Search Results

Search found 2417 results on 97 pages for 'mb'.

Page 8/97 | < Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >

  • rsync problems and security concerns

    - by MB.
    Hi I am attempting to use rsync to copy files between two linux servers. both on 10.04.4 I have set up the ssh and a script running under a cron job. this is the message i get back from the cron job. To: mark@ubuntu Subject: Cron ~/rsync.sh Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ANSI_X3.4-1968 X-Cron-Env: X-Cron-Env: X-Cron-Env: X-Cron-Env: Message-Id: <20120708183802.E0D54FC2C0@ubuntu Date: Sun, 8 Jul 2012 14:38:01 -0400 (EDT) rsync: link_stat "/home/mark/#342#200#223rsh=ssh" failed: No such file or directory (2) rsync: opendir "/Library/WebServer/Documents/.cache" failed: Permission denied (13) rsync: recv_generator: mkdir "/Library/Library" failed: Permission denied (13) * Skipping any contents from this failed directory * rsync error: some files/attrs were not transferred (see previous errors) (code 23) at main.c(1060) [sender=3.0.7] Q.1 can anyone tell me why I get this message -- rsync: link_stat "/home/mark/#342#200#223rsh=ssh" failed: No such file or directory (2) the script is: #!/bin/bash SOURCEPATH='/Library' DESTPATH='/Library' DESTHOST='192.168.1.15' DESTUSER='mark' LOGFILE='rsync.log' echo $'\n\n' >> $LOGFILE rsync -av –rsh=ssh $SOURCEPATH $DESTUSER@$DESTHOST:$DESTPATH 2>&1 >> $LOGFILE echo “Completed at: `/bin/date`” >> $LOGFILE Q2. I know I have several problems with the permissions all of the files I am copying usually require me to use sudo to manipulate them. My question is then is there a way i can run this job without giving my user root access or using root in the login ?? Thanks for the help .

    Read the article

  • Replace dual-XP installs with single-XP install and repartition drive?

    - by caeious
    Hello, The Current Situation I have a hard drive that currently is split up like so: Primary Partition C: 9.77 GB NTFS Healthy (System) with XP Pro (in Polish) installed Extended Partition D: 39.82 GB NTFS Healthy (Boot) with XP Pro (in English) installed 6.30 GB Free space When I start my comuter I get a black and white Windows Boot Manager dual boot screen with 2 choices both being Microsoft Windows XP. The first choice is the English version of XP and the second choice is the Polish version of XP. Images of my Computer Management window and Dual Boot screen The Mission What I need to do is get rid of the entire extended partition (D: 39.82 GB & 6.30 free space) and just have the one primary C: drive which I assume will be somewheres around 55 GB big. So in the end I just want XP Pro in English running on my C: drive and no black and white boot screen to show up when starting up my laptop. The Question How do I go about successfully completing The Mission with out making my computer a useless pile of silicon, plastic and metal? UPDATE: So I went ahead and tried to follow Neal's suggestion but hit a wall. I got to a Windows XP Pro install screen that had the 3 following options as well as my drive data: To set up Windows XP on the selected item, press Enter To create a partition in the unpartitioned space, press C To delete the selected partition, press D 57232 MB Disk 0 at Id 0 on bus 0 on atapi [MBR] C: Partition1 [NTFS] 10001 MB ( 4642 MB free ) Unpartitioned space 6448 MB D: Partition2 [NTFS] 40774 MB ( 26225 MB free ) Unpartitioned space 8 MB I figured I would go with the first choice ((To set up Windows XP on the selected item, press Enter)) because I just wanted to set up Windows XP on C: Partition1 (which was preselected) so I pressed Enter which brought me to a screen displaying this message: You chose to install Windows XP on a partition that contains another operating system. Installing Windows XP on this partition might cause the other operating system to function improperly. CAUTION: Installing multiple operating systems on a single partition is not recommended. So this leads me to 2 new questions: How do I get rid of the Windows XP (Polish language) install on C: Partition 1 so that I can cleanly and safely install Windows XP (English language) on it? Neal, is this what you meant by me possibly having to delete the partition that the Windows XP (Polish language) install was located on? Since I have the option to delete partitions with the 3rd choice ((To delete the selected partition, press D)), should I do that on this screen or wait until I have Windows XP (English language) safely installed on C: Partition 1? I have to ask these questions because I have read that it is possibly dangerous to delete hard drive partitions. Just being cautious.

    Read the article

  • Why do I see a large performance hit with DRBD?

    - by BHS
    I see a much larger performance hit with DRBD than their user manual says I should get. I'm using DRBD 8.3.7 (Fedora 13 RPMs). I've setup a DRBD test and measured throughput of disk and network without DRBD: dd if=/dev/zero of=/data.tmp bs=512M count=1 oflag=direct 536870912 bytes (537 MB) copied, 4.62985 s, 116 MB/s / is a logical volume on the disk I'm testing with, mounted without DRBD iperf: [ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 1.10 GBytes 941 Mbits/sec According to Throughput overhead expectations, the bottleneck would be whichever is slower, the network or the disk and DRBD should have an overhead of 3%. In my case network and I/O seem to be pretty evenly matched. It sounds like I should be able to get around 100 MB/s. So, with the raw drbd device, I get dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/drbd2 bs=512M count=1 oflag=direct 536870912 bytes (537 MB) copied, 6.61362 s, 81.2 MB/s which is slower than I would expect. Then, once I format the device with ext4, I get dd if=/dev/zero of=/mnt/data.tmp bs=512M count=1 oflag=direct 536870912 bytes (537 MB) copied, 9.60918 s, 55.9 MB/s This doesn't seem right. There must be some other factor playing into this that I'm not aware of. global_common.conf global { usage-count yes; } common { protocol C; } syncer { al-extents 1801; rate 33M; } data_mirror.res resource data_mirror { device /dev/drbd1; disk /dev/sdb1; meta-disk internal; on cluster1 { address 192.168.33.10:7789; } on cluster2 { address 192.168.33.12:7789; } } For the hardware I have two identical machines: 6 GB RAM Quad core AMD Phenom 3.2Ghz Motherboard SATA controller 7200 RPM 64MB cache 1TB WD drive The network is 1Gb connected via a switch. I know that a direct connection is recommended, but could it make this much of a difference? Edited I just tried monitoring the bandwidth used to try to see what's happening. I used ibmonitor and measured average bandwidth while I ran the dd test 10 times. I got: avg ~450Mbits writing to ext4 avg ~800Mbits writing to raw device It looks like with ext4, drbd is using about half the bandwidth it uses with the raw device so there's a bottleneck that is not the network.

    Read the article

  • OpenVPN bridged not pinging beyond openvpn server on Ubuntu/Windows 2003

    - by ani
    I set up an OpenVPN server using Ubuntu and a windows server 2003 client to interconnect two networks between two different offices. They can now ping each other, but the rest of the network cannot be contacted by the windows client. Office 1 has internal network of: 192.168.0.0 255.255.240.0 Office 2 has internal network of: 192.168.16.0 255.255.255.0 And the configuration files are: Server.conf port 1194 --script-security 2 up "/etc/openvpn/up.sh br0" down "/etc/openvpn/down.sh br0" # TCP or UDP server? ;proto tcp proto udp dev tap0 ;dev tun ca ca.crt cert openvpn.crt key openvpn.key dh dh1024.pem ifconfig-pool-persist ipp.txt server-bridge 192.168.0.59 255.255.240.0 192.168.6.72 192.168.6.75 push "route 192.168.0.0 255.255.240.0" push "dhcp-option DNS 192.168.0.2" push "dhcp-option DOMAIN testeers.local" keepalive 10 120 tls-auth ta.key 0 # This file is secret comp-lzo user nobody group nogroup persist-key persist-tun log /var/log/openvpn/openvpn.log status /var/log/openvpn-status.log verb 3 Client Config file client dev tap ;dev tun --script-security 2 ;proto tcp proto udp remote 1xx.2xx.xxx.124 1194 resolv-retry infinite nobind persist-key persist-tun ca ca.crt cert admin-VAIO.crt key admin-VAIO.key ns-cert-type server tls-auth ta.key 1 comp-lzo verb 3 Ifconfig on the server now shows the following: br0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:50:56:8b:1a:49 inet addr:192.168.0.59 Bcast:192.168.15.255 Mask:255.255.240.0 inet6 addr: fe80::250:56ff:fe8b:1a49/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:1081860 errors:0 dropped:1358 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:242385 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:76600615 (76.6 MB) TX bytes:64474575 (64.4 MB) eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:50:56:8b:1a:49 UP BROADCAST RUNNING PROMISC MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:1144125 errors:0 dropped:7172 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:252486 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:109893729 (109.8 MB) TX bytes:66372620 (66.3 MB) lo Link encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 RX packets:67865 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:67865 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:5183276 (5.1 MB) TX bytes:5183276 (5.1 MB) tap0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 32:4f:42:11:b7:c5 inet6 addr: fe80::304f:42ff:fe11:b7c5/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING PROMISC MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:3329 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:215472 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:100 RX bytes:373205 (373.2 KB) TX bytes:17465832 (17.4 MB)

    Read the article

  • .net famework 4 total application deployment size

    - by kzen
    After watching in horror as the .net framework 3.5 SP1 bloated to whopping 231 MB I was amazed to see that .NET Framework 4 Full (x86) is only 35 MB and client profile just 29 MB... My question is if .NET Framework 4 is in any way dependent on previous versions of the framework(s) being installed on the client machine or if my users will have to download only 29 (or 35) MB if I develop a Winforms or WPF desktop application in VS 2010 targeting the .NET Framework 4?

    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

  • 2 drives, slow software RAID1 (md)

    - by bart613
    Hello, I've got a server from hetzner.de (EQ4) with 2* SAMSUNG HD753LJ drives (750G 32MB cache). OS is CentOS 5 (x86_64). Drives are combined together into two RAID1 partitions: /dev/md0 which is 512MB big and has only /boot partitions /dev/md1 which is over 700GB big and is one big LVM which hosts other partitions Now, I've been running some benchmarks and it seems like even though exactly the same drives, speed differs a bit on each of them. # hdparm -tT /dev/sda /dev/sda: Timing cached reads: 25612 MB in 1.99 seconds = 12860.70 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 352 MB in 3.01 seconds = 116.80 MB/sec # hdparm -tT /dev/sdb /dev/sdb: Timing cached reads: 25524 MB in 1.99 seconds = 12815.99 MB/sec Timing buffered disk reads: 342 MB in 3.01 seconds = 113.64 MB/sec Also, when I run eg. pgbench which is stressing IO quite heavily, I can see following from iostat output: Device: rrqm/s wrqm/s r/s w/s rsec/s wsec/s avgrq-sz avgqu-sz await svctm %util sda 0.00 231.40 0.00 298.00 0.00 9683.20 32.49 0.17 0.58 0.34 10.24 sda1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sda2 0.00 231.40 0.00 298.00 0.00 9683.20 32.49 0.17 0.58 0.34 10.24 sdb 0.00 231.40 0.00 301.80 0.00 9740.80 32.28 14.19 51.17 3.10 93.68 sdb1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sdb2 0.00 231.40 0.00 301.80 0.00 9740.80 32.28 14.19 51.17 3.10 93.68 md1 0.00 0.00 0.00 529.60 0.00 9692.80 18.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 md0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 dm-0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.60 0.00 4.80 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 dm-1 0.00 0.00 0.00 529.00 0.00 9688.00 18.31 24.51 49.91 1.81 95.92 Device: rrqm/s wrqm/s r/s w/s rsec/s wsec/s avgrq-sz avgqu-sz await svctm %util sda 0.00 152.40 0.00 330.60 0.00 5176.00 15.66 0.19 0.57 0.19 6.24 sda1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sda2 0.00 152.40 0.00 330.60 0.00 5176.00 15.66 0.19 0.57 0.19 6.24 sdb 0.00 152.40 0.00 326.20 0.00 5118.40 15.69 19.96 55.36 3.01 98.16 sdb1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sdb2 0.00 152.40 0.00 326.20 0.00 5118.40 15.69 19.96 55.36 3.01 98.16 md1 0.00 0.00 0.00 482.80 0.00 5166.40 10.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 md0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 dm-0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 dm-1 0.00 0.00 0.00 482.80 0.00 5166.40 10.70 30.19 56.92 2.05 99.04 Device: rrqm/s wrqm/s r/s w/s rsec/s wsec/s avgrq-sz avgqu-sz await svctm %util sda 0.00 181.64 0.00 324.55 0.00 5445.11 16.78 0.15 0.45 0.21 6.87 sda1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sda2 0.00 181.64 0.00 324.55 0.00 5445.11 16.78 0.15 0.45 0.21 6.87 sdb 0.00 181.84 0.00 328.54 0.00 5493.01 16.72 18.34 61.57 3.01 99.00 sdb1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sdb2 0.00 181.84 0.00 328.54 0.00 5493.01 16.72 18.34 61.57 3.01 99.00 md1 0.00 0.00 0.00 506.39 0.00 5477.05 10.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 md0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 dm-0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 dm-1 0.00 0.00 0.00 506.39 0.00 5477.05 10.82 28.77 62.15 1.96 99.00 And this is completely getting me confused. How come two exactly the same specced drives have such a difference in write speed (see util%)? I haven't really paid attention to those speeds before, so perhaps that something normal -- if someone could confirm I would be really grateful. Otherwise, if someone have seen such behavior again or knows what is causing such behavior I would really appreciate answer. I'll also add that both "smartctl -a" and "hdparm -I" output are exactly the same and are not indicating any hardware problems. The slower drive was changed already two times (to new ones). Also I asked to change the drives with places, and then sda were slower and sdb quicker (so the slow one was the same drive). SATA cables were changed two times already.

    Read the article

  • Linux software RAID6: rebuild slow

    - by Ole Tange
    I am trying to find the bottleneck in the rebuilding of a software raid6. ## Pause rebuilding when measuring raw I/O performance # echo 1 > /proc/sys/dev/raid/speed_limit_min # echo 1 > /proc/sys/dev/raid/speed_limit_max ## Drop caches so that does not interfere with measuring # sync ; echo 3 | tee /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches >/dev/null # time parallel -j0 "dd if=/dev/{} bs=256k count=4000 | cat >/dev/null" ::: sdbd sdbc sdbf sdbm sdbl sdbk sdbe sdbj sdbh sdbg 4000+0 records in 4000+0 records out 1048576000 bytes (1.0 GB) copied, 7.30336 s, 144 MB/s [... similar for each disk ...] # time parallel -j0 "dd if=/dev/{} skip=15000000 bs=256k count=4000 | cat >/dev/null" ::: sdbd sdbc sdbf sdbm sdbl sdbk sdbe sdbj sdbh sdbg 4000+0 records in 4000+0 records out 1048576000 bytes (1.0 GB) copied, 12.7991 s, 81.9 MB/s [... similar for each disk ...] So we can read sequentially at 140 MB/s in the outer tracks and 82 MB/s in the inner tracks on all the drives simultaneously. Sequential write performance is similar. This would lead me to expect a rebuild speed of 82 MB/s or more. # echo 800000 > /proc/sys/dev/raid/speed_limit_min # echo 800000 > /proc/sys/dev/raid/speed_limit_max # cat /proc/mdstat md2 : active raid6 sdbd[10](S) sdbc[9] sdbf[0] sdbm[8] sdbl[7] sdbk[6] sdbe[11] sdbj[4] sdbi[3](F) sdbh[2] sdbg[1] 27349121408 blocks super 1.2 level 6, 128k chunk, algorithm 2 [9/8] [UUU_UUUUU] [=========>...........] recovery = 47.3% (1849905884/3907017344) finish=855.9min speed=40054K/sec But we only get 40 MB/s. And often this drops to 30 MB/s. # iostat -dkx 1 sdbc 0.00 8023.00 0.00 329.00 0.00 33408.00 203.09 0.70 2.12 1.06 34.80 sdbd 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 sdbe 13.00 0.00 8334.00 0.00 33388.00 0.00 8.01 0.65 0.08 0.06 47.20 sdbf 0.00 0.00 8348.00 0.00 33388.00 0.00 8.00 0.58 0.07 0.06 48.00 sdbg 16.00 0.00 8331.00 0.00 33388.00 0.00 8.02 0.71 0.09 0.06 48.80 sdbh 961.00 0.00 8314.00 0.00 37100.00 0.00 8.92 0.93 0.11 0.07 54.80 sdbj 70.00 0.00 8276.00 0.00 33384.00 0.00 8.07 0.78 0.10 0.06 48.40 sdbk 124.00 0.00 8221.00 0.00 33380.00 0.00 8.12 0.88 0.11 0.06 47.20 sdbl 83.00 0.00 8262.00 0.00 33380.00 0.00 8.08 0.96 0.12 0.06 47.60 sdbm 0.00 0.00 8344.00 0.00 33376.00 0.00 8.00 0.56 0.07 0.06 47.60 iostat says the disks are not 100% busy (but only 40-50%). This fits with the hypothesis that the max is around 80 MB/s. Since this is software raid the limiting factor could be CPU. top says: PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 38520 root 20 0 0 0 0 R 64 0.0 2947:50 md2_raid6 6117 root 20 0 0 0 0 D 53 0.0 473:25.96 md2_resync So md2_raid6 and md2_resync are clearly busy taking up 64% and 53% of a CPU respectively, but not near 100%. The chunk size (128k) of the RAID was chosen after measuring which chunksize gave the least CPU penalty. If this speed is normal: What is the limiting factor? Can I measure that? If this speed is not normal: How can I find the limiting factor? Can I change that?

    Read the article

  • SQL IO and SAN troubles

    - by James
    We are running two servers with identical software setup but different hardware. The first one is a VM on VMWare on a normal tower server with dual core xeons, 16 GB RAM and a 7200 RPM drive. The second one is a VM on XenServer on a powerful brand new rack server, with 4 core xeons and shared storage. We are running Dynamics AX 2012 and SQL Server 2008 R2. When I insert 15 000 records into a table on the slow tower server (as a test), it does so in 13 seconds. On the fast server it takes 33 seconds. I re-ran these tests several times with the same results. I have a feeling it is some sort of IO bottleneck, so I ran SQLIO on both. Here are the results for the slow tower server: C:\Program Files (x86)\SQLIO>test.bat C:\Program Files (x86)\SQLIO>sqlio -kW -t8 -s120 -o8 -frandom -b8 -BH -LS C:\Tes tFile.dat sqlio v1.5.SG using system counter for latency timings, 14318180 counts per second 8 threads writing for 120 secs to file C:\TestFile.dat using 8KB random IOs enabling multiple I/Os per thread with 8 outstanding buffering set to use hardware disk cache (but not file cache) using current size: 5120 MB for file: C:\TestFile.dat initialization done CUMULATIVE DATA: throughput metrics: IOs/sec: 226.97 MBs/sec: 1.77 latency metrics: Min_Latency(ms): 0 Avg_Latency(ms): 281 Max_Latency(ms): 467 histogram: ms: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24+ %: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 99 C:\Program Files (x86)\SQLIO>sqlio -kR -t8 -s120 -o8 -frandom -b8 -BH -LS C:\Tes tFile.dat sqlio v1.5.SG using system counter for latency timings, 14318180 counts per second 8 threads reading for 120 secs from file C:\TestFile.dat using 8KB random IOs enabling multiple I/Os per thread with 8 outstanding buffering set to use hardware disk cache (but not file cache) using current size: 5120 MB for file: C:\TestFile.dat initialization done CUMULATIVE DATA: throughput metrics: IOs/sec: 91.34 MBs/sec: 0.71 latency metrics: Min_Latency(ms): 14 Avg_Latency(ms): 699 Max_Latency(ms): 1124 histogram: ms: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24+ %: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 C:\Program Files (x86)\SQLIO>sqlio -kW -t8 -s120 -o8 -fsequential -b64 -BH -LS C :\TestFile.dat sqlio v1.5.SG using system counter for latency timings, 14318180 counts per second 8 threads writing for 120 secs to file C:\TestFile.dat using 64KB sequential IOs enabling multiple I/Os per thread with 8 outstanding buffering set to use hardware disk cache (but not file cache) using current size: 5120 MB for file: C:\TestFile.dat initialization done CUMULATIVE DATA: throughput metrics: IOs/sec: 1094.50 MBs/sec: 68.40 latency metrics: Min_Latency(ms): 0 Avg_Latency(ms): 58 Max_Latency(ms): 467 histogram: ms: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24+ %: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 C:\Program Files (x86)\SQLIO>sqlio -kR -t8 -s120 -o8 -fsequential -b64 -BH -LS C :\TestFile.dat sqlio v1.5.SG using system counter for latency timings, 14318180 counts per second 8 threads reading for 120 secs from file C:\TestFile.dat using 64KB sequential IOs enabling multiple I/Os per thread with 8 outstanding buffering set to use hardware disk cache (but not file cache) using current size: 5120 MB for file: C:\TestFile.dat initialization done CUMULATIVE DATA: throughput metrics: IOs/sec: 1155.31 MBs/sec: 72.20 latency metrics: Min_Latency(ms): 17 Avg_Latency(ms): 55 Max_Latency(ms): 205 histogram: ms: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24+ %: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 Here are the results of the fast rack server: C:\Program Files (x86)\SQLIO>test.bat C:\Program Files (x86)\SQLIO>sqlio -kW -t8 -s120 -o8 -frandom -b8 -BH -LS E:\Tes tFile.dat sqlio v1.5.SG using system counter for latency timings, 62500000 counts per second 8 threads writing for 120 secs to file E:\TestFile.dat using 8KB random IOs enabling multiple I/Os per thread with 8 outstanding buffering set to use hardware disk cache (but not file cache) open_file: CreateFile (E:\TestFile.dat for write): The system cannot find the pa th specified. exiting C:\Program Files (x86)\SQLIO>sqlio -kR -t8 -s120 -o8 -frandom -b8 -BH -LS E:\Tes tFile.dat sqlio v1.5.SG using system counter for latency timings, 62500000 counts per second 8 threads reading for 120 secs from file E:\TestFile.dat using 8KB random IOs enabling multiple I/Os per thread with 8 outstanding buffering set to use hardware disk cache (but not file cache) open_file: CreateFile (E:\TestFile.dat for read): The system cannot find the pat h specified. exiting C:\Program Files (x86)\SQLIO>sqlio -kW -t8 -s120 -o8 -fsequential -b64 -BH -LS E :\TestFile.dat sqlio v1.5.SG using system counter for latency timings, 62500000 counts per second 8 threads writing for 120 secs to file E:\TestFile.dat using 64KB sequential IOs enabling multiple I/Os per thread with 8 outstanding buffering set to use hardware disk cache (but not file cache) open_file: CreateFile (E:\TestFile.dat for write): The system cannot find the pa th specified. exiting C:\Program Files (x86)\SQLIO>sqlio -kR -t8 -s120 -o8 -fsequential -b64 -BH -LS E :\TestFile.dat sqlio v1.5.SG using system counter for latency timings, 62500000 counts per second 8 threads reading for 120 secs from file E:\TestFile.dat using 64KB sequential IOs enabling multiple I/Os per thread with 8 outstanding buffering set to use hardware disk cache (but not file cache) open_file: CreateFile (E:\TestFile.dat for read): The system cannot find the pat h specified. exiting C:\Program Files (x86)\SQLIO>test.bat C:\Program Files (x86)\SQLIO>sqlio -kW -t8 -s120 -o8 -frandom -b8 -BH -LS c:\Tes tFile.dat sqlio v1.5.SG using system counter for latency timings, 62500000 counts per second 8 threads writing for 120 secs to file c:\TestFile.dat using 8KB random IOs enabling multiple I/Os per thread with 8 outstanding buffering set to use hardware disk cache (but not file cache) using current size: 5120 MB for file: c:\TestFile.dat initialization done CUMULATIVE DATA: throughput metrics: IOs/sec: 2575.77 MBs/sec: 20.12 latency metrics: Min_Latency(ms): 1 Avg_Latency(ms): 24 Max_Latency(ms): 655 histogram: ms: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24+ %: 0 0 0 5 8 9 9 9 8 5 3 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 C:\Program Files (x86)\SQLIO>sqlio -kR -t8 -s120 -o8 -frandom -b8 -BH -LS c:\Tes tFile.dat sqlio v1.5.SG using system counter for latency timings, 62500000 counts per second 8 threads reading for 120 secs from file c:\TestFile.dat using 8KB random IOs enabling multiple I/Os per thread with 8 outstanding buffering set to use hardware disk cache (but not file cache) using current size: 5120 MB for file: c:\TestFile.dat initialization done CUMULATIVE DATA: throughput metrics: IOs/sec: 1141.39 MBs/sec: 8.91 latency metrics: Min_Latency(ms): 1 Avg_Latency(ms): 55 Max_Latency(ms): 652 histogram: ms: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24+ %: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 91 C:\Program Files (x86)\SQLIO>sqlio -kW -t8 -s120 -o8 -fsequential -b64 -BH -LS c :\TestFile.dat sqlio v1.5.SG using system counter for latency timings, 62500000 counts per second 8 threads writing for 120 secs to file c:\TestFile.dat using 64KB sequential IOs enabling multiple I/Os per thread with 8 outstanding buffering set to use hardware disk cache (but not file cache) using current size: 5120 MB for file: c:\TestFile.dat initialization done CUMULATIVE DATA: throughput metrics: IOs/sec: 341.37 MBs/sec: 21.33 latency metrics: Min_Latency(ms): 5 Avg_Latency(ms): 186 Max_Latency(ms): 120037 histogram: ms: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24+ %: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 C:\Program Files (x86)\SQLIO>sqlio -kR -t8 -s120 -o8 -fsequential -b64 -BH -LS c :\TestFile.dat sqlio v1.5.SG using system counter for latency timings, 62500000 counts per second 8 threads reading for 120 secs from file c:\TestFile.dat using 64KB sequential IOs enabling multiple I/Os per thread with 8 outstanding buffering set to use hardware disk cache (but not file cache) using current size: 5120 MB for file: c:\TestFile.dat initialization done CUMULATIVE DATA: throughput metrics: IOs/sec: 1024.07 MBs/sec: 64.00 latency metrics: Min_Latency(ms): 5 Avg_Latency(ms): 61 Max_Latency(ms): 81632 histogram: ms: 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24+ %: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 Three of the four tests are, to my mind, within reasonable parameters for the rack server. However, the 64 write test is incredibly slow on the rack server. (68 mb/sec on the slow tower vs 21 mb/s on the rack). The read speed for 64k also seems slow. Is this enough to say there is some sort of bottleneck with the shared storage? I need to know if I can take this evidence and say we need to launch an investigation into this. Any help is appreciated.

    Read the article

  • How does the linux kernel manage less than 1GB physical memory ?

    - by TheLoneJoker
    I'm learning the linux kernel internals and while reading "Understanding Linux Kernel", quite a few memory related questions struck me. One of them is, how the Linux kernel handles the memory mapping if the physical memory of say only 512 MB is installed on my system. As I read, kernel maps 0(or 16) MB-896MB physical RAM into 0xC0000000 linear address and can directly address it. So, in the above described case where I only have 512 MB: How can the kernel map 896 MB from only 512 MB ? What about user mode processes in this situation? Where are user mode processes in phys RAM? Every article explains only the situation, when you've installed 4 GB of memory and the kernel maps the 1 GB into kernel space and user processes uses the remaining amount of RAM. I would appreciate any help in improving my understanding. Thanks..!

    Read the article

  • iphone memory leaks and malloc?

    - by Brodie4598
    Okay so im finally to the point where I am testing my iPad App on an actual iPad... One thing that my app does is display a large (2mb) image in a scroll view. This is causing the iPad to get memory warnings. I run the app in the instruments to check for the leak. When I load the image, a leak is detected and i see the following in the allocations: ALl Allocations: 83.9 MB Malloc 48.55 MB: 48.55 MB Malloc 34.63 MB: 34.63 MB What im trying to understand is how to plug the leak obviously, but also why a 2MB image is causing a malloc of 20x that size I am very new to programming in obj-c so im sure this is an obvious thing, but I just cant figure it out. Here is the code:

    Read the article

  • How come, diffrent text files become diffrent sizes after compression ?

    - by Arsheep
    I have file of some random text size = 27 gb and after compression it becomes 40 mb or so. And a 3.5 GB sql file become 45 Mb after compression. But a 109 mb text file become 72 mb after compression so what can be wrong with it. Why so less compressed, it must 10 mb or so , or i am missing something . All files as i can see is English text only and and some grammar symbols (/ , . - = + etc) Can you tell why ? If not can you tell how can i super compress a text file ? I can code in PHP , np in that.

    Read the article

  • SQL SERVER – Update Statistics are Sampled By Default

    - by pinaldave
    After reading my earlier post SQL SERVER – Create Primary Key with Specific Name when Creating Table on Statistics, I have received another question by a blog reader. The question is as follows: Question: Are the statistics sampled by default? Answer: Yes. The sampling rate can be specified by the user and it can be anywhere between a very low value to 100%. Let us do a small experiment to verify if the auto update on statistics is left on. Also, let’s examine a very large table that is created and statistics by default- whether the statistics are sampled or not. USE [AdventureWorks] GO -- Create Table CREATE TABLE [dbo].[StatsTest]( [ID] [int] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL, [FirstName] [varchar](100) NULL, [LastName] [varchar](100) NULL, [City] [varchar](100) NULL, CONSTRAINT [PK_StatsTest] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ([ID] ASC) ) ON [PRIMARY] GO -- Insert 1 Million Rows INSERT INTO [dbo].[StatsTest] (FirstName,LastName,City) SELECT TOP 1000000 'Bob', CASE WHEN ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%2 = 1 THEN 'Smith' ELSE 'Brown' END, CASE WHEN ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%10 = 1 THEN 'New York' WHEN ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%10 = 5 THEN 'San Marino' WHEN ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%10 = 3 THEN 'Los Angeles' ELSE 'Houston' END FROM sys.all_objects a CROSS JOIN sys.all_objects b GO -- Update the statistics UPDATE STATISTICS [dbo].[StatsTest] GO -- Shows the statistics DBCC SHOW_STATISTICS ("StatsTest"PK_StatsTest) GO -- Clean up DROP TABLE [dbo].[StatsTest] GO Now let us observe the result of the DBCC SHOW_STATISTICS. The result shows that Resultset is for sure sampling for a large dataset. The percentage of sampling is based on data distribution as well as the kind of data in the table. Before dropping the table, let us check first the size of the table. The size of the table is 35 MB. Now, let us run the above code with lesser number of the rows. USE [AdventureWorks] GO -- Create Table CREATE TABLE [dbo].[StatsTest]( [ID] [int] IDENTITY(1,1) NOT NULL, [FirstName] [varchar](100) NULL, [LastName] [varchar](100) NULL, [City] [varchar](100) NULL, CONSTRAINT [PK_StatsTest] PRIMARY KEY CLUSTERED ([ID] ASC) ) ON [PRIMARY] GO -- Insert 1 Hundred Thousand Rows INSERT INTO [dbo].[StatsTest] (FirstName,LastName,City) SELECT TOP 100000 'Bob', CASE WHEN ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%2 = 1 THEN 'Smith' ELSE 'Brown' END, CASE WHEN ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%10 = 1 THEN 'New York' WHEN ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%10 = 5 THEN 'San Marino' WHEN ROW_NUMBER() OVER (ORDER BY a.name)%10 = 3 THEN 'Los Angeles' ELSE 'Houston' END FROM sys.all_objects a CROSS JOIN sys.all_objects b GO -- Update the statistics UPDATE STATISTICS [dbo].[StatsTest] GO -- Shows the statistics DBCC SHOW_STATISTICS ("StatsTest"PK_StatsTest) GO -- Clean up DROP TABLE [dbo].[StatsTest] GO You can see that Rows Sampled is just the same as Rows of the table. In this case, the sample rate is 100%. Before dropping the table, let us also check the size of the table. The size of the table is less than 4 MB. Let us compare the Result set just for a valid reference. Test 1: Total Rows: 1000000, Rows Sampled: 255420, Size of the Table: 35.516 MB Test 2: Total Rows: 100000, Rows Sampled: 100000, Size of the Table: 3.555 MB The reason behind the sample in the Test1 is that the data space is larger than 8 MB, and therefore it uses more than 1024 data pages. If the data space is smaller than 8 MB and uses less than 1024 data pages, then the sampling does not happen. Sampling aids in reducing excessive data scan; however, sometimes it reduces the accuracy of the data as well. Please note that this is just a sample test and there is no way it can be claimed as a benchmark test. The result can be dissimilar on different machines. There are lots of other information can be included when talking about this subject. I will write detail post covering all the subject very soon. Reference: Pinal Dave (http://blog.SQLAuthority.com) Filed under: Pinal Dave, SQL, SQL Authority, SQL Index, SQL Optimization, SQL Performance, SQL Query, SQL Scripts, SQL Server, SQL Tips and Tricks, T SQL, Technology Tagged: SQL Statistics

    Read the article

  • Why would Copying a Large Image to the Clipboard Freeze a Computer?

    - by Akemi Iwaya
    Sometimes, something really odd happens when using our computers that makes no sense at all…such as copying a simple image to the clipboard and the computer freezing up because of it. An image is an image, right? Today’s SuperUser post has the answer to a puzzled reader’s dilemna. Today’s Question & Answer session comes to us courtesy of SuperUser—a subdivision of Stack Exchange, a community-driven grouping of Q&A web sites. Original image courtesy of Wikimedia. The Question SuperUser reader Joban Dhillon wants to know why copying an image to the clipboard on his computer freezes it up: I was messing around with some height map images and found this one: (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/15/Srtm_ramp2.world.21600×10800.jpg) The image is 21,600*10,800 pixels in size. When I right click and select “Copy Image” in my browser (I am using Google Chrome), it slows down my computer until it freezes. After that I must restart. I am curious about why this happens. I presume it is the size of the image, although it is only about 6 MB when saved to my computer. I am also using Windows 8.1 Why would a simple image freeze Joban’s computer up after copying it to the clipboard? The Answer SuperUser contributor Mokubai has the answer for us: “Copy Image” is copying the raw image data, rather than the image file itself, to your clipboard. The raw image data will be 21,600 x 10,800 x 3 (24 bit image) = 699,840,000 bytes of data. That is approximately 700 MB of data your browser is trying to copy to the clipboard. JPEG compresses the raw data using a lossy algorithm and can get pretty good compression. Hence the compressed file is only 6 MB. The reason it makes your computer slow is that it is probably filling your memory up with at least the 700 MB of image data that your browser is using to show you the image, another 700 MB (along with whatever overhead the clipboard incurs) to store it on the clipboard, and a not insignificant amount of processing power to convert the image into a format that can be stored on the clipboard. Chances are that if you have less than 4 GB of physical RAM, then those copies of the image data are forcing your computer to page memory out to the swap file in an attempt to fulfil both memory demands at the same time. This will cause programs and disk access to be sluggish as they use the disk and try to use the data that may have just been paged out. In short: Do not use the clipboard for huge images unless you have a lot of memory and a bit of time to spare. Like pretty graphs? This is what happens when I load that image in Google Chrome, then copy it to the clipboard on my machine with 12 GB of RAM: It starts off at the lower point using 2.8 GB of RAM, loading the image punches it up to 3.6 GB (approximately the 700 MB), then copying it to the clipboard spikes way up there at 6.3 GB of RAM before settling back down at the 4.5-ish you would expect to see for a program and two copies of a rather large image. That is a whopping 3.7 GB of image data being worked on at the peak, which is probably the initial image, a reserved quantity for the clipboard, and perhaps a couple of conversion buffers. That is enough to bring any machine with less than 8 GB of RAM to its knees. Strangely, doing the same thing in Firefox just copies the image file rather than the image data (without the scary memory surge). Have something to add to the explanation? Sound off in the comments. Want to read more answers from other tech-savvy Stack Exchange users? Check out the full discussion thread here.

    Read the article

  • Powershell: Select-Object with additional calculated difference value

    - by David.Chu.ca
    Let me explain my question. I have a daily report about one PC's free space as in text file (sp.txt) like: DateTime FreeSpace(MB) ----- ------------- 03/01/2010 100.43 DateTime FreeSpace(MB) ----- ------------- 03/02/2010 98.31 .... Then I need to use this file as input to generate a report with difference of free space between dates: DateTime FreeSpace(MB) Change ----- ------------- ------ 03/01/2010 100.43 03/02/2010 98.31 2.12 .... Here are some codes I have to get above result without the additional "Change" calculation: Get-Content "C:\report\sp.txt" ` | where {$_.trim().length -gt 0 -and -not ($_ -like "Date*") -and -not ($_ -like "---*")} ` | Select-Object @{Name='DateTime'; expression={[DateTime]::Parse($_.SubString(0, 10).Trim())}}, ` @{Name='FreeSpace(MB)'; expression={$_.SubString(12, 12).Trim()}}, ` | Sort-Object DateTime ` | Select-Object DateTime, 'FreeSpace(MB)' |ft -AutoSize # how to add additional column Change to this Select-Object? My understanding is that Select-Object will return a collection of objects. Here I create this collection from an input text file(parse each line into parts: datetime and freespace(MB)). In order to calculate the difference between dates, I guess that I need to add additional calculated value to the result of the last Select-Object, or pipe the result to another Select-Object with the calculation as additional property or column. In order to do it, I need to get the previous row's FreeSpace value. Not sure if it is possible and how?

    Read the article

  • SQLCMD.EXE generates ugly report. How to format it?

    - by Juri Bogdanov
    I did batch to run SQL query like use [AxDWH_Central_Reporting] GO EXEC sp_spaceused @updateusage = N'TRUE' GO It displays 2 tables and generates some ugly report with some kind of 'P' unneeded letters... See below Changed database context to 'AxDWH_Central_Reporting'. database_name Pdatabase_size Punallocated space --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------P------------------P------------------ AxDWH_Central_Reporting P10485.69 MB P7436.85 MB reserved Pdata Pindex_size Punused ------------------P------------------P------------------P------------------ 3121176 KB P3111728 KB P7744 KB P1704 KB ---------------------------------------------------------------- I also tryed to generate 1 table from this procedure with next query declare @dbname sysname, @dbsize bigint, @logsize bigint, @reservedpages bigint select @reservedpages = sum(a.total_pages) from sys.partitions p join sys.allocation_units a on p.partition_id = a.container_id left join sys.internal_tables it on p.object_id = it.object_id select @dbsize = sum(convert(bigint,case when status & 64 = 0 then size else 0 end)), @logsize = sum(convert(bigint,case when status & 64 <> 0 then size else 0 end)) from dbo.sysfiles select 'database name' = db_name(), 'database size' = ltrim(str((convert (dec (15,2),@dbsize) + convert (dec (15,2),@logsize)) * 8192 / 1048576,15,2) + ' MB'), 'unallocated space' = ltrim(str((case when @dbsize >= @reservedpages then (convert (dec (15,2),@dbsize) - convert (dec (15,2),@reservedpages)) * 8192 / 1048576 else 0 end),15,2) + ' MB') But got similar ugly report: database name Pdatabase size Punallocated space --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------P------------------P------------------ master P5.75 MB P1.52 MB (1 rows affected) Is it possible to change the layout formatting for report? To make it more beautifull?

    Read the article

  • Github file size limit changed 6/18/13. Can't push now

    - by slindsey3000
    How does this change as of June 18, 2013 affect my existing repository with a file that exceeds that limit? I last pushed 2 months ago with a large file. I have a large file that I have removed locally but I can not push anything now. I get a "remote error" ... remote: error: File cron_log.log is 126.91 MB; this exceeds GitHub's file size limit of 100 MB I added the file to .gitignore after original push... But it still exists on remote (origin) Removing it locally should get rid of it at origin(Github) right? ... but ... it is not letting me push because there is a file on Github that exceeds the limit... https://github.com/blog/1533-new-file-size-limits These are the commands I issued plus error messages.. git add . git commit -m "delete cron_log.log" git push origin master remote: Error code: 40bef1f6653fd2410fb2ab40242bc879 remote: warning: Error GH413: Large files detected. remote: warning: See http://git.io/iEPt8g for more information. remote: error: File cron_log.log is 141.41 MB; this exceeds GitHub's file size limit of 100 MB remote: error: File cron_log.log is 126.91 MB; this exceeds GitHub's file size limit of 100 MB To https://github.com/slinds(omited_here)/linexxxx(omited_here).git ! [remote rejected] master - master (pre-receive hook declined) error: failed to push some refs to 'https://github.com/slinds(omited_here) I then tried things like git rm cron_log.log git rm --cached cron_log.log Same error.

    Read the article

  • how to force operating system to give java more memory?

    - by Denny
    Hello, I've got problem with java jar files and memory. I use netbeans 6.7 to develop an application and this application need more memory to run because it converts another files. Whenever this application convert a 6-10 mb file, it'll crash. So I set netbeans VM Options : -Xms32m -Xmx256m and the application can convert 6-10mb files with no problem. I Clean and Build the project so it can make a jar file of my application. I run the jar on my computer and use jconsole to monitor the memory. The maximum memory to use by the application shows 256 mb. But whenever I move it to some other computers, it shows 65-66 mb on jconsole and the application will crash when convert 6-10 mb files. So I need to use command prompt : java -jar -Xmx256m myjar.jar to execute the jar with maximum memory Why it can be happen, in my computer the maximum memory shows 256 mb but on another computer 65-66 mb? Can I force another computer to give extra maximum memory to my application? Thank you for your answer. I'm sorry for my inadequate English. If you all find my question is hard to understand, please let me know. Best Regards Denny ps: fyi the computer i used to develop the application have 2gb ram, on the other computers i tested have 1-2 gb ram.

    Read the article

  • I-Phone: Trying to check an Array for an item based on a string produced

    - by MB
    Hello! I'm writing a program that will concatenate a string based on letters, and then check an array to see if that string exists. If it does, then it will print a line in IB saying so. I've got all the ins-and-outs worked out, save for the fact that the simulator keeps crashing on me! Here's the code: -(IBAction)checkWord:(id)sender { NSMutableArray *wordList = [NSMutableArray arrayWithObjects:@"BIKE", @"BUS", @"BILL", nil]; if([wordList containsObject:theWord]) { NSString *dummyText = [[NSString alloc] initWithFormat:@"%@ is a real word.", theWord]; checkText.text = dummyText; [dummyText release]; } } "theWord" is the string that is being referenced against the Array to see if it matches an item contained within it. In this case "BIKE" is 'theWord'. Thank you for your help in advance! -MB

    Read the article

  • How to get wireless (Alfa) operate in full power and speed up wireless Internet?

    - by MahboobeAlam
    I am using Wireless to connect to the internet (router). My laptop has Atheros wireless (AR 242x/542x) adapter but the router is a little bit far-away from my room so I have to use an external wireless adapter i.e. Alfa (Realtek 8187) for connectivity. However, since I have started using Ubuntu I noticed that Alfa is not working in full power, internet speed in Ubuntu is much slower than in Windows on my laptop. When I am using Windows 7 the LED (bulb) on Alfa blinks as it should, but when in Ubuntu, it doesn't blink rather it is on but very dim. Connection using Atheros adapter is also the same (slow)... I have tried 4 methods (I found on the Internet) to troubleshoot this matter but no success. It seems to me that Ubuntu/Linux is not letting these wireless adapters to operate in full strength. iwconfig shows that power management is off for both. So what's the problem? Details: ifconfig eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:1f:16:1e:36:ec UP BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:0 (0.0 B) TX bytes:0 (0.0 B) Interrupt:45 Base address:0x6000 lo Link encap:Local Loopback inet addr:127.0.0.1 Mask:255.0.0.0 inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host UP LOOPBACK RUNNING MTU:16436 Metric:1 RX packets:1657 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:1657 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 RX bytes:241697 (241.6 KB) TX bytes:241697 (241.6 KB) wlan0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:22:5f:9b:24:b5 inet6 addr: fe80::222:5fff:fe9b:24b5/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:715460 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:694246 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:493539292 (493.5 MB) TX bytes:235159393 (235.1 MB) wlan1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:c0:ca:42:14:62 inet addr:192.168.100.102 Bcast:192.168.100.255 Mask:255.255.255.0 inet6 addr: fe80::2c0:caff:fe42:1462/64 Scope:Link UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1 RX packets:171053 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0 TX packets:181363 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 RX bytes:74094659 (74.0 MB) TX bytes:59474204 (59.4 MB) iwconfig lo no wireless extensions. eth0 no wireless extensions. wlan0 IEEE 802.11bg ESSID:off/any Mode:Managed Access Point: Not-Associated Tx-Power=20 dBm Retry long limit:7 RTS thr:off Fragment thr:off Power Management:off wlan1 IEEE 802.11bg ESSID:"Zia" Mode:Managed Frequency:2.412 GHz Access Point: 00:0D:F0:9C:A6:18 Bit Rate=54 Mb/s Tx-Power=20 dBm Retry long limit:7 RTS thr:off Fragment thr:off Power Management:off Link Quality=70/70 Signal level=-31 dBm Rx invalid nwid:0 Rx invalid crypt:0 Rx invalid frag:0 Tx excessive retries:204 Invalid misc:6610 Missed beacon:0

    Read the article

  • Why isn´t linux using all the available memory

    - by Devator
    I have a linux VPS which has 256 MB of memory (free only finds 248 though). However it seems I still have 85 MB free, but it's swapping for 255 MB. Why is this? free -m total used free shared buffers cached Mem: 248 245 3 0 41 40 -/+ buffers/cache: 163 85 Swap: 1971 255 1716

    Read the article

  • PHP CLI not respecting memory limit in php.ini

    - by user13743
    I am using drush, which is a command-line php app to manage a drupal website. I am running a command to import a lot of data, which is causing me to hit php's memory limit. PHP Fatal error: Allowed memory size of 536870912 bytes exhausted ... Which is 512MB if I'm doing the math correctly (536870912 / 1024 / 1024 = 512). I've changed the directive in the php.ini that drush uses: $> drush status ... PHP configuration : /etc/php5/cli/php.ini $> grep memory /etc/php5/cli/php.ini ; Maximum amount of memory a script may consume (128MB) ; http://php.net/memory-limit memory_limit = 1024M But I'm still hitting the 512 MB limit! I am running in a virtual machine, whose memory settings I changed from 512 to 1025 MB of RAM to allow drush to run. $> free -m total used free shared buffers cached Mem: 1010 578 431 0 14 392 -/+ buffers/cache: 172 837 Swap: 382 0 382 So it says it has some 431 MB free, now that I've bumped the vm up to 1024. I guess half the memory is being used to run the GUI, but I don't understand how the GUI was running okay when the vm had 512 MB of ram. Why is the PHP cli still hitting a 512 MB memory limit? If it was hitting a system memory limit, shouldn't it die around 431MB, which is what the free command says is available?

    Read the article

  • What is the fastest MD5 sum calculator?

    - by netvope
    I tested the speed of md5sum on a few Ubuntu 8.04 servers Pentium III 700 MHz: 52 MB/s Atom 1.6 GHz, 32-bit: 119 MB/s Core 2 (Yorkfield) 2.5GHz, 32-bit: 194 MB/s Core 2 (Yorkfield) 2.5GHz, 64-bit: 222 MB/s Then I downloaded a tool (by apt-get install) called md5deep and found that it's roughly 20% faster (as tested on the 32-bit Core 2 server). This makes me feel that the "vanilla" md5sum included in Ubuntu isn't the fastest one. Questions: Other than md5deep, are you aware of any MD5 calculators that are potentially faster than md5sum? (Answers for software from other OS are also welcomed.) If I want to compile md5sum myself, where can I download the source? What compiler options would you suggest for the Core 2 server? (note: gcc 4.2.4 in Ubuntu 8.04 does not seem to support -march=core2)

    Read the article

  • slow pppoe connection using Ubuntu 9.10

    - by Radu
    I have a Compaq Presario CQ61, instaled Ubuntu 9.10 and Windows 7 on it. It works great except the PPPoE connection in Ubuntu, when i dial in Windows my download speed reach up to 91 Mb, rebooted in Ubuntu, downloaded same file from the same server with a speed of maximum 3 Mb, cheked in Windows again 80 - 90 Mb constant. I can't figure what slow's the internet connection in Ubuntu. Anyone has an ideea on this problem ? (NO iptables configured, NO HTB, CBQ ...etc configured) . Thank you

    Read the article

  • Macbook Pro 2.66 GHz vs. 2.8 GHz

    - by nevan
    Is there much advantage in getting the higher end Macbook Pro compared to the mid-range one? The differences between the two are: 2.66 GHz vs. 2.8 GHz 256 MB graphics memory vs. 512 MB 3 MB L2 cache vs. 6 MB 320 GB hard drive vs. 500 GB $2000 vs. $2300 I've looked around, but I can't find any direct comparisons for the two machines. I'd be using the machine for development. I generally use a computer for 3 years. I don't really play games, but do use Photoshop regularly. I've heard that once Snow Leopard arrives, the graphics chip will be used to boost the main processor, so I was wondering if getting the one with more graphics memory would be an advantage?

    Read the article

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