Re: Performance issue on Stable
Sorry, I meant to postpone this message in mutt and instead sent it.
On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 07:20:41AM -0700, Bill Moseley wrote:
> This is a quite vague at this point, but I'm looking idea on how to
> track down performance problems.
>
> We moved an application from a development machine to a client's
> managed server an noticed it running quite a bit slower. Simple
> requests[1] take about three to five times longer. And this happens
> when the load average is above on on the fast machine and load
> average is is < 0.1 on the client's server.
>
> I'd like to provide the ISP with more info than "It's running slow" so
> I'm wondering what tools to use to compare these two machines.
>
> Some of the basic specs are:
>
> Development Client's Server
> --------------- ----------------------
> CPU Athlon XP1800+ Xeon
> Mhz 1150.591 1793.936
> cache 256KB 512KB
> bogomips 2260.99 3565.15
> RAM 1GB .5GB
> OS Deb Unstable Deb Sarge
> Kernel 2.6.6 2.4.28
> Tasks 115 214
> fs xfs atime ext3 noatime, nodiratime
>
> It seem
It seems to be CPU. Maybe the machine is taxed on the number of
processes. What I notice is the machine runs at a low load average,
but any small takes makes the CPU load jump.
Anyway, just looking for a few recommendations on what you would do
when trying to track down performance issues.
>
> >From that alone it would seem like the client's server would be
> faster, although I'm sure that's not the entire story. Yet, the
> development server can have a load average over 1 and still process
> simple requests faster than the clients when its load average is <
> 0.1.
>
> vmstat shows no swapping, so memory does not see to be a problem.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [1] It's a fast_cgi application that's just returning a small file
> from the file system -- no database access involved in this request.
>
> --
> Bill Moseley
> moseley@hank.org
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
>
--
Bill Moseley
moseley@hank.org
Reply to: