LinuxQuestions.org
Did you know LQ has a Linux Hardware Compatibility List?
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Other *NIX Forums > Solaris / OpenSolaris
User Name
Password
Solaris / OpenSolaris This forum is for the discussion of Solaris and OpenSolaris.
General Sun, SunOS and Sparc related questions also go here.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 01-12-2013, 12:56 PM   #1
shivaa
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2012
Location: Grenoble, Fr.
Distribution: Sun Solaris, RHEL, Ubuntu, Debian 6.0
Posts: 1,797
Blog Entries: 4

Rep: Reputation: 285Reputation: 285Reputation: 285
Server perfomance issue


Hello everyone!

I have 2 Sun Fire V210/V240, Netra 240 server (let's name them ServerA and ServerB) with same configurations and running SunOne directory server application.

Both server are behind load balancer, but when I analyzed both these server for their cpu utilizations for whole month (using tool HP-OVPM), it shows high utilization in ServerA compare to ServerB.

I checked H/W configuration (using prtdiag -v) on both server and everything was same except Memory Configurations. Here's that part of output:-

ServerA:
Code:
============================ Memory Configuration ============================
Segment Table:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Base Address       Size       Interleave Factor  Contains
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
0x0                2GB               2           BankIDs 0,1
0x1000000000       2GB               4           BankIDs 16,17,18,19

Bank Table:
-----------------------------------------------------------
           Physical Location
ID       ControllerID  GroupID   Size       Interleave Way
-----------------------------------------------------------
0        0             0         1GB             0,1
1        0             0         1GB
16       1             0         512MB           0,1,2,3
17       1             1         512MB
18       1             1         512MB
19       1             0         512MB

Memory Module Groups:
--------------------------------------------------
ControllerID   GroupID  Labels
--------------------------------------------------
0              0        MB/P0/B0/D0,MB/P0/B0/D1

Memory Module Groups:
--------------------------------------------------
ControllerID   GroupID  Labels
--------------------------------------------------
1              0        MB/P1/B0/D0,MB/P1/B0/D1
1              1        MB/P1/B1/D0,MB/P1/B1/D1
ServerB:
Code:
============================ Memory Configuration ============================
Segment Table:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Base Address       Size       Interleave Factor  Contains
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
0x0                1GB               1           BankIDs 0
0x200020000        2GB               2           BankIDs 1,2
0x1000000000       1GB               1           BankIDs 16

Bank Table:
-----------------------------------------------------------
           Physical Location
ID       ControllerID  GroupID   Size       Interleave Way
-----------------------------------------------------------
0        0             0         1GB             0
1        0             1         1GB             0,1
2        0             1         1GB             0,1
16       1             0         1GB             0

Memory Module Groups:
--------------------------------------------------
ControllerID   GroupID  Labels
--------------------------------------------------
0              0        MB/P0/B0/D0,MB/P0/B0/D1
0              1        MB/P0/B1/D0,MB/P0/B1/D1

Memory Module Groups:
--------------------------------------------------
ControllerID   GroupID  Labels
--------------------------------------------------
1              0        MB/P1/B0/D0,MB/P1/B0/D1
Could you check these output and suggest if these configuration differences are causing the difference in performance?

TIA

Last edited by shivaa; 01-12-2013 at 01:35 PM. Reason: Info added
 
Old 01-13-2013, 06:35 AM   #2
druuna
LQ Veteran
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,532
Blog Entries: 7

Rep: Reputation: 2371Reputation: 2371Reputation: 2371Reputation: 2371Reputation: 2371Reputation: 2371Reputation: 2371Reputation: 2371Reputation: 2371Reputation: 2371Reputation: 2371
There's not enough info to answer/troubleshoot your (possible) problem.

- what else besides a directory server is running on (one of) these servers?,
- how is load-balancing set up (round-robin/weighted/etc ?),
- how is SunOne directory server set up (master-master/master-slave, read-write for both or read only for the slave?),
- hardware differences,
- etc.

This might not be a problem at all. If both boxes perform nicely seen from the users/applications then the difference in CPU utilization between the 2 isn't an issue.
 
Old 01-13-2013, 07:00 AM   #3
shivaa
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2012
Location: Grenoble, Fr.
Distribution: Sun Solaris, RHEL, Ubuntu, Debian 6.0
Posts: 1,797
Blog Entries: 4

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 285Reputation: 285Reputation: 285
Thanks @druuna.
- There's nothing except directory server application on these servers.
- Load balancing is F5, and both servers are behind F5 (I am not much sure about different set ups, but many other servers groups are behind F5 and their cpu utilization is similar if I compare for whole month, I mean if I look any other group of two servers that are behind F5 then their cpu utilization is quite similar i.e. two parallel graphs)
- Both are read-read instances.
- No difference in H/W architecture.

Last edited by shivaa; 01-13-2013 at 07:02 AM. Reason: Typo
 
Old 02-18-2013, 02:35 AM   #4
shivaa
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2012
Location: Grenoble, Fr.
Distribution: Sun Solaris, RHEL, Ubuntu, Debian 6.0
Posts: 1,797
Blog Entries: 4

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 285Reputation: 285Reputation: 285
Problem solved. Actually some apache https processes were there in server B, which was causing high load. So after killing/stopping the same, pb solved.

Thanks for your responses! Ciao!!
 
  


Reply

Tags
performance, solaris


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
perfomance monitoring on server Bogdan Linux - Software 3 02-05-2013 10:05 AM
Linux Server - Load perfomance r2d2#jedi Linux - Server 4 01-13-2011 07:20 AM
Server Perfomance chaotix2003 Linux - Newbie 2 01-03-2008 08:49 PM
Harddrive perfomance waelaltaqi Linux - Hardware 4 11-10-2005 02:24 PM
Dicreasing speed perfomance heraklez Slackware 6 08-03-2005 02:10 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:27 PM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration