Search Results

Search found 1529 results on 62 pages for 'bandwidth'.

Page 8/62 | < Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >

  • Equivalent of scp -l bandwidth_cap for .ssh/config?

    - by Mark Bennett
    Short form: You can limit the bandwidth the scp uses with the -l switch, you pass a number that's in kbits/sec. I'd rather set this in my .ssh/config file for certain names machines. What's the equivalent named setting for -l ? I haven't been able to find it. Followup question: Generally, not sure how to map back and forth between ssh command line options and config names, short of doing Google searches or manually comparing man pages on a case by case basis. Is there a table that directly equates the two? Longer form of first question, with context: I've started using ssh config quite a bit, especially now that I need to go through a proxy and do lots of port mappings. I even define the same machine more than once depending on what type of tunneling I need. However, when uploading a large file, it's difficult to do anything else on my machine. Even though I have more download bandwidth than up, I think that scp saturates the link so even my small requests can't reach the Internet. There's a fix for this, using the -l bandwidth command line switch for scp. scp -l 1000 bigfile.zip titan: I'd like to use this in my config instead, so I'd create an additional named entry called "titan-upload" and I'd use that as the target whenever I upload. So instead of: scp bigfile.zip titan: I'd say: scp bigfile.zip titan-upload Or even set different caps depending on where I am: scp bigfile.zip titan-upload-from-home vs. scp bigfile.zip titan-upload-from-work I'm generally on Mac and Linux.

    Read the article

  • Using multiple USB webcams in Linux

    - by rachelderp
    Running more than one USB webcam in Debian/Linux results in the the following error: libv4l2: error turning on stream: No space left on device VIDIOC_STREAMON: No space left on device What initially seemed to be a programming issue in OpenCV turned into a quest for a mysterious hardware/software problem after the same errors were produced by running cheese and xawtv. Apparently it's caused by webcams requesting all the available bandwidth on the USB host controller. With that in mind I decided to run wireshark and capinfos to see just how much bandwidth a single camera used. 4 megabits per second at 320x240 14 megabits per second at 640x480 32 megabits per second at 1920x1080 Interesting! That might explain why two cameras at 320x240 work but any higher resolution fails. It's as if my USB controller is only operating at USB 1 speeds, yet lsusb shows both webcams belonging to a device which supposedly supports 480 megabits per second. One solution proposed forcing the webcams to calculate their bandwidth usage instead of requesting their maximum by running the following commands: sudo rmmod uvcvideo sudo modprobe uvcvideo quirks=128 Unfortunately that made no difference, so I decided to try another solution. A post on StackOverflow suggested telling my webcams to use a lower FPS or compressed video format like MJPEG, but after running v4lctl list it doesn't appear either of my webcams support changing their video mode. And that's where I'm stuck. Why would two webcams operating well below the maximum speed of USB 2 would produce this error? ps: It's not a disk space issue, df displays no change when the webcams are started. pps: If it makes a difference, here's the output of lsusb

    Read the article

  • Bandwidth Control on our Internet Connection

    - by AlamedaDad
    Hi all, I have Covad dual/bonded T1 service in our office coming through a Cisco 1841 and then through a Sonicwall 3060Pro/Enhanced SW firewall. The problem I'm looking for some input on is how to limit the amount of bandwidth any single user/PC can user for downloading a file from the Internet. It's become an issue that when one person happens to download let's say an ~300MB file, normal internet access for the other employees slows to a crawl. I've seen through MRTG that in fact usage of the circuit jumps to the full 3mb for the duration of the download and then drops. Is it possible to control this? I'm not familiar with QOS or the like so I'm not sure. Any help on this would be appreciated. Thanks...Michael

    Read the article

  • Compare Your Internet Cost and Speed to Global Averages [Infographic]

    - by ETC
    Internet pricing and speed varies wildly across the world. The US, for instance, currently ranks 15th in speed but enjoys reasonably priced internet access. How reasonably priced? If you’re a US citizen you likely have an average internet access speed of 4.8 mbps and you pay a little over $3 per mbps. If you’re in Sweden, however, you likely have an 18 mbps connection and you pay a scant 63 cents per mpbs. The real envy of the internet speed Olympics by far is Japan with a mighty 61 mbps at a mere 27 cents per mbps. Hit up the link below for the full infographic (or use this local mirror if you need to dodge a firewall), then sound off in the comments with how you compare on the international scale. Internet Speeds and Costs Around the World [via Daily Infographic] Latest Features How-To Geek ETC Should You Delete Windows 7 Service Pack Backup Files to Save Space? What Can Super Mario Teach Us About Graphics Technology? Windows 7 Service Pack 1 is Released: But Should You Install It? How To Make Hundreds of Complex Photo Edits in Seconds With Photoshop Actions How to Enable User-Specific Wireless Networks in Windows 7 How to Use Google Chrome as Your Default PDF Reader (the Easy Way) Manage Your Favorite Social Accounts in Chrome and Iron with Seesmic E.T. II – Extinction [Fake Movie Sequel Video] Remastered King’s Quest Games Offer Classic Gaming on Modern Machines Compare Your Internet Cost and Speed to Global Averages [Infographic] Orbital Battle for Terra Wallpaper WizMouse Enables Mouse Over Scrolling on Any Window

    Read the article

  • Cost effective way to provide static media content

    - by james
    I'd like to be able to deliver around 50MB of static content, either in about 30 individual files up to 10MB or grouped into 3 compressed files, around 5k to 20k times a day. Ideally I'd like to put some sort of very basic security around providing the data to ensure that a request is from the expected source, but if tossing the security for a big reduction in price is possible then it's an option. Does anyone have any suggestions other than what I've found: Google AppEngine is $0.12/GB & I believe has a file size limit of 10MB so I'd have to break the data up a bit. So a rough calculation would seem to be that this would cost me about $30 to $120 a day. Or I've seen something like what seems to be just public static content delivery with no type of logic capabilities like Usenet.nl at what I think calculates to about $0.025/GB which would cost me about $6 to $25 a day. Any idea if I'm going about these calculations right & if there might be a better option for just static content on a decently high volume delivery? Again some basic security would be great but if cost is greatly reduced without it then I'm up for that.

    Read the article

  • Need to know who is hogging my bandwidth?

    - by Dev
    I have an ethernet connection to my iMac and with Internet sharing I am broadcasting the wireless network from my mac rather than using a wireless router. I use it to connect other devices wirelessly to the internet. But this makes all the traffic flow through my iMac. I wanted a way to analyze the traffic so that I know what connected devices are hogging the bandwidth at a given time and from which websites? I installed wireshark for mac and played around a little but it seems like an overkill when you first look at it. Can someone please help with few instructions to get what I need or any other way other than using wireshark? Thanks Dev.

    Read the article

  • rsync server side limit bandwidth/connection

    - by c2h2
    In a VOIP application, I have upto 3000 clients rsync audio files from there linux server in a daily, server is placed at a data center (10Mbps in/out bound), the server works as a VOIP sip server running FreeSWITCH (low ping latency should be ensured.) Therefore I would like to have server side control of rsync which controls: Limit total outbound bandwidth. Limit total number of connections. (Reject clients while at max number of connection and let it retry after a specific time frame.) OPTIONAL: list/kill individual connections. Normally I would use ssh + rsync + pem_keys with some extra options, but above requirements are not feasible by simple command lines. Can anyone point me some direction. or show some scripts/tools? I would also probably integrate them and release on github. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Help w/ error "Account exceeded bandwidth limits" Thunderbird 3 + Gmail

    - by boo
    Over the past two days I have been receiving the following message on a new computer running Windows 7: Account exceeded bandwidth limits. (Failure) Whenever I try to access my emails through Thunderbird, this is followed by: Login to server imap.gmail.com failed. Credentials are correct as I have access via HTTP. And then it requests me to enter my password (I have also unlocked the captcha on this account, but this didn't stop any error messages) I'm looking for a details on why this is happening, to prevent it from reoccurring, such as whether this is specific to something in Thunderbird 3 or google?

    Read the article

  • Help w/ error "Account exceeded bandwidth limits" Thunderbird 3 + Gmail

    - by boo
    Over the past two days I have been receiving the following message on a new computer running Windows 7: Account exceeded bandwidth limits. (Failure) Whenever I try to access my emails through Thunderbird, this is followed by: Login to server imap.gmail.com failed. Credentials are correct as I have access via HTTP. And then it requests me to enter my password (I have also unlocked the captcha on this account, but this didn't stop any error messages) I'm looking for a details on why this is happening, to prevent it from reoccurring, such as whether this is specific to something in Thunderbird 3 or google?

    Read the article

  • How can you monitor internet download usage?

    - by dv3500ea
    Some broadband providers impose a monthly download limit, charging extra if you go over. It is also quite easy to exceed some of the lower limits just by installing/updating packages and 'normal' browsing (which to me includes streaming TV programs and movies). This means that you need to limit the amount you use the internet, yet it is hard to know when. The System Monitor helps a bit with this by giving a total received/total sent in the networking section of the Resources tab. However, this is reset every reboot. It would be good if there was a way to have a monthly total received so you can know how close you are to exceeding your limit and maybe even be given warnings if it looks like you are going to exceed the limits. Does anyone know of a way to achieve this?

    Read the article

  • Increasing link speed on OpenVPN (bandwidth)

    - by Mike
    I have bought a tunnel service by using OpenVPN. For a year I've had 10 Mbps max upload/download speed but now I've bought an additional 20 Mbps making the available total bandwidth 30 Mbps for me. On their homepage there are some controls available for me, for example to restart the tunnel. I've done that. It also says that the speed has indeed been upgraded to 30 Mbps on their page. I also got an email that said they have upgraded the speed. However after I reboot my machine, and OpenVPN has started up and is running as usual, when I look at the Windows Task Manager (opens when pressing CTRL+SHIFT+ESC) in the "Networking" tab I still have a link speed of only 10 Mbps. Two adapters are listed: Local Area Connection 4 (10 Mbps) and Local Area Connection 5 (100 Mbps). LAC5 is my "real" adapter, I have a 100 Mbps Internet connection if I don't use a tunnel. LAC3 is the virtual adapter used by OpenVPN. The problem is that it is still showing 10 Mbps even though I have upgraded to 30 Mbps. How can I fix this?

    Read the article

  • Y560 Lenovo IdeaPad bandwidth issue

    - by Vlakarados
    I have a Y560 Lenovo IdeaPad, my config: i7 740QM, 4GB RAM, RADEON HD 6570m/5700 1024MB and my network adapter is Intel WIFI Link 5150. The laptop is 2 years old and the problem I'm about to describe is present from the first day. As may be seen here, the receive bandwidth should be up to 300 Mbps, but the maximum download speed from LAN and using torrents is about 2.4MB/s. My internet connection is 100Mbps and other laptops in my house have the appropriate download speed - up to 12MB/s, I have tested at my friends house and at my job, the speed remains the same. I have tried all possible configurations I could think of in network settings - nothing helps. I use Windows 7 and I have had installed different versions (Ultimate, Professional, Home, OEM Home, 64 and 32 bit versions). Some time ago I searched for the problem and found one or two threads that had the same problem and there were something said about a limitation in firmware that some experienced users have managed to bypass. Updating drivers didn't help me either. Is there any reliable way to fix this?

    Read the article

  • Memory Bandwidth Performance for Modern Machines

    - by porgarmingduod
    I'm designing a real-time system that occasionally has to duplicate a large amount of memory. The memory consists of non-tiny regions, so I expect the copying performance will be fairly close to the maximum bandwidth the relevant components (CPU, RAM, MB) can do. This led me to wonder what kind of raw memory bandwidth modern commodity machine can muster? My aging Core2Duo gives me 1.5 GB/s if I use 1 thread to memcpy() (and understandably less if I memcpy() with both cores simultaneously.) While 1.5 GB is a fair amount of data, the real-time application I'm working on will have have something like 1/50th of a second, which means 30 MB. Basically, almost nothing. And perhaps worst of all, as I add multiple cores, I can process a lot more data without any increased performance for the needed duplication step. But a low-end Core2Due isn't exactly hot stuff these days. Are there any sites with information, such as actual benchmarks, on raw memory bandwidth on current and near-future hardware? Furthermore, for duplicating large amounts of data in memory, are there any shortcuts, or is memcpy() as good as it will get? Given a bunch of cores with nothing to do but duplicate as much memory as possible in a short amount of time, what's the best I can do?

    Read the article

  • Does Windows DFS always keep some files backlogged?

    - by Badger
    I have been monitoring our DFS backlog and I have noticed that is hasn't really dropped below 1000 or so files. I am assuming this means it needs to use more bandwidth. So starting last night I allowed it to use 512Kbps between 6pm and 4am, when it used to only get 128Kbps. I noticed a large drop, but it never went below about 1500 files. I just want to be sure my conclusion about needing to use more bandwidth is correct before I tell my boss about it. I have included a graph of the data showing my stats from yesterday afternoon and last night. DFS Backlog Graph

    Read the article

  • Downloads speed starts ok but after a few seconds they go down to 10kbps?

    - by peterg
    Since yesterday any file I try to download from any host start downloading ok (at 1mbps) but after a few seconds the speed start to decrease down to 10kbps. I use a mobile modem (huawei) and I connect to a wcdma network. What could be happening? I use kaspersky, and I checked the Network Monitor and I don't see any weird process using bandwidth. What other tests can I run? Recommend me some app to monitor the traffic to see if I have some malware or see where my bandwidth goes.

    Read the article

  • How is it possible for SSD's drives to have such a good latency?

    - by tigrou
    First time i read some information about SSD's, i was surprised to learn they internally use NAND flash chips. This kind of memory is generally slow (low bandwidth) and have high latency while SSD's are just the opposite. But here is how it works : SSD drives increase their bandwidth by using several NAND flash chips in parallel. In other words, they do some data striping (aka RAID0) across several chips (done by the controller). What i don't understand is how SSD's drives have such a low latency, whereas they are using NAND chips? (or at least lot better than what a typical single NAND chip would do) EDIT: I think under-estimate NAND chip capabilities. USB drives, while powered by NAND's are mostly limited by USB protocol (which have a pretty high latency) and the USB controller. That explain their poor performance in some cases.

    Read the article

  • How SSD's drives reduce their latency?

    - by tigrou
    First time i read some information about SSD's, i was surprised to learn they internally use NAND flash chips. This kind of memory is generally slow (low bandwidth) and have high latency while SSD's are just the opposite. But here is how it works : SSD drives increase their bandwidth by using several NAND flash chips in parallel. In other words, they do some data striping (aka RAID0) across several chips (done by the controller). What i don't understand is how SSD's drives managed to reduce latency? (or at least lot better than what a single NAND chip without any controller can do)

    Read the article

  • AMD 24 core server memory bandwidth

    - by ntherning
    I need some help to determine whether the memory bandwidth I'm seeing under Linux on my server is normal or not. Here's the server spec: HP ProLiant DL165 G7 2x AMD Opteron 6164 HE 12-Core 40 GB RAM (10 x 4GB DDR1333) Debian 6.0 Using mbw on this server I get the following numbers: foo1:~# mbw -n 3 1024 Long uses 8 bytes. Allocating 2*134217728 elements = 2147483648 bytes of memory. Using 262144 bytes as blocks for memcpy block copy test. Getting down to business... Doing 3 runs per test. 0 Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.58047 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 1764.082 MiB/s 1 Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.58012 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 1765.152 MiB/s 2 Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.58010 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 1765.201 MiB/s AVG Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.58023 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 1764.811 MiB/s 0 Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.36174 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 2830.778 MiB/s 1 Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.35869 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 2854.817 MiB/s 2 Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.35848 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 2856.481 MiB/s AVG Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.35964 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 2847.310 MiB/s 0 Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.23546 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 4348.860 MiB/s 1 Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.23544 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 4349.230 MiB/s 2 Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.23544 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 4349.359 MiB/s AVG Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.23545 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 4349.149 MiB/s On one of my other servers (based on Intel Xeon E3-1270): foo2:~# mbw -n 3 1024 Long uses 8 bytes. Allocating 2*134217728 elements = 2147483648 bytes of memory. Using 262144 bytes as blocks for memcpy block copy test. Getting down to business... Doing 3 runs per test. 0 Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.18960 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 5400.901 MiB/s 1 Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.18922 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 5411.690 MiB/s 2 Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.18944 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 5405.491 MiB/s AVG Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.18942 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 5406.024 MiB/s 0 Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.14838 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 6901.200 MiB/s 1 Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.14818 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 6910.561 MiB/s 2 Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.14820 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 6909.628 MiB/s AVG Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.14825 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 6907.127 MiB/s 0 Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.04362 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 23477.623 MiB/s 1 Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.04262 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 24025.151 MiB/s 2 Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.04258 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 24048.849 MiB/s AVG Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.04294 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 23847.599 MiB/s For reference here's what I get on my Intel based laptop: laptop:~$ mbw -n 3 1024 Long uses 8 bytes. Allocating 2*134217728 elements = 2147483648 bytes of memory. Using 262144 bytes as blocks for memcpy block copy test. Getting down to business... Doing 3 runs per test. 0 Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.40566 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 2524.269 MiB/s 1 Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.38458 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 2662.638 MiB/s 2 Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.38876 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 2634.043 MiB/s AVG Method: MEMCPY Elapsed: 0.39300 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 2605.600 MiB/s 0 Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.30707 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 3334.745 MiB/s 1 Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.30425 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 3365.653 MiB/s 2 Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.30342 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 3374.849 MiB/s AVG Method: DUMB Elapsed: 0.30491 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 3358.328 MiB/s 0 Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.07875 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 13003.670 MiB/s 1 Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.08374 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 12228.034 MiB/s 2 Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.07635 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 13411.216 MiB/s AVG Method: MCBLOCK Elapsed: 0.07961 MiB: 1024.00000 Copy: 12862.006 MiB/s So according to mbw my laptop is 3 times faster than the server!!! Please help me explain this. I've also tried to mount a ram disk and use dd to benchmark it and I get similar differences so I don't think mbw is to blame. I've checked the BIOS settings and the memory seem to be running at full speed. According to the hosting company the modules are all OK. Could this have something to do with NUMA? It seems like Node Interleaving is disabled on this server. Will enabling it (thus turning off NUMA) make a difference? foo1:~# numactl --hardware available: 4 nodes (0-3) node 0 cpus: 0 1 2 3 4 5 node 0 size: 8190 MB node 0 free: 7898 MB node 1 cpus: 6 7 8 9 10 11 node 1 size: 12288 MB node 1 free: 12073 MB node 2 cpus: 18 19 20 21 22 23 node 2 size: 12288 MB node 2 free: 12034 MB node 3 cpus: 12 13 14 15 16 17 node 3 size: 8192 MB node 3 free: 8032 MB node distances: node 0 1 2 3 0: 10 20 20 20 1: 20 10 20 20 2: 20 20 10 20 3: 20 20 20 10

    Read the article

  • Does this prove a network bandwidth bottleneck?

    - by Yuji Tomita
    I've incorrectly assumed that my internal AB testing means my server can handle 1k concurrency @3k hits per second. My theory at at the moment is that the network is the bottleneck. The server can't send enough data fast enough. External testing from blitz.io at 1k concurrency shows my hits/s capping off at 180, with pages taking longer and longer to respond as the server is only able to return 180 per second. I've served a blank file from nginx and benched it: it scales 1:1 with concurrency. Now to rule out IO / memcached bottlenecks (nginx normally pulls from memcached), I serve up a static version of the cached page from the filesystem. The results are very similar to my original test; I'm capped at around 180 RPS. Splitting the HTML page in half gives me double the RPS, so it's definitely limited by the size of the page. If I internally ApacheBench from the local server, I get consistent results of around 4k RPS on both the Full Page and the Half Page, at high transfer rates. Transfer rate: 62586.14 [Kbytes/sec] received If I AB from an external server, I get around 180RPS - same as the blitz.io results. How do I know it's not intentional throttling? If I benchmark from multiple external servers, all results become poor which leads me to believe the problem is in MY servers outbound traffic, not a download speed issue with my benchmarking servers / blitz.io. So I'm back to my conclusion that my server can't send data fast enough. Am I right? Are there other ways to interpret this data? Is the solution/optimization to set up multiple servers + load balancing that can each serve 180 hits per second? I'm quite new to server optimization, so I'd appreciate any confirmation interpreting this data. Outbound traffic Here's more information about the outbound bandwidth: The network graph shows a maximum output of 16 Mb/s: 16 megabits per second. Doesn't sound like much at all. Due to a suggestion about throttling, I looked into this and found that linode has a 50mbps cap (which I'm not even close to hitting, apparently). I had it raised to 100mbps. Since linode caps my traffic, and I'm not even hitting it, does this mean that my server should indeed be capable of outputting up to 100mbps but is limited by some other internal bottleneck? I just don't understand how networks at this large of a scale work; can they literally send data as fast as they can read from the HDD? Is the network pipe that big? In conclusion 1: Based on the above, I'm thinking I can definitely raise my 180RPS by adding an nginx load balancer on top of a multi nginx server setup at exactly 180RPS per server behind the LB. 2: If linode has a 50/100mbit limit that I'm not hitting at all, there must be something I can do to hit that limit with my single server setup. If I can read / transmit data fast enough locally, and linode even bothers to have a 50mbit/100mbit cap, there must be an internal bottleneck that's not allowing me to hit those caps that I'm not sure how to detect. Correct? I realize the question is huge and vague now, but I'm not sure how to condense it. Any input is appreciated on any conclusion I've made.

    Read the article

  • big speed difference on a network link with and without VPN tunnel

    - by xirtyllo
    Scenario: We have a network link between two offices. The link is provided by a third party company through a VLAN on their network, but to us it is totally transparent -as if we had a simple ethernet cable going from one location to the other-. We have one router at each side of the link, with 3 VPN tunnels in between the two. The test: When I test the speed of the network link with the routers in place, with one laptop directly connected to the router on each side, I consistently get ~30/35Mbps. But if I take out the routers and I test the link connecting the laptops directly to the ethernet cable at each side, I consistently get ~85/88Mbps. It's quite a big performance hit, and I would tend to think that the VPN tunnels are responsible for the slow down. Is it normal that this configuration (two routers with three VPN tunnels between them) takes away so much bandwidth? More info: The encryption algorithm used for the VPN tunnels is AES128. The routers model is Zyxel USG200 and Zyxel USG1000, and their CPU, memory, and storage use is well within normal limits. The nominal bandwidth of the network link is 100Mbps. The network link in question is supplied by a third party company (the building in between our two offices). Basically it passes through their network as a VLAN, but the VLAN is completely transparent to us (e.g. no configuration required on our side, just like one single cable from end to end). Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately) I cannot directly test different routers configurations as I'm not the person in charge of it.

    Read the article

  • Server suffering serious speed drop

    - by Tar
    As you can see from the picture http://i.imgur.com/UpDZh.png), my server is suffering a serious drop in speed. This is intermittent and has been happening for the past 3 or 4 hours. The server has 1gbps uplink so I can't figure out why it's happening. Checking bandwidth monitoring tools like bwm-ng and dstat show normal speeds of like 150kb/s outbound traffic. Just now I was completely disconnected from SSH.

    Read the article

  • Limiting interface bandwidth with tc under Linux

    - by Matt
    I have a linux router which has a 10GBe interface on the outside and bonded Gigabit ethernet interfaces on the inside. We have currently budget for 2GBit/s. If we exceed that rate by more than 5% average for a month then we'll be charged for the whole 10Gbit/s capacity. Quite a step up in dollar terms. So, I want to limit this to 2GBit/s on 10GBe interface. TBF filter might be ideal, but this comment is of concern. On all platforms except for Alpha, it is able to shape up to 1mbit/s of normal traffic with ideal minimal burstiness, sending out data exactly at the configured rates. Should I be using TBF or some other filter to apply this rate to the interface and how would I do it. I don't understand the example given here: Traffic Control HOWTO In particular "Example 9. Creating a 256kbit/s TBF" tc qdisc add dev eth0 handle 1:0 root dsmark indices 1 default_index 0 tc qdisc add dev eth0 handle 2:0 parent 1:0 tbf burst 20480 limit 20480 mtu 1514 rate 32000bps How is the 256K bit/s rate calculated? In this example, 32000bps = 32k bytes per second. Since tc uses bps = bytes per second. I guess burst and limit come into play but how would you go about choosing sensible numbers to reach the desired rate? This is not a mistake. I tested this and it gave a rate close to 256K but not exactly that.

    Read the article

  • How much bandwidth does my server require?

    - by Jagira
    Hello, I have blog + website hosted on Godaddy server. I get somewhere around 50k hits a day. I was thinking of hosting it on my own. I want to know whether a 2mbps connection is sufficient or not? Somebody with self-hosting experience please guide...

    Read the article

  • Wireless mouse keeps freezing when using whole network bandwidth

    - by Ümit AKKAYA
    Hi i have wireless mouse and keyboard connected to pc with USB receiver. When i downloading something without limiting download speed, mouse and keyboard keep freezing randomly. Mouse : Microsoft Wireless Mouse 5000 Keyboard : Microsoft keyboard 3000 v2 Chipset : Intel HM65 Processor : Intel Core i7 2670QM @ 2200MHz Physical Memory : 8192MB (2 x 4096 DDR3-SDRAM) OS : Win 7 x64 Note : The solution described in http://superuser.com/a/309622/157168 not helped.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >