Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1

    May switch cause high load on powerful server?

    Aight, I have two quad core processors and load is like 15.
    May it be caused by switch if it doesnt let traffic trough properly?

    if dmesg grep eth shows 100 full duplex is it normal or should it be 1000 full duplex? how can I make it 1000 full duplex on centos 5 ?

    0000:0a:02.0: eth0: (PCI Express:2.5GB/s:Width x4)
    0000:0a:02.0: eth0: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection
    0000:0a:02.0: eth0: MAC: 3, PHY: 5, PBA No: ffffff-0ff
    0000:0a:02.0: eth1: (PCI Express:2.5GB/s:Width x4)
    0000:0a:02.0: eth1: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection
    0000:0a:02.0: eth1: MAC: 3, PHY: 5, PBA No: ffffff-0ff
    ADDRCONF(NETDEV_UP): eth0: link is not ready
    0000:0a:02.0: eth0: Link is Up 100 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: RX/TX
    0000:0a:02.0: eth0: 10/100 speed: disabling TSO
    ADDRCONF(NETDEV_CHANGE): eth0: link becomes ready
    ADDRCONF(NETDEV_UP): eth1: link is not ready
    0000:0a:02.0: eth1: Link is Up 100 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: RX/TX
    0000:0a:02.0: eth1: 10/100 speed: disabling TSO
    ADDRCONF(NETDEV_CHANGE): eth1: link becomes ready
    eth0: no IPv6 routers present
    eth1: no IPv6 routers present
    ADDRCONF(NETDEV_UP): eth0: link is not ready
    0000:0a:02.0: eth0: Link is Up 100 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: RX/TX
    0000:0a:02.0: eth0: 10/100 speed: disabling TSO
    ADDRCONF(NETDEV_CHANGE): eth0: link becomes ready
    ADDRCONF(NETDEV_UP): eth1: link is not ready
    0000:0a:02.0: eth1: Link is Up 100 Mbps Full Duplex, Flow Control: RX/TX
    0000:0a:02.0: eth1: 10/100 speed: disabling TSO
    ADDRCONF(NETDEV_CHANGE): eth1: link becomes ready
    eth0: no IPv6 routers present
    eth1: no IPv6 routers present

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    1,204
    Can you provide us with the output of the command " top "

    and about your question - actualy a 1000mbps line would make your hardware work harder, due to larger amount of I/O that a 1gbps link can eat up in contrast to a 100mbps link.
    beast5.com - Managed Hosting Solutions 2004 - 2014

  3. #3
    Here you go:

    __PID_____USER_____PR__NI__VIRT__RES__SHR_S_%CPU__%MEM____TIME+____COMMAND
    _6212_srcds014_____15___0__213m_201m_7404_S___12__1.3_829:25.22 srcds_i686
    _4397_srcds017_____15___0__162m_153m_7304_S___11__1.0__59:37.82 srcds_i686
    _9766_srcds016_____15___0__130m_120m_7328_S____6__0.7__43:49.45 srcds_i686
    _8646_srcds010_____15___0__111m__98m_7264_S____3__0.6__15:33.58 srcds_i686
    _4692_srcds006_____15___0__189m_178m_7428_S____2__1.1__54:15.96 srcds_i686
    15711_srcds011_____15___0__116m_103m_7456_S____2__0.6__20:49.17 srcds_i686
    15934_srcds005_____15___0__103m__90m_7284_S____2__0.6__12:38.15 srcds_i686
    _8318_srcds007_____15___0__115m_101m_7336_S____1__0.6__70:52.09 srcds_i686
    17876_root_________15___0_12740_1172__804_R____1__0.0___0:00.12 top
    _2157_srcds003_____15___0_96752__79m_6916_S____0__0.5___9:37.12 srcds_i686
    _6678_srcds012_____15___0__119m_106m_7472_S____0__0.7__17:31.71 srcds_i686
    _7016_srcds002_____15___0__148m__78m__12m_S____0__0.5___2:10.72 srcds_i686
    _8099_srcds008_____15___0_78112__66m_7372_S____0__0.4__28:09.32 srcds_i686
    11173_srcds015_____15___0__101m__88m_7420_S____0__0.6__10:49.15 srcds_i686
    12067_srcds004_____15___0__127m_113m_7432_S____0__0.7__20:20.02 srcds_i686
    24526_srcds013_____15___0_97932__81m_7160_R____0__0.5___9:25.22 srcds_i686
    25848_srcds009_____15___0_73388__61m_7192_S____0__0.4___2:01.61 srcds_i686
    27002_srcds001_____15___0_98592__81m_6916_S____0__0.5__10:37.66 srcds_i686
    So it can't be switch and patch cat5e utp cables fault?
    Last edited by Driimer; 07-28-2009 at 07:03 PM. Reason: edited it into more readable format

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    1,204
    nope its not your cable, you got plenty of counter strike servers running there.
    how many slots per server?

    a load of 15 sound Normal for such kind of server usage.

    in this page alone we can see about 17 game servers.

    lets say 12players per server ?

    17X12 ?
    you are overkilling your hardware mate.

    how much ram do you have there?

    show us the output of " free -m "
    and " iostat "
    which kind of disks are you useing?
    have you disabled un wanted services / kernel modules ?
    beast5.com - Managed Hosting Solutions 2004 - 2014

  5. #5
    16gb ram

    ____________________total_______used______free____shared_____buffers___cached
    Mem:________________16051______15662_______389_______0_________528_______10810
    -/+ buffers/cache:_____4323_______11727
    Swap:_______________1983___________0_____1983
    Adding ram doesnt seem to help since same result was with 8gb.

    avg-cpu:__%user___%nice_%system_%iowait__%steal___%idle
    ___________2.15___0.03____0.82____0.56____0.00___96.44

    Device:________tps______Blk_read/s___Blk_wrtn/s___Blk_read___Blk_wrtn
    sda__________16.95________16.24_______410.86___26647872__673999262
    dm-0_________51.84________16.24_______410.86___26643882__673998912
    dm-1__________0.00_________0.00_________0.00________896________328
    15krpm discs

    Haven't disabled any kernel modules nor services.

    Would changing from raid 1 into raid 0 system make huge difference in server load?
    Last edited by Driimer; 07-28-2009 at 07:35 PM. Reason: edited for better view

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    1,204
    Quote Originally Posted by Driimer View Post
    16gb ram



    Adding ram doesnt seem to help since same result was with 8gb.



    15krpm discs

    haven't disabled any kernel modules nor services.
    you should fine tune your machine, get rid of un-used modules and services.

    another thing, try looking at /var/log/messages for any kind of errors.

    ...split your game servers to 2 machines. (ouch i know).

    game servers eat a lot, and im pretty sure they are loaded with players.
    beast5.com - Managed Hosting Solutions 2004 - 2014

  7. #7
    Would changing from raid 1 into raid 0 system make huge difference in server load?

    Repeating it since you replied before I edited. I know I have to format discs if I make change from raid 0 into raid 1 but does it format discs if I make it from raid 1 into raid 0?

    Edit: that cat5e is my cable there tho, same goes to switch and that's why I think they aren't proper tech over there.
    Last edited by Driimer; 07-28-2009 at 07:42 PM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Israel
    Posts
    1,204
    RAID 0 is not a good option for production servers, as if one disk get damaged you loose your whole disk array.

    stick with raid1 , for 15K disks its a minor diffrance in contrast to the benefit you gain while mirroring.

    anyway, first of all , get rid of services you dont need and tweak your kernel a bit.
    that could help just a bit more, but as it seems, you are asking your hardware for too much...
    beast5.com - Managed Hosting Solutions 2004 - 2014

  9. Newsletters

    Subscribe Now & Get The WHT Quick Start Guide!

Similar Threads

  1. Server high load/high mysql usage. Need new server. [HELP]
    By ToroPreto in forum Hosting Security and Technology
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 07-05-2009, 07:12 PM
  2. high server load / high swap / lots of httpd
    By hbhb in forum Hosting Security and Technology
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 02-22-2008, 09:17 AM
  3. Server load: How high is too high?
    By t325 in forum Dedicated Server
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-02-2007, 12:56 AM
  4. Server load not very high but pages load slowly
    By singtel22 in forum Hosting Security and Technology
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 01-27-2005, 02:43 PM
  5. How high Server load is high
    By Chris2001 in forum Hosting Security and Technology
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 03-09-2004, 09:02 PM

Related Posts from theWHIR.com

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •