So since there seems to be a few of us having this issue, are there any
Debian or linux kernel engineers out there who are willing to help? Is this
the best place for that?
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 3:50 PM, David Mckisick wrote:
> Same issue here exactly and have noticed this since upgrading to Wh
Same issue here exactly and have noticed this since upgrading to Wheezy. We
have also delayed upgrading the rest of our servers until this gets fixed.
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Scott Ferguson <
scott.ferguson.debian.u...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 04/07/13 00:30, Will Platnick wrote:
> > More
On 04/07/13 00:30, Will Platnick wrote:
> More troubleshooting steps:
>
> Built and installed latest 3.10 kernel, no change in interrupts
> Built and installed latest 2.6.32 kernel, and I am back to Squeeze level
> loads and no high timer, rescheduling, non-maskable or performance
> interrupts are
More troubleshooting steps:
Built and installed latest 3.10 kernel, no change in interrupts
Built and installed latest 2.6.32 kernel, and I am back to Squeeze level
loads and no high timer, rescheduling, non-maskable or performance
interrupts are present.
So, does anybody have any idea what chang
Something else I just noticed now that I'm on a screen high enough to show all of /proc/interrupts on one line:Non-maskable interrupts are happening on Wheezy whereas they didn't on Squeeze. Additionally, it seems Non-maskable interrupts and Performance monitoring are the same value all the time. -
I followed those. I got nothing.
—
Sent from Mailbox for iPhone
On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 5:24 AM, Darac Marjal
wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 08:54:06PM -0400, Will Platnick wrote:
>> I am experiencing some issues with load after upgrading some of my Squeeze
>> boxes to Wheezy. I have 7 app ser
On Tue, Jul 02, 2013 at 08:54:06PM -0400, Will Platnick wrote:
> I am experiencing some issues with load after upgrading some of my Squeeze
> boxes to Wheezy. I have 7 app servers, all with identical hardware with
> identical packages and code. I upgraded one of my boxes to wheezy, along with
>
On Sat, 2003-10-04 at 19:44, Rus Foster wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I seem to have a strange problem. I have a server which is showing a
> > load average of around 1 but cpu usage of 0.6% over two cpus.
>
> This would imply I/O wait for me. What sort of disks does it have?
Thats what I thought but thi
> Hi,
>
> I seem to have a strange problem. I have a server which is showing a
> load average of around 1 but cpu usage of 0.6% over two cpus.
This would imply I/O wait for me. What sort of disks does it have?
> What bothers me is that load average used to stay under 0.16 previously
> - nothing h
Bijan Soleymani <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Is this normal? I don't seem to remember having ide performance issues like
> > this before (this is a new install).
> >
> This is normal if dma is not enabled.
> It isn't enabled by default in Debian.
> To enable it install hdparm and then
> run
Or just get hwtools it creates a basic init.d script where you put your
hdparm flags
Bijan Soleymani wrote:
>>Is this normal? I don't seem to remember having ide performance issues like
>>this before (this is a new install).
>>
>>
>>
>This is normal if dma is not enabled.
>It isn't enable
> Is this normal? I don't seem to remember having ide performance issues like
> this before (this is a new install).
>
This is normal if dma is not enabled.
It isn't enabled by default in Debian.
To enable it install hdparm and then
run hdparm -d1 /dev/hdx as root
where x is either a,b,c,d depe
Jason Pepas said:
> the other day I was moving several gigs of files from one ide drive to
> another on the same ide chain (the secondary channel is broken) and my
> load average went up to around 7 (no, not 0.07). The machine would
> become unresponsive for several seconds at a time. This is
Have you checked your dma settings? hdparm/hwtools?
Ramon Kagan
York University, Computing and Network Services
Unix Team - Intermediate System Administrator
(416)736-2100 #20263
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-
I have not failed. I have just
found 10,000 ways that don'
"Jordi S. Bunster" wrote:
> We JUST installed the server. I mean, there's nothing hand
> compiled, except for Amavis. But it doesn't eat that much CPU
amavis is VERY cpu intensive i run it on many systems. is there a lot
of mail going through the system? is there a lot of big attachments?
one of
On Sun, 3 Jun 2001 23:18:41 -0300 (BRT)
"Jordi S. Bunster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > you have a run away process and/or a memory leak
> >
> > ( amd and intel cpu behave slightly differently for
> > ( the same code...
>
> Mmm .. speaking about internal programs, we only have some perl
>
On Sun, Jun 03, 2001 at 11:18:41PM -0300, Jordi S. Bunster wrote:
> 91 processes: 89 sleeping, 2 running, 0 zombie, 0 stopped
> CPU states: 68.7% user, 31.2% system, 0.0% nice, 0.0% idle
> Mem: 257856K av, 229104K used, 28752K free, 103600K shrd,
> 73192K buff
> Swap: 128484K av, 0K used,
On Sun, 3 Jun 2001, Jordi S. Bunster wrote:
JSB> > you have a run away process and/or a memory leak
JSB> >
JSB> > ( amd and intel cpu behave slightly differently for
JSB> > ( the same code...
JSB>
JSB> Mmm .. speaking about internal programs, we only have some perl
JSB> scripts. Perl is the com
> you have a run away process and/or a memory leak
>
> ( amd and intel cpu behave slightly differently for
> ( the same code...
Mmm .. speaking about internal programs, we only have some perl
scripts. Perl is the compiled one, right?
> what apps is running???
We JUST installed the server. I me
hi ay
or you could have a hacker running an irc on your machine
-- if the rest of your lan/machines is fine...
than probably not
c ya
alvin
On Sun, 3 Jun 2001, Alvin Oga wrote:
>
> hi ya jordi
>
> you have a run away process and/or a memory leak
>
> ( amd and intel cpu behave slightly d
On Sun, 3 Jun 2001 22:51:51 -0300 (BRT)
"Jordi S. Bunster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just a question: Is there any reason in particular for a Debian
> Box keep its load average always over 6?
Not really. Did you try top to find out which processes are doing
that? Maybe you where running a Net
hi ya jordi
you have a run away process and/or a memory leak
( amd and intel cpu behave slightly differently for
( the same code...
what apps is running???
top -i
ps axuw
c ya
alvin
On Sun, 3 Jun 2001, Jordi S. Bunster wrote:
>
> Just a question: Is there any reason in particular for a D
what is running on it? have you checked top for processes?
--
Forrest English
http://truffula.net
"When we have nothing left to give
There will be no reason for us to live
But when we have nothing left to lose
You will have nothing left to use"
-Fugazi
On Sun, 3 Jun 2001, Jordi S. Bunster
On Fri, Mar 09, 2001 at 03:25:24PM -0800, kmself@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> The clarification is given in the O'Reilly citation. Runnable
> processes, not waiting on other resources, I/O blocking excepted.
Excellent - thanks!
--
Linux will do for applications what the Internet did for networks.
on Fri, Mar 09, 2001 at 01:27:50AM -0600, Dave Sherohman ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 10:55:10PM -0800, kmself@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> > on Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 11:21:07AM -0600, Dave Sherohman ([EMAIL
> > PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > You have the notation correct, but load ave
On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 10:55:10PM -0800, kmself@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> on Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 11:21:07AM -0600, Dave Sherohman ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> wrote:
> > You have the notation correct, but load average and CPU utilization are not
> > directly related. Load average is the average number of
on Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 11:21:07AM -0600, Dave Sherohman ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 06:09:41PM +0100, Joris Lambrecht wrote:
> > isn't 2.00 more like 2% ? It is US notation where . is a decimal separator.
> > Not ?
>
> You have the notation correct, but load average and
on Mon, Mar 05, 2001 at 11:12:16PM -0500, MaD dUCK ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> [cc'ing this to PLUG because it seems interesting...]
>
> also sprach kmself@ix.netcom.com (on Mon, 05 Mar 2001 08:02:51PM -0800):
> > It's not 200% loaded. There are two processes in the run queue. I'd do
>
> huh?
On Tue, Mar 06, 2001 at 06:09:41PM +0100, Joris Lambrecht wrote:
> isn't 2.00 more like 2% ? It is US notation where . is a decimal separator.
> Not ?
You have the notation correct, but load average and CPU utilization are not
directly related. Load average is the average number of processes that
Dear dUCK,
isn't 2.00 more like 2% ? It is US notation where . is a decimal separator.
Not ?
-Original Message-
From: MaD dUCK [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2001 3:38 AM
To: debian users
Subject: high load average
someone explain this to me:
albatross:~$ uname -a
L
[cc'ing this to PLUG because it seems interesting...]
also sprach kmself@ix.netcom.com (on Mon, 05 Mar 2001 08:02:51PM -0800):
> It's not 200% loaded. There are two processes in the run queue. I'd do
huh? is that what 2.00 means? the average length of the run queue?
that would explain it becau
on Mon, Mar 05, 2001 at 09:37:36PM -0500, MaD dUCK ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> someone explain this to me:
>
> albatross:~$ uname -a
> Linux albatross 2.2.17 #2 Mon Sep 04 20:49:27 CET 2000 i586 unknown
>
> albatross:~$ uptime
> 2:56am up 174 days, 5:50, 1 user, load average: 2.00, 2.05, 2
also sprach Noah L. Meyerhans (on Mon, 05 Mar 2001 09:51:53PM -0500):
> Load average is not an indication of how busy the CPU is. A busy CPU
> can *cause* a high load average, but so can other stuff.
good point. so i found two offending processes in state D:
root 24520 0.0 0.9 1652 904 ?
On Mon, Mar 05, 2001 at 09:37:36PM -0500, MaD dUCK wrote:
> the load average displayed by uptime has been very consistently above
> 2.00 and the output of ps aux has been pretty much the same for the
> past two weeks. no hung jobs. no traffic. the server basically *isn't
> being used*, especially n
Suresh Kumar posts:
> I have never seen load averages going above 2
> earlier with redhat installation.
>
On a similar setup while running Netscape ? Please
install libc5 and libg++272 found in /oldlibs of the
Debian 'slink' CD.
ragOO, VU2RGU. Kochi, INDIA.
Keeping the Air-Wa
Recent versions of netscape will slow a 16Mb system to a crawl. How does the
system respond when you aren't running netscape? What window manager
are you using? What else are you running at the time. Check you netscape
memory cache size.
I would be wiling to bet the problem lies in the (lack o
George Bonser wrote:
> Any process involved with heavy net activity in an SMP system with 2.2.3
> will do this. I had problems with web servers doing it. 2.2.9 seems OK.
> 2.2.6/7 were disasters. 2.2.5 seemed to work, though.
Hm, could you expand on that? I've been using 2.2.7 for a while, what
pr
* George Bonser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [05/26/99 18:59] wrote:
> Do a ps -ax and see how many processes you have stuck in D state ;). Then
> go and get 2.2.9
Yup, that explains it! I have 5 sxid processes in D state.
Hmmmcould it have something to do with the fact that I installed
arla 5 days ag
38 matches
Mail list logo
