted up just fine. I moved the remaining stick into each slot and the system continued to operate normally, so I came to the conclusion that the stick that I removed was dead. I ordered an exact replacement, along with 2 more sticks of 256MB DDR2 (again, exactly the same as the original), bringing the total system memory to 1GB. Upon installing the three brand new sticks, the system blue screened again, this time stating that win32k.sys attempted to write to read-only memory. I inserted my custom Windows PE disk in order to get a better look at the memory dump with BlueScreenView, but it refused to boot and produced another blue screen, but without an error message. I removed each new stick one-by-one, restarting each time. It continued to blue screen until I was left with only the original stick. I then tried inserting the new sticks in various different orders, but this only produced more blue screens. I reinserted all three sticks (along with the original) and ran memtest86 again, which reported errors all over the place. So, now I'm right back where I started. I don't think it could be the slots themselves, because I can plug the original stick into any slot and it works just fine. System setup reports each stick correctly and shows the total as 1GB, however. It just seems strange to me that all three brand new sticks of RAM could be dead on arrival. Is there something I missed? Or should I just go ahead and RMA them?

    Read the article

  • Nginx , Apache , Mysql , Memcache with server 4G ram. How optimize to enought memory?

    - by TomSawyer
    i have 1 dedicated server with Nginx proxy for Apache. Memcache, mysql, 4G Ram. These day, my visitor on my site wasn't increased, but my server get overload always in some specified time. (9AM - 15PM) Ram in use is increased second by second to full. that's moment, my server will get overload. i have to kill all apache , mysql service and reboot it to get free memory. that's the circle. here is my ram in use at the moment 160(nginx) 220(apache) 512(memcache) 924(mysql) here's process number 4(nginx) 14(apache) 5(memcache) 20(mysql) and here's my my.cnf config. someone can help me to optimize it? [mysqld] datadir=/var/lib/mysql socket=/var/lib/mysql/mysql.sock user=mysql skip-locking skip-networking skip-name-resolve # enable log-slow-queries log-slow-queries = /var/log/mysql-slow-queries.log long_query_time=3 max_connections=200 wait_timeout=64 connect_timeout = 10 interactive_timeout = 25 thread_stack = 512K max_allowed_packet=16M table_cache=1500 read_buffer_size=4M join_buffer_size=4M sort_buffer_size=4M read_rnd_buffer_size = 4M max_heap_table_size=256M tmp_table_size=256M thread_cache=256 query_cache_type=1 query_cache_limit=4M query_cache_size=16M thread_concurrency=8 myisam_sort_buffer_size=128M # Disabling symbolic-links is recommended to prevent assorted security risks symbolic-links=0 [mysqldump] quick max_allowed_packet=16M [mysql] no-auto-rehash [isamchk] key_buffer=256M sort_buffer=256M read_buffer=64M write_buffer=64M [myisamchk] key_buffer=256M sort_buffer=256M read_buffer=64M write_buffer=64M [mysqlhotcopy] interactive-timeout [mysql.server] user=mysql basedir=/var/lib [mysqld_safe] log-error=/var/log/mysqld.log pid-file=/var/run/mysqld/mysqld.pid

    Read the article

  • How to run Ubuntu fully in initramfs?

    - by miernik
    I have a machine with 10 GB of RAM, and I would like to run Ubuntu on it (Debian also OK if its easier), fully in RAM in such a way: I boot from a compressed image on an USB flash disk, that is uncompressed into RAM, and then I can remove the disk from the USB slot, and use the system only with RAM, without any permanent disk. Whenever I make any changes that I want permanent, I would put the flash disk back into the USB slot (possibly not the same one as I used initially to boot, as I would like to keep many versions of the boot flash disk), and run some command that would save the current state into a compressed image on the disk. How can I set this up?

    Read the article

  • Why does my system use so much cache?

    - by Dave M G
    Previously, on my desktop computer running Ubuntu 14.04, I had 4GB RAM, which I thought should be plenty. However, after being on for a while, my computer would seem to get slow. I have a system resource monitor app in my Gnome panel, which I assume represents the available RAM (?). It shows a dark green area as being "Memory", and a light green area as "Cache". The "Cache" would slowly grow until it filled the whole graph, and then programs would get slow to load, or it would take a while to switch programs. I could alleviate the problem somewhat with this command, but eventually the computer cache fills up again, so it's only a bandaid: sudo sh -c "sync; echo 3 > /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches" So, I figured I'd get more RAM, so I replaced one 2GB stick with an 8GB stick, and now I have 10 GB ram. And my "cache" still slowly maxes out and my computer slows as a result. Also, sometimes the computer starts out with "cache" maxed when I first boot and log in. Not always though, I don't know if there's a pattern that determines why it happens. Why is Ubuntu using up so much cache? Is 10GB not enough for Ubuntu? Here's what my system monitor looks like in my Gnome panel. The middle square shows RAM usage. The light green area is the "cache": This is my memory and swap history, which doesn't seem to include any information about "cache". I realize at this point I'm not totally clear on the difference between "cache" and "swap":

    Read the article

  • Am I getting the right memory for my motherboard?

    - by Daniel Carvalho
    Hi technophiles; I have a Gigabyte GA-EP45-DS motherboard. Also, the memory that came with my computer was two Transcend aXe RAM 1066MHZ 1GB modules. The thing is, I noticed that my motherboard has "DDR2 1200" written on it. This concerns me, have I bought slower memory than my computer is supposed to have ideally? Now, I'm not super concerned at a granular level about the best optimal RAM with the best CAS latency etc... but I do hope at least that I've got the right speed. Now, as far as I know, there is no such thing as ram at 1200MHZ? Am I right? You see, because I'm thinking of getting more RAM now, before I can't find the same type or speed any-more and just want to make sure it's the right thing. Furthermore, if the memory is slower than what I should be getting for my motherboard, what RAM should I be getting, and will that new RAM play nice with my old RAM? If I get new RAM at a different speed, would it be better / more beneficial performance-wise to omit the old RAM because of how the whole DUAL channel RAM thing works? I'm not too clued up on this area. Thanks chiefs.

    Read the article

  • How do I calculate a SWAP partition?

    - by Dean Howell
    Since the late 90s I've always understood that it is best practice to allocate twice the amount of physical RAM as swap space. I just received my new laptop in the mail and it came with 6GB of RAM. In a separate order I had 16GB of RAM to replace the preinstalled. I didn't have the right torx driver to get to the RAM in this machine, so I installed Ubuntu and manually set a 16GB partition for swap. 32GB seemed a tad excessive... Did I make the right choice? Would my machine perform better if there was no SWAP at all?

    Read the article

  • Error -12 hibernation image. Not enough free memory (sometimes)

    - by user99306
    I am having a problem with hibernation in Ubuntu 12.10, it had worked fine in 12.04. When I try and hibernate it sometimes appears to hibernate throws up an error and returns me to the desktop. The error I get is this: PM: Creating hibernation image: PM: Need to copy 375021 pages PM: Normal pages needed: 117957 + 1024, available pages: 110205 PM: Not enough free memory PM: Error -12 creating hibernation image Now I understand what the error means, but it doesn't make sense. My swap file is 5GB and is seldom ever used as I have 4GB of RAM. I know it is recommended to have 1.5 times more swap than RAM etc, but space doesn't seem to be the problem, despite the error. For example, I rarely use more than about 25%-30% of my RAM, yet still have the problem above. Moreover on a fresh boot and login, with no programs open and using only about 12% of RAM, I can get the above error - yet at other times I can hibernate whilst using 25% of my RAM. Also if I keep trying to hibernate, it eventually does after throwing up the above error four or five times. A successful hibernation looks like this: PM: Creating hibernation image: PM: Need to copy 295511 pages PM: Normal pages needed: 95534 + 1024, available pages: 132627 Is there some setting that I need to tweak or something I need to do before hibernating to avoid this problem? I guess the question could be better interpreted as: Is there some way of safely flushing the buffers and the cache before hibernation? Other than attempting to hibernate several times until it is successful! Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • What happens when more RAM is installed than the motherboard supports?

    - by DanDan
    I have a free RAM slot and some spare memory that will fit my computer. However the problem is my motherboard only supports 2GB and I have 2GB installed. What would happen if I plugged the spare memory in the RAM slot? The following things spring to mind: Nothing will happen It will work, computer becomes faster Computer becomes slower Explosion Undetermined (Any of the above) Does anyone have any experience of this? Update: Egged on by you zealous lot, I went ahead and stuck the extra memory in. It booted up! Unfortunately, the hunch of some has been proved correct. The memory is reported at the capped limit, rather then the actual available. A shame then! But thank you all for your suggestions, speculations and stories. For your reference, I am using a Dell Insprion 6000 with 2gb installed, latest drivers. I attempted to add 512mb, with no success.

    Read the article

  • An increase to 3 Gig of RAM slows down Ubuntu 10.04 LTS

    - by williepabon
    I have Ubuntu 10.04 running from an external hard drive (installed on an enclosure) connected via USB port. Like a month or so ago, I increased RAM on my pc from 2 Gigs to 3 Gigs. This resulted on extremely long boot times and slow application loads. While I was understanding the nature of my problem, I posted various threads on this forum ( Questions # 188417, 188801), where I was advised to gather speed tests, and other info on my machine. I was also suggested that I might have problems with the RAM installed. Initially, I did not consider that possibility because: 1) I did a memory test with a diagnostic program from DELL (My pc is from Dell) 2) My pc works fine with Windows XP (the default OS), no problems with memory 3) My pc works fine when booting with Ubuntu 10.10 memory stick, no speed problems 4) My pc works fine when booting with Ubuntu 11.10 memory stick, no speed problems Anyway, I performed the memory tests suggested. But before doing it, and to check out any possibility of hardware issues on the hard drive, I did the following: (1) purchased a new hard drive enclosure and moved my hard drive to it, (2) purchased a new USB cable and used it to connect my hard drive/enclosure setup to a different USB port on my pc. Then, I performed speed tests with 1 Gig, 2 Gigs and 3 Gigs of RAM with my Ubuntu 10.04 OS. Ubuntu 10.04 worked well when booted with 1 Gig or 2 Gigs of RAM. When I increased to 3 Gigs, it slowed down to a crawl. I can't understand the relationship between an increase of 1 Gig and the effect it has in Ubuntu 10.04. This doesn't happen with Ubuntu 10.10 and 11.10. Unfortunately for me, Ubuntu 10.04 is my principal work operating system. So, I need a solution for this. Hardware and system information: DELL Precision 670 2 internal SATA Hard drives Audigy 2 ZS audio system Factory OS: Windows XP Professional SP3 NVidia 8400 GTS video card More info: williepabon@WP-WrkStation:~$ uname -a Linux WP-WrkStation 2.6.32-38-generic #83-Ubuntu SMP Wed Jan 4 11:13:04 UTC 2012 i686 GNU/Linux williepabon@WP-WrkStation:~$ lsb_release -a No LSB modules are available. Distributor ID: Ubuntu Description: Ubuntu 10.04.4 LTS Release: 10.04 Codename: lucid Speed test with the 3 Gigs of RAM installed: williepabon@WP-WrkStation:~$ sudo hdparm -tT /dev/sdc [sudo] password for williepabon: /dev/sdc: Timing cached reads: 84 MB in 2.00 seconds = 41.96 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 4 MB in 3.81 seconds = 1.05 MB/sec This is a very slow transfer rate from a hard drive. I will really appreciate a solution or a work around for this problem. I know that that there are users that have Ubuntu 10.04 with 3 Gigs or more of RAM and they don't have this problem. Same question asked on Launchpad for reference.

    Read the article

  • How to access an encrypted INI file from C on an embedded system with little RAM

    - by Mawg
    I want to encrypt an INI file using a Delphi program on a Windows PC. Then I need to decrypt & access it in C on an embedded system with little RAM. I will do that once & fetch all info; I will not be consutinuously accessing the INI file whenever my program needs data from the file. Any advice as to which encryption to use? Nothing too heavyweight, just good enough for "Security through obscurity" and FOSS for both Delphi & C. And how can I decrypt, get all the info from the INI file - using as little RAM as possible, and then free any allocated RAM? I hope that someone can help. [Update] I am currently using an Atmel UC3, although I am not sure if that will be the final case. It has 512kB falsh & 128kB RAM. For an INI file, I am talking of max 8 sections, with a total of max 256 entries, each max 8 chars. I chose INI (but am not married to it), because i have had major problems in the past when the format of a data fiel changes, no matter whether binary, or text. For tex, I prefer the free format of INI (on PC), but suppose I could switch to line_1=data_1, line_2=data_2 and accept that if I add new fields in future software erleases they must come at the end, even if it is not pretty when read directly by humans. I suppose if I choose a fixed format text file then I never need get more than one line into RAM at a time ...

    Read the article

  • Is it better to have more small ram chips or fewer large ones?

    - by Alex Andronov
    I am currently building a new server. I have options between say 32GB Memory for 2 CPUs, DDR3, 1066MHz (8x4GB Dual Ranked RDIMMs) and 36GB Memory for 2 CPUs, DDR3, 1066MHz (18x2GB Dual Ranked RDIMMs) Both at the same price. Should I go for the higher ram amount or the fewer chips? This will be for a Dell PowerEdge R710 with two Intel® Xeon® E5530, 2.4Ghz, 8MB Cache, 5.86 GT/s QPI, Turbo, HT Thanks

    Read the article

  • How large of a swap partition is needed to hibernate?

    - by Closure Cowboy
    I've read this question, but it doesn't definitively answer my question. If I want my computer to be able to hibernate, do I need to have a swap partition as large as my RAM, or will Ubuntu wisely be able to hibernate if the swap partition can fit the currently-in-use RAM? I'm about to install Ubuntu on a computer with a lot of RAM, and a relatively small hard drive, so I don't want to use more hard drive space than necessary. I wanted to avoid giving my actual specifications to keep this question more general, though I'll give them if necessary.

    Read the article

  • What makes an application memory bandwidth bound?

    - by TheLQ
    This has been something that's been bothering me for a while: What makes an application memory bandwidth bound? For example, take this monstrosity of a computer that calculated the 5 trillionth digit of pi (and later 10 trillionth digit). I was surprised that they choose the lower but faster 98 GB RAM at 1066 MHz instead of the larger but slower 144 GB at 800 MHz. This is especially surprising considering they are using 22 TB HD array to store the results from computation; more RAM means less need for hard drives. Maybe its because I don't write applications for HPC servers, but how would RAM be the bottleneck? Are there any other non-HPC applications that usually run into this problem?

    Read the article

  • Win7 recognizing 100% of my RAM some places, not others.

    - by stickynips
    Before you go blaming it on a 32bit OS, I'm running Win7 64bit. I have 4x 1GB sticks of RAM installed. I recently RMA'd one stick and installed the replacement. It would seem that parts of my system are recognizing it and others aren't. Both System Properties and dxdiag show the full 4GB, but task manager and rainmeter are only reporting 3GB. What's numbers should I trust and how can I fix this? Here's screenshots of what I'm seeing.

    Read the article

  • Where is my ram?

    - by gsedej
    I have 2GB installed on my machine running Ubuntu 12.04. After some time of use, I see much of my RAM used. The RAM does not free enough even though I closed all my programs. I included 2 screenshots. First is "Gnome system monitor" (all process) and second is "htop" (with sudo), both sorted by memory usage. From both you see, that it's not possible that all running apps takes together 1GB of memory. First 7 biggest programs sum 250, but others are much smaller (all can't sum even 100MB). The cache is 300MB (yellow ||| on htop) and is not included in 1GB used. Also 260MB is already on swap. (which actually makes 1,3GB of used memory) If i start Firefox (or Chrome) with many tabs, it has only 1GB available and not potentially 1,5 GB (assume 0,5GB is for system). When I need more ram, swapping happens. So where is my ram? Which program is using it? How can i free it, to be available for e.g. Firefox? Gnome system monitor htop

    Read the article

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

< Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >