I haven't noticed an impact on performance. One of our CASs is IB RIP with 1500 simultaneous users.
Eric J. Kenny Network Analyst Marist College 3399 North Rd. Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 845.575.3820 From: "Heller, Josh" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Date: 12/09/09 03:29 PM Subject: Re: NAC 4.7.1 Upgrade - High CPU on CAS Sent by: Cisco Clean Access Users and Administrators <[email protected]> So are there any ramifications seen yet with regard to the high CPU utilization with kclick? Thank you, Josh Heller Sr. Network Analyst Information Technology Kutztown University 610.683.4930 -----Original Message----- From: Cisco Clean Access Users and Administrators [ mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mike Diggins Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 9:45 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: NAC 4.7.1 Upgrade - High CPU on CAS This is my production CAS (3140) running 4.1.6 lightly loaded: [r...@cas ~]# top top - 23:12:17 up 464 days, 3:18, 1 user, load average: 0.17, 0.21, 0.18 Tasks: 63 total, 2 running, 61 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 1.7% us, 6.7% sy, 0.0% ni, 69.7% id, 2.3% wa, 10.0% hi, 9.7% si Mem: 1035588k total, 962836k used, 72752k free, 42060k buffers Swap: 2040244k total, 2876k used, 2037368k free, 588684k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 2835 root 15 0 0 0 0 S 8.7 0.0 25757:49 kclick This is my test CAS (3140) running 4.7.1 with NO load: [r...@test-cas ~]# top top - 21:41:25 up 12:02, 1 user, load average: 1.00, 1.00, 1.00 Tasks: 71 total, 3 running, 68 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie Cpu(s): 0.3%us, 49.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 0.0%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 50.7%si, 0.0%st Mem: 904184k total, 462560k used, 441624k free, 90544k buffers Swap: 4192956k total, 0k used, 4192956k free, 261208k cached PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND 2726 root 25 0 0 0 0 R 99.5 0.0 718:37.89 kclick Is anyone running 4.7.1 on one of the newer appliances like the 3310 or 3350? If so, is the same thing happening? -Mike On Thu, 3 Dec 2009, Mike King wrote: > I haven't looked at the command line of a CAS in a year or so, but if I remember correctly, on the CAS it was always normal for the kclick to replace the CPU idler. > > On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 11:24 AM, Kyle Torkelson <[email protected]> wrote: > Mike > We are exact same as you...Virtual Gateway In Band on two 3140's. Whether I have 0, 50 or 200 users online, kclick is always using 95-99%. TAC told me it > was nothing out of the ordinary... > > I'm still skeptical though... > > Kyle Torkelson > University of Sioux Falls > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Cisco Clean Access Users and Administrators [ mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mike Diggins > Sent: Thursday, December 03, 2009 10:02 AM > To: [email protected][root@test-cas1 ~]# top > Subject: NAC 4.7.1 Upgrade - High CPU on CAS > > Just upgraded my test NAC system (1x3140 CAM, 1x3140 CAS) from 4.6.1 to > 4.7.1. The "kclick" process on the CAS is taking 99% of my CPU, and there > is nobody on the system! I recall someone else posting with this same > issue. I'm in Virtual Gateway Inband mode. Did anyone find a cause? > >
