Enhancing performance on Server
richard.hubbell at gmail.com
Wed Jan 26 06:23:09 UTC 2005
First find out what your users are doing to your server.
That means gather some data.
get disk data
You could use sar to gather the data.
Gather a couple of weeks worth, then you can change as needed.
You may just need to tweak applications. e.g. samba
My guess would be the network is a bottle neck but get the facts
and act on the facts.
p.s. fedora-list seems to be a free-for-all, has it always been?
On Wed, 26 Jan 2005 05:59:09 -0000, James Marcinek
<jmarc1 at jemconsult.biz> wrote:
> I am trying to enhance the performance of a linux server, running FC3, for a
> small office of about 14 users. The system is provding several of the following
> Samba running as a Domain Controller
> Samba File server
> HylaFAX server
> vsftp server (to support HylaFAX)
> Postfix (to support email notices)
> Amanda Server (running after hours backups)
> The server is running a pentium IV (not sure on the speed at the moment, and has
> 1.5 Gigs of RAM, hardware based SCSI raid (PCI SCSI card) and external modem.
> >From the system monitoring that I've been periodically checking, the CPU is in
> good shape as well as the RAM. However, the loggin in and off of user's is felt
> on the network. The Samba environment was just converted from a Workgroup to a
> domain. The local user profiles were copied and converted to roaming, in
> addition to changing the local home directory from the default C: location to
> their $HOME drives on the Samba Domain controller. Each domain user id was
> logged in to their respective PC, which will download a copy to the local PC to
> expedite the logon/logoff process. However it still takes time to logoff and
> save settings, etc. Some of the problems may be due to the fact the user's were
> previously saving large files (like music, etc) in their home folder. I'm sure
> this will alleviate some items.
> When I use the tops command during the logon/logoff periods, I do see samba
> spiking the CPU to higher limits, though still acceptable. A lot of physical RAM
> is also used, which is one area I think could be addressed; however the paging
> space doesn't look to active...
> I'm wondering if the bottleneck is in the network card. The whole network is
> 100BaseT. I haven't used a lot of network tools (mainly netstat) so I'd be
> interested to hear of some good ones. Also if there are any suggestions based
> off of past experiences.
> I do have one thing that I am considering but don't know if it's practical (or
> feasible) and that is putting another network card onto the network. Now I've
> never done this but heard that the cards could be bound, or one card accepting
> packets and one would be for sending. I'd be extremely interested in hearing if
> it's possible and how it can be done. I'd also like to hear of any pros and cons
> to this or any other suggestions.
> fedora-list mailing list
> fedora-list at redhat.com
> To unsubscribe: http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
More information about the users