FDC Servers Network Slow?
Dec 16, 2008FDC servers network slow?
Anyone having problems with sites hosted on FDC right now?
FDC servers network slow?
Anyone having problems with sites hosted on FDC right now?
I'm on a NetDepot 10 meg unmetered and just started migrating some accounts over from The Planet. I've been with them since... well the beginning. I wanted something a little less expensive with more bang for buck.
While the uptime has been good. The network speeds have not. I'm never getting more than sustained transfer speeds (scp, rsync) from my Planet server of 400KB/s... at this rate it's going to take 6 hours to transfer an account that's just 8 gigs in size.
NIC is set to 100 meg, full duplex. Both servers have just about no activity on them and firewalls clear.
3% 323MB 378.9KB/s 6:02:15 ETA
Is anyone else finding the network speeds with NetDepot sluggish? I submitted a support ticket about this.
This makes things like remote backups impossible.. hopefully it's just a issue with an overused switch or something. The worst part is I did the full buy-down package in hopes of being with them long term, now I'm not so sure.
problem with my server running CentOS 5.3.
I noticed that there are huge pings to my server from time to time, example:
------------------
64 bytes from HOSTNAME (server-IP): icmp_seq=0 ttl=60 time=2.93 ms
64 bytes from HOSTNAME (server-IP): icmp_seq=1 ttl=60 time=2.70 ms
64 bytes from HOSTNAME (server-IP): icmp_seq=2 ttl=60 time=1901 ms
64 bytes from HOSTNAME (server-IP): icmp_seq=3 ttl=60 time=899 ms
64 bytes from HOSTNAME (server-IP): icmp_seq=5 ttl=60 time=2.69 ms
64 bytes from HOSTNAME (server-IP): icmp_seq=6 ttl=60 time=2.62 ms
64 bytes from HOSTNAME (server-IP): icmp_seq=4 ttl=60 time=2132 ms
64 bytes from HOSTNAME (server-IP): icmp_seq=8 ttl=60 time=2.57 ms
64 bytes from HOSTNAME (server-IP): icmp_seq=7 ttl=60 time=1190 ms
64 bytes from HOSTNAME (server-IP): icmp_seq=10 ttl=60 time=2.65 ms
64 bytes from HOSTNAME (server-IP): icmp_seq=9 ttl=60 time=1048 ms
64 bytes from HOSTNAME (server-IP): icmp_seq=12 ttl=60 time=2.74 ms
64 bytes from HOSTNAME (server-IP): icmp_seq=11 ttl=60 time=1205 ms
------------------
First I thought that it is network related, but most strange for me was that I did not have any packets lose.
Then I tried to ping from my server to other hosts - situation was the same - some ping were good and some were huge (700ms, 800ms, even 2000ms)
I checked:
cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_conntrack_max
and it was 65536
Then I checked:
cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/netfilter/ip_conntrack_count
and it was ~1600 so normal.
dmesg was showing such errors:
conntrack_ftp: partial 227 3331059707+13
Then I checked ifconfig, here is the output:
------------------
eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 00:24:21:57:2B:6F
inet addr:MAIN=IP Bcast:BCAST=IP Mask:255.255.255.192
inet6 addr: fe80::224:21ff:fe57:2b6f/64 Scope:Link
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:170557113 errors:0 dropped:2421127049 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:182047660 errors:0 dropped:46 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:2756835074 (2.5 GiB) TX bytes:79640621 (75.9 MiB)
Interrupt:82 Base address:0xe000
------------------
Strange for me was:
RX packets [...] dropped:2421127049
TX packets [...] dropped:46
I did not have such dropped information on all my other servers. Dropped counter for RX was constatnly increasing.
So I decided to restart all services on the server. After restarting network and ipaliases - problem disappeared. RX dropped counter is still rising, but I do not have any slowdowns on the server and pings are normal.
My question is - does anyone could have any idea what can casue my problem and how can I prevent this in the future?
I am copying 6 GB of data to a machine across a 100baseTX (full-duplex) link. There are no collisions on the network, yet scp and systat -ifstat are both reporting extreamily slow transfer speeds... around 400 KB/s. That cant be! What what can I do to fix this?
I'm running FreeBSD 6.2. What other stats should I be looking at to figure this out?
why I am not getting at least 9 MB / sec, let alone 12?
I have a server in Liquidweb with 50GB of web pages and I want to move this accounts to my servers in Europe. The problem is that speed is about 4Mbps and becomes impossible to move the accounts.
With my other servers in GNAX I have not had trouble getting speeds of 80/100Mbps.
I tried to move my server of Liquidweb to GNAX but has reached only 14Mbps.
Which is the best solution? The network liquidweb has always been very stable, but I am seeing that is really slow.
My new server is on a 100 Mbps port.
Doing a wget [url]
gives me only 6.63 MBps.
Doing a wget [url]
gives me 1.17 MBps.
The folks at leaseweb say it could be due to a network maintenance that they are performing and should be sorted tomorrow. No problem with that.
However, I just wanted to know if anyone else with a leaseweb server is experiencing the same problem now.
What is the speed you are getting?
On the positive side, leaseweb support replies have been fast and to the point. I like it so far.
We've got a discounted Quad dedi box from Ecatel.net about a week ago. Their network and prices are really good, sure. But we still have problems with start up because the second hdd isn't mounted or installed properly. The support team has answers about 1-2 times per day only so this question is in progress already for days.. The helpdesk is locked somehow from todays morning (I see our account is present but there's no way to log in) and we are still waiting for replys from day-before-yesterday requests...
I wouldn't like to be some kind of sharp under any circumstances and I respect every business but this is probably too long so we have to pay now just for waiting to get a server ready with no start yet.
Does somebody work with them? Is it normal situation? We still have some boxes in Layeredtech and would like to move to European DC (these boxes are middle-ended so we need more power now). There were no such problems in LT. Never. The maximum response time to such kind of questions was 2-5 hours (15 minutes in general), maybe a bit more (for hardware setup requests), but not days and nights with no progress indicator.
Maybe that is a European DC highlight strategy to have such delays with tickets response, isn't it? Coz the European market is new for us, anyway, we've never had boxes there before but would like to.
I have a server with a overheating problem and a network problem.
(With a lot of users connecting to it every second)
Well, recently the server started to get slow then finally it was up on KVM but network connections do not work.
After reboot, it works for around 10+ hours but it won't last for a day as it gets slower then unconnectable.
When I look at the logs, I see this:
Mar 5 00:38:35 cn1 kernel: printk: 769 messages suppressed.
Mar 5 00:38:36 cn1 kernel: dst cache overflow
Mar 5 00:38:39 cn1 kernel: CPU0: Temperature above threshold
Mar 5 00:38:39 cn1 kernel: CPU1: Temperature above threshold
Mar 5 00:38:39 cn1 kernel: CPU1: Running in modulated clock mode
Mar 5 00:38:39 cn1 kernel: CPU0: Running in modulated clock mode
Mar 5 00:38:41 cn1 kernel: printk: 709 messages suppressed....
I have two servers running windows 2008(rtm) and I'm getting just crappy transfer speeds between them.
server 1:
dual xeon quad core
8gb ram
dynamic mirrored disks (windows software raid, ick i know
hyper-V, 6 or so VMs, not real heavy load
server 2:
dual xeon quad core
8gb ram
3ware 9650Se raid card, raid1 (using latest engineering drivers/firmware)
The servers are connected to each other via gigabit crossover. When I start to do a file transfer (a 40gb virtual machine, through windows file sharing) it starts fast. 60+MB/s says 12minutes remain but after 5minutes and 5gb or so of transfer it's slowed way down to 7MB/s and the network usage graph that was smooth and is now choppy.
I would like to find out from users how they designed and layout their networks when it comes to subnets.
Currently we have 3 subnet's of different sizes which house our network equipment such as Switches, PDU's, Log Servers etc. but also on these same subnet's are servers which we provide web hosting and VPS services. We also have some clients on these subnets with dedicated servers.
I am curious about this network design. Is it acceptable to house our operational equipment such as switches, PDU's etc on these same subnets which has client access servers or should be obtain a small seperate subnet to house this equipment for security and isolation reasons.
i looking for the servers (powerfull and cheap) i take this post in vps forum 2 day's ago but i understand that it is better for me to take the post in dedicated forum my friend's :
1-vpn server(with many ip)-->with high transfer + good performance(for start)
2-server for starting image hosting (with high or unlimited transfer + 100mbps )+atleast 50_60gb h.d.d
I've got 25 domains on a Virtuozzo/Plesk8.6/CentOS5 VPS. Each domain has one up-to-date install of WordPress, most have very little traffic (average 200mb per month), maybe 2 domains get 5-7gb traffic per month.
I monitor port 80 connections and rarely see more than 10 at a time.
That should in my opinion be no problem at all for a VPS with 768mb guaranteed ram and 2.4ghz cpu. I've got 30gb hard drive spare too.
But.... about 8 or 10 times a day it grinds to a complete halt: server load at 500-1000%, sites timing out, plesk takes 3mins to load, often I can't even connect with SSH, and the plesk web server, apache
INSERT INTO module_watchdog_sys_stat (time, type, value, service_id) VALUES(FROM_UNIXTIME(1226404705), 'MAINMEM_USAGE', 17472, 11);
80 seconds sounds like a huge amount of time for a MySQL insert to me! Does anyone know if this is likely to be the cause of my trouble? Some problem with Plesk and the database? Or could it be something else?
any experiences to report about purchasing used / refurb gear from either Network Liquidators (nweq.com) or Network Hardware (networkhardware.com)?
View 12 Replies View RelatedI have a lot of questions here so if you can't answer them all I understand. even pointing me somewhere where I could get the answers would be appreciated; hardware sites focusing on server hardware, forums focusing on such, etc.
we plan to have three different types of servers:
- db server (self explanatory. mysql. for forums, mysql driven sites.)
- file server (lots of files around ~2-10MB, consistant 70mbps right now, but we want more room for upgrades. needs a LOT of storage room.)
- web server (lots of php files, but also static things like plain html, images, etc. also includes all misc services for the setup-- dns, etc.)
could I be given a rundown for which hardware each of the three should have? I don't need specifics, even just knowing that more ram is important here while cpu doesn't matter as much, or that the fastest disks available are a must, etc would all be valuable info for me. despite that, I certainly wouldn't mind specific hypothetical hardware configs.
for the database server I'm assuming the more ram the better. not entirely sure about the cpu? also not positive on disks...
for the fileserver, how much ram would be practical or useful? disk io will be an issue I'm because plenty of people will be pulling files at once so the disk needs to read from multiple places. scsi (and even raptors) are not an option as we need 750GB+ of space on a reasonable budget. more ram will take some load of of the disks, but how much is neccessary / reasonable?
for the web server I'm assuming cpu first, then ram, but it'll likely need less ram than the db server?
I'm more lost on the disks than anything. scsi on the fileserver is not an option under any circumstances due to $/GB. for the db & web server I'm willing to pay for scsi if the performance increase really does warrant the extra money, but I'd like to be convinced before shelling it out. if you have benchmarks geared at server hardware when it comes to disks I'd really appreciate it.
also, what's the best way to network these together when colocated? each one with a dual gigabit ethernet port and then the communications go to and from the router?
We send mail to another servers but we cant recieve mails another servers. We can't recieve with webmail and outlook.
I look logs but there is no error and our ip is not in blacklist.
there is the error in our server
[url]
linux cpanel centos 4.6
I was wondering if it is possible to cluster 2 web servers and 2 mysql servers with only one server working as load balancer.
I am planning to use LVS (ldirectord and heartbeat).
Let's say I have 3 IPs allocated to the load balancing server.
111.222.111.222 (Main IP)
111.222.111.223 (Web Load Balancing IP)
111.222.111.224 (MySQL Load Balancing IP)
If a connection is made to .223 it would pass the request to one of the web nodes.
If a connection is made to .224 it would pass the request to one of the MySQL nodes.
Is it possible to do this?
If not, can I run, for example, nginx on 223 IP address to provide forward proxy? (Then it would not be able to HA but the main point is to load balance so)
Also, what would be the best way to keep the data same on both web servers? This is a web cluster for a very high traffic forum with a lot of uploads every hour so it has to do real time synchronization. I heard that DRDB is only one way and not two way so I'm not going to be able to use this.
I am just colocating servers and managing them myself, and renting services off of them. In the future I would like to start offering dedicated servers as well. I am wondering if many companies do this, or if its more of a general practice to just setup as a reseller? The worst part that comes to mind is thinking of how to do billing for the bandwidth per month. With my setup I would only be offering flat bandwidth packages (like 2TB a month) but even so, I cant think of anyway to automate it so WHMCS knows if they went over, if so, how much, etc.
View 6 Replies View RelatedAt 15.00 PM (+1 hours here) my isp rebooted the hardware node. After the reboot there were some issues, they think it is possibly a DDoS Attack. They said the load on the host node was in the hunderds and my VPS was stopped because of the reboot and when I started it, HyperVM first told me it was not possible and after a few tries it started finally.
But the load was very high, and it still is. How can I check what the problem is that creates the high load?
Im getting very poor ftp speeds from my server, can someone test the speed and report it back, link below:-
[url]
I did nothing but my whole server got slower.
Especially the sshd and mc.
I solve the sshd problem cos I edited the conf file with UseDNS no so it faster right now but I couldnt do anything with mc.
I have to wait about 15 seconds to load it.
Any suggestion?
or any ideal why my server become slower?
System: Debian 4.0
kernel: grsec 2.6.19-1
Till today morning its okey.
Oh, yes, I run tiger and got the following message in log:
09:50> Beginning security report for atdn.us (GNU/Linux Linux 2.6.19.1-grsec).
# Performing check of passwd files...
# Checking entries from /etc/passwd.
--WARN-- [pass014w] Login (firebird) is disabled, but has a valid shell.
--WARN-- [pass016w] User oident has / as home directory
--WARN-- [pass015w] Login ID sshd does not have a valid shell
(/usr/sbin/nologin).
--WARN-- [pass015w] Login ID sync does not have a valid shell (/bin/sync).
# Performing check of PATH components...
--WARN-- [path009w] /etc/csh.login does not setenv an initial setting for
PATH.
# Only checking user 'root'
I modificated this to the correct one (I mean I try to solve this warnings) but when I noticed that my machine becmome slower, I recover everything.
I have an ASP.Net + SQL Server 2008 Express website I was hosting with DiscountASP.net. Their service seems pretty solid, and I didn't have any issues hosting with them. Customer support was quick and knowledgeable.
However, I had noticed for quite some time that the website seemed pretty slow. Please note that the website isn't live yet, so it was only me and a colleague who were accessing it. I was accessing the website from Dubai, UAE and he from Doha, Qatar. Therefore traffic/load definitely wasn't the problem.
We tried an instance of the website on a VPS (the DB was still running on DASP), and it was blazing fast! The difference in speed was quite significant and sustained. What could the reason for this be? Is it because we can't expect good speeds from shared hosting? Or should I report this issue to DASP?
I would be paying around 5x of what I'm paying right now ($100 instead of $20) if I switched to a VPS, but if there are definite advantages, I would be willing to do so. I don't expect large volumes of traffic on the website for quite a while.
I have a problem with my company's web hosting solution: occasionally we go through periods where we cannot seem to access our webpages very quickly. In different browsers (IE, Firefox) it takes literally minutes to load a single page. Most of the time the pages load very quickly from inside our office or outside.
Our self-hosting configuration is:
Windows XP Pro. w/ SP3
Apache 2.2.11 with PHP5.2.9-2
Norton Internet Security
Our internet connection is 10Mbps down / 900 kbps up cable behind a DLink router with port 80 forwarded over to the web server. Each page of our site is relatively small in size.
The same computer server as a mail server for about 10 email addresses.
When we encounter this problem, restarting the Apache service never seems to help, but restarting the computer does seem to help. XP was put on the computer with the latest updates about 3 weeks ago, so I am not concerned about spyware, particularly since this computer is only used as a server.
Does anyone have any troubleshooting steps to determine what the problem is? We don't have hundreds of visitors at a time in traffic as far as I am aware.
I own the website [url]and it's hosted at Host Excellence. Recently there have been some downtime periods, and most importantly, I have noticed that downloads are very slow. For instance, when I download a file such as [url]I get an approximative transfer rate of 100-150 KB/sec (whereas most other sites download at 500 KB/sec or more). First of all I'd like to know if you guys get similar results, and what do you recommend? I have contacted my host about it, they seem to deny the problem. Should I switch? What to? I need something reliable and fast.
View 14 Replies View RelatedAfter my bad experiences with the other provider, I decided to go with GeekStorage.com for my hosting needs. I found plenty of positive reviews for them but so far, it doesn't look good :-/
The support was fast enough, but not really helpfull.
My basic problems, so far, are:
1. The VPS is _really_ slow. Simple operations like listing (ls) the contents of directories with 4-5 files takes around 1~1.5seconds. Editing /etc/vim/vimrc with vim takes around 3 seconds (to open, I mean).
2. While trying to install phpmyadmin from the default ubuntu repository took me almost 10 minutes, from downloading to installing the packages. Something my old Dual P3 (yes, pentium 3) did in less than 2 minutes. Accessing the phpmyadmin page (with a web browser) took around 3 seconds, and no, I don't mean loading the database scheme and stuff, just the login screen. It just stood there for 3 seconds, then instant load. No, it wasn't a DNS problem. My browser was just hanging at "Waiting..."
3. Bandwidth is _really_ low. Tried downloading different files located all around the world and I never seen more than 300k/s, max. Sometimes it drops to a painfull 150k/s and just stays there.
4. Timeouts. First night they got my VPS up I had small downtime periods. I was trying to edit the DNS files and I had like 20 disconnects in 1 hour. The connection was working for 2 minutes, then *poof* dropped for another 2 minutes.
5. The virtualization. I can't install simple software as pureftpd. All I get is "Jan 4 20:38:21 vps pure-ftpd: (?@?) [ERROR] Unable to switch capabilities : Operation not permitted". Tried different workarounds (trying to avoid recompilation with --without-capabilities) but nothing worked.
As answers, all I got so far is:
- for the connection problem:
"Could you please provide the results of a traceroute when this problem is occurring? We will forward it to the DC and see if they can determine any network issues. Thank you, and apologies for the trouble."
Got the answer 1 hour after I asked them if there's something wrong, but it was too late... the problems were gone, for the moment.
- the slow response from the vps:
"2-3 seconds is understandable during peak hours, however we have not seen this issue come up on node3 since the server was rebooted recently. If the issues arise again
please let us know, we will check on the cause."
I *almost* understand about the peak hours, but it's not normal. I remember this was an issue with *shared* hosting. This was one of the reasons I got a VPS in the first place.
Basically they're telling me that during peak hours my customers will have to wait 3 seconds for my websites to load. You know what the average user does after waiting that many seconds for a page to load? Closes the browser or types another address.
I have the VPS512 plan (the $55 one + $3 safetyweb protection) + extra 50% bandwidth and disk space. My VPS is located on NODE3.
Anyone else experiencing the same issues (maybe on another node?) I'm still hoping for this issues to go away, maybe it's something temporary, but if this happens for the whole week, I'll definatelly ask for money back (they have a 60day return policy).
My cPanel/WHM VPS is running slugesh/slow and loading time is affected, for cPanel/WHM and HTTP mainly PHP files.
VPS Spec:
CPU: 1 GHz * 4 cores
RAM: 832MB - Spare Ram 300MB+
Space: 35GB - Left 27GB
Load: Various but normally below 1.00
Is it in the UK, I am in the UK ping and trace route looks fine
My site is very slow. But I can not find the reason.
Here is the top
Code:
top - 22:04:07 up 22:09, 1 user, load average: 0.44, 0.43, 0.34
Tasks: 402 total, 1 running, 401 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
Cpu(s): 4.3%us, 0.7%sy, 0.0%ni, 94.8%id, 0.1%wa, 0.1%hi, 0.1%si, 0.0%st
Mem: 2074804k total, 2007836k used, 66968k free, 72720k buffers
Swap: 4192956k total, 96k used, 4192860k free, 641728k cached
PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
17133 apache 20 0 27752 9.9m 3392 S 4 0.5 0:02.25 httpd
6306 apache 20 0 27772 9.9m 3452 S 4 0.5 0:08.04 httpd
2261 mysql 20 0 251m 88m 4752 S 3 4.3 48:25.58 mysqld
17081 apache 20 0 27700 9.9m 3496 S 2 0.5 0:02.81 httpd
17105 apache 20 0 27112 9504 3428 S 2 0.5 0:02.62 httpd
11844 apache 20 0 27756 9.9m 3444 S 0 0.5 0:06.21 httpd
13676 apache 20 0 27700 9.9m 3440 S 0 0.5 0:04.74 httpd
13718 apache 20 0 27424 9856 3448 S 0 0.5 0:04.83 httpd
16690 apache 20 0 26628 8980 3408 S 0 0.4 0:01.88 httpd
When run
[root@nd10749 ~]# netstat -an |grep 80 |wc -l
2788
It was able to handle over 5000 connection without problem.
When checked the log, can not find anything suspicous.
Leaseweb very very slow?
just me?
2 dedis... and both with problems... anyone?
Recently, my server has been running real slow and I don't know why... I've not noticed any increase in traffic (In fact it goes slow with no traffic on it...), what are some things I can look at to try and diagnose the problem? I know next to nothing about *nix so please speak in great detail.
Anytime I restart Apache, it loads quick for a few seconds then gets slow again...
Here are the top few processes listed on the process manager: .....
I had configured webserver on one of my CentOS server. It worked fine for few months but after sometimes it started giving problem. I was not able to browse website. The I found that it was timing out so I increased timeout period from php and the website started working.
But still the website is taking 30-35 seconds to load. I checked the server but I couldn't find any solution. Please guide me to get this resolved.
I noticed today that SSH is taking longer to log into, I have tried by password and key but they just as slow as each other.
Once I am logged in, it is fine.
I have tried restarted SSHD via WHM but it makes no difference. Trace route looks ok and all other services seem fine as well.
Server load is around 0.00 and around 500mb ram spare.
I have got a dedicated server running Fedora Core 7.
My problem is that I am trying to run yum updates using the default repos and it failes to respond and check any mirrors?
I have tried to disable ipv6 and changed some tcp timeout settings along with the resolver.conf name servers and has appeared to fix the wget timeouts but yum is still slow.