Ubuntu Installation :: Disk IO Performance Degrades Horribly After Upgrade To 10.10?
Oct 18, 2010
I upgraded my old Kubuntu installation to 10.10 Maverick Meercat and I am now experiencing a really annoying problem. I boot my computer and everything seems fine for a while, but eventually my disk performance drops to horrible levels. It's not gradual. It's fine one second and then abysmal the next.
If I do "cp file1 file2" and then kill the cp process after 10s, there are only a couple of MB copied.When I run dmesg after the performance degradation, I see this:
Code:
[12879.434115] irq 22: nobody cared (try booting with the "irqpoll" option)
[12879.434121] Pid: 0, comm: swapper Tainted: P 2.6.35-22-generic #34-Ubuntu
[12879.434124] Call Trace:
[12879.434126] <IRQ> [<ffffffff810cba5b>] __report_bad_irq+0x2b/0xa0
[12879.434137] [<ffffffff810cbc5c>] note_interrupt+0x18c/0x1d0
[Code]...
View 3 Replies
ADVERTISEMENT
Nov 28, 2010
I'm toying around with fluxbox and like it's speed and simplicity. However, the gnome-panel is great and I would like to use it in fluxbox. Specifically, I like its system monitor, typing break, gnubiff and clock (which world clock support). My question is: if I'm running the gnome-panel in fluxbox will this degrade performance, for example, since the gnome-panel needs to load all the gnome related libraries etc.? One of the main reasons I'm looking into fluxbox is for speed so I don't want to lose that just because of the panel.
View 14 Replies
View Related
Oct 19, 2010
I am running openSuse 11.2 (32-bit), my CPU only supports 32-bits. I have a hardware RAID device. My system has 4GB of RAM. When I configure my system to only use 3GB, 2GB, or even 1GB, using mem=1024M in grub, my RAID performance is much better then when letting my system use the default 4GB available.Can anyone explain to me why this is? Is there anything I can do, i.e. kernel configuration, that will help performance when running with all 4GB enabled?
View 5 Replies
View Related
Dec 29, 2010
I am having a lot of performance problems since my upgrade my ATI board does not get properly supported (tried a lot but nothing really helps)my keyboard typing is horrable : i have to see at each click of it got accepted ; cannot type text properly screen performance is bad - often the screen greys out and back to color (probably because of driver)
[Code]...
View 1 Replies
View Related
Apr 6, 2011
Ubuntu 10.10 is dual booted but it is my primary OS.
Unfortunately it's on the outer edges of the disk in an extended partition.
This has always bugged me, with regards to read/write performance.
Do my concerns of reduced performance have any foundation? Should i bite the bullet and format the drive installing ubuntu first?
I ran the disk read benchmark and my read speeds were 100MB/Sec at the beginning of the test to just 55MB/Sec at the end. I have no idea if the position of the test has any bearing on the position of the disk or whether the speed recorded is affected by other factors such as the tests function or simulation.
View 5 Replies
View Related
Jan 29, 2010
how much of a performance impact full disk encryption (say, AES 256-bit) has on disk-related activities? On one particular project I'm involved in I am trying to weigh out security vs performance issues.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Jan 15, 2010
I am trying to upgrade to 9.10 but it fails because the disk is full. I am running a Dell Mini with 16GB SSD...so there isn't a lot of free space to begin with. Added to that, I have some hefty applications (rosegarden, audacity, skype, etc) which I kind of need. Am I better off just sticking to 9.04? Are there any good ways to clean up the system and get rid of stuff that might be sticking around? I did apt-get clean and it didn't clean enough.
View 6 Replies
View Related
May 6, 2010
My issue is that while I was upgrading from Hardy to Lucid, everything was going fine until the very end when some packages were badly corrupted (according to the installer) and the upgrade could not complete. When I rebooted, it would not load into the login screen, and instead just presented me with a console. However, 10.04 showed up under GRUB, I loaded 10.04, and it worked fine, so I just changed GRUB to load 10.04 by default. I managed to fix the broken package problem from 10.04.
The problem now is that, since it was a "partial" upgrade and terminated before completion, I still have 8.04 on my hard disk. I can still load 8.04 and still get the same console, instead of the login screen. I just wanted to know how I can "complete" the upgrade and get rid of 8.04. Except for that one issue, upgrade was successful.
View 7 Replies
View Related
Jun 12, 2010
I just upgraded from 9.10 to 10.04 using the upgrade option in the Update Manager and now my system fails to boot.
[Code]...
View 2 Replies
View Related
Oct 11, 2010
which is a surprise as I've found Ubuntu beyond my expectations on all the machines I've run it on.I'm trying to upgrade my old desktop from 9.04 to 9.10 (and then 10.04 - same as my laptop), and am running into this message at the start of the upgrade process:"Not enough free disk spaceThe upgrade is now aborted. The upgrade needs a total of 3109M free space on disk '/'. Please free at least an additional 1088M of disk space on '/'. Empty your trash and remove temporary packages of former installations using 'sudo apt-get clean'."I've done a bit of searching and have followed the leads I've found but am still stuck. I've emptied trash, cleared out old kernels etc but it hasn't got me there.
Running df -h gives this:
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/sda1 7.8G 5.5G 2.0G 75% /
[code]...
View 2 Replies
View Related
Jun 11, 2010
I just did a clean install of Lenny after running Etch for ages. Mythtv used to just work out of the box but now I'm getting the dreaded 'cannot connect to database error' & if I try to run the fronted or mythtv-setup the screen is unreadable.Why does this distro (which I used to love) seem to get worse with every release?
View 6 Replies
View Related
Apr 29, 2010
Im getting an error:
Not Enough Disk Space.
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
I think im getting this error because I didnt allocate enough space to the Ubuntu partition when I installed it. How do I allocate more space to the Ubuntu partition? If this is not possible, is it possible to install 10.04 from my Windows?
View 5 Replies
View Related
May 2, 2010
I am trying to upgrade my ubuntu distribution from 9.10 to 10.04 using update-manager. I have only 2G free in my / partition, and update-manager complains saying it needs 4G free in the / partition to upgrade.
I presume the space is needed to store downloaded packages. Is there any way I can change the download directory to some other partition (i have plenty of space in other partitions)?
View 2 Replies
View Related
Feb 1, 2011
I installed Ubuntu 10.04 on Windows 7 using Wubi. Then upgraded it to 10.10 and KDE. Initially while installing I alloted only a small amount of disk space. Now I need more space for Ubuntu. How can I do it without disturbing the current setup and configurations of both Windows and Ubuntu.
View 5 Replies
View Related
May 5, 2011
I've had this problem on a couple of Ubuntu server upgrades and am keen to get to the bottom of it. Basically, with an Ubuntu 10.10 server installtion where LVM has been used, running through the do-release-upgrade process works perfectly until the reboot stage. Then grub complains with "no such disk" and dumps me out to the grub shell. From here, I can see (from ls) the following:
Code:
(hostname-swap_1) (hostname-root) (hd0) (hd0,5) (hd0,1) (fd0)
I can enumerate the filesystem on (hd0,1) which seems to contain the /boot filesystem and the filesystem on (hostname-root) seems to contain the / filesystem.
If I execute:
Code:
linux=(hd0,1)/vmlinuz-image-2.6.38-8-server root=(hostname-root)
initrd=(hd0,1)/initrd.img-2.6.38-8-server
boot
It boots, but into busybox saying that the target filesystem doesn't have requested /sbin/init.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Oct 17, 2010
I've just bought a 6-core Phenom with 16G of RAM. I use it primarily for compiling and video encoding (and occassional web/db). I'm finding all activities get disk-bound and I just can't keep all 6 cores fed. I'm buying an SSD raid to sit between the HDD and tmpfs. I want to setup a "layered" filesystem where reads are cached on tmpfs but writes safely go through to the SSD. I want files (or blocks) that haven't been read lately on the SSD to then be written back to a HDD using a compressed FS or block layer.
So basically reads:
- Check tmpfs
- Check SSD
- Check HD
And writes: - Straight to SSD (for safety), then tmpfs (for speed) And periodically, or when space gets low: - Move least frequently accessed files down one layer. I've seen a few projects of interest. CacheFS, cachefsd, bcache seem pretty close but I'm having trouble determining which are practical. bcache seems a little risky (early adoption), cachefs seems tied to specific network filesystems. There are "union" projects unionfs and aufs that let you mount filesystems over each other (USB device over a DVD usually) but both are distributed as a patch and I get the impression this sort of "transparent" mounting was going to become a kernel feature rather than a FS.
I know the kernel has a built-in disk cache but it doesn't seem to work well with compiling. I see a 20x speed improvement when I move my source files to tmpfs. I think it's because the standard buffers are dedicated to a specific process and compiling creates and destroys thousands of processes during a build (just guessing there). It looks like I really want those files precached.....
View 1 Replies
View Related
Aug 12, 2010
I have doubts regarding storage:
How to configure the Events of Storage Processor?
What are performance issues will come daily in a critical production server?
What are first steps for disk performance Check?
What are first steps for Storage Processor performance Check?
What are first steps for MetaLUN performance Check?
View 2 Replies
View Related
Oct 27, 2010
I am experiencing disk write performance issues and I cannot find the cause. I have LSI-9211-8i SAS 2 controller (latest firmware), Centos 5.5 latest x86_64 kernel (2.6.18-194.17.4.el5 #1 SMP with latest LSI driver v. 7.00 datet Jul 27) and Seagate Cheetah ST3600057SS drives. These drives have a std write performance (sustained) of > 200MB/s (and read as well); with Fedora core 13 (same machine), issuing a dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdo bs=1024k count=16384 (16 GB direct device write), gets normally to 213 MB/s (repeated retries). On Centos 5.5 I am getting speeds around 110/113 MB/s.
iostat does not show anything specific (just 1.3 % wait, CPU 99.7 idle).
There are 14 drives: tried with several of them, same figures. Reads go around 200 MB/s.
View 2 Replies
View Related
Jul 26, 2010
I run apt-get upgrade and get
Quote:
Preconfiguring packages ...
(Reading database ... 78720 files and directories currently installed.)
Preparing to replace apt 0.7.25.3ubuntu9 (using .../apt_0.7.25.3ubuntu9.1_i386.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement apt ...
dpkg: error processing /var/cache/apt/archives/apt_0.7.25.3ubuntu9.1_i386.deb (--unpack):
unable to create `/usr/share/locale/dz/LC_MESSAGES/apt.mo.dpkg-new' (while processing `./usr/share/locale/dz/LC_MESSAGES/apt.mo'): No space left on device
No apport report written because the error message indicates a disk full error
[Code]....
View 1 Replies
View Related
Dec 22, 2010
After upgrade from 10.04 to 10.10 I can't mount anymore my crypted disk image.I've an old backup of this image, but when I try to mount it, system give me same errors.
View 2 Replies
View Related
May 11, 2011
I have one hard disk (call her HDA) that contains nothing but a single ext4 partition containing a backup of all my important data. I did a clean install of 10.10 on my primary hard disk (call her HDB) and from there proceeded to the 11.04 upgrade. In 10.10, I was able to read HDA just fine. However after the upgrade, I can no longer mount this drive.
When mounting from file browser:
Code:
Error mounting: mount: wrong fs type, bad option, bad superblock on /dev/sda,
missing codepage or helper program, or other error
In some cases useful info is found in syslog - try
dmesg | tail or so
The end of dmesg said the following:
Code:
dmesg | tail
[49.853308] wlan0: associated
[50.084874] ADDRCONF(NETDEV_CHANGE): wlan0: link becomes ready
[52.859533] Intel AES-NI instructions are not detected.
[52.890955] padlock_aes: VIA PadLock not detected.
[60.710006] wlan0: no IPv6 routers present
[82.130904] EXT4-fs (sda): bad geometry: block count 122096646 exceeds size of device (122096381 blocks) .....
[96.010858] EXT4-fs (sda): bad geometry: block count 122096646 exceeds size of device (122096381 blocks)
[107.791812] EXT4-fs (sda): bad geometry: block count 122096646 exceeds size of device (122096381 blocks)
[322.758948] EXT4-fs (sda): bad geometry: block count 122096646 exceeds size of device (122096381 blocks)
[516.932403] EXT4-fs (sda): bad geometry: block count 122096646 exceeds size of device (122096381 blocks)
For some reason my hard disk has a block count greater than the size of my device. I've done my background searching on this and tried a command line utility I've never heard of before:
Code:
# sudo e2fsck /dev/sda
e2fsck 1.41.14 (22-Dec-2010)
The filesystem size (according to the superblock) is 122096646 blocks
The physical size of the device is 122096381 blocks
Either the superblock or the partition table is likely to be corrupt!
Abort<y>? yes
And this is as far as I've got. I'm really hesitant to start fiddling around and experimenting with possible fixes because the backup data on this drive holds a decade's worth of work for me and is extremely valuable (hence why I have a spare drive for backups). I really didn't think that the Ubuntu upgrade process would mess with this drive, seeing as the Ubuntu install was contained on an entirely different drive. Any safest way for me to recover this data? Data preservation is the #1 priority for me here. I need to copy all of this data over to my primary drive where Ubuntu is installed. After that, I can reformat this "broken" backup drive.
View 4 Replies
View Related
Nov 20, 2010
Today I was trying to upgrade mysql and php.PhP went well, thats at the latest version, but the mysql went to 5.5x from REMI. This killed all my websites, no DB and worse.Well I typed the wrong this (totally my fault - serious EPIC FAIL)i typed yum remove mysql not downgrade...This removed plesk and a load of other stuff, and now im screwed.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Feb 23, 2010
I was running Ubuntu 9.04 Desktop on a headless Pentium 4 machine which is our file, mail, web & fax server. The two x 250GB SATA hard disks were in a RAID 1 array with full disk encryption. Ran the 9.10 upgrade via WEBMIN and it failed. I should have known then to copy over everything to a backup disk, but instead I rebooted.
On restart the machine accepted my encryption passphrase but promptly hung with a mountall symbol lookup error - code 127. So I can't start the machine to get at the disks, and using a Live CD is useless as it has no way to open the RAID array to get at the encrypted partitions. Although we have data backed up (as at last night) I'd hoped not to have to rebuild the entire server from scratch. But its looking bad.I have taken one drive out and plugged it into another machine (Hercules), and the partitions show up as /dev/sdb1 /dev/sdb2 /dev/sdb3.
If it weren't for RAID, I could open /dev/sdb2 the main partition) in Disk Utility and enter my encryption passphrase to get access. But RAID adds a layer of obstruction that I have not yet overcome. I used mdadm to scan the above partitions and created the /etc/mdadm.conf file, which I edited to show the 2nd drive as missing (rather than risk corrupting both drives). I activated the RAID array with mdadm, and cat shows:
Code:
root@HERCULES# cat /proc/mdstat
Personalities : [raid1]
md1 : active raid1 sdb3[0]
1815232 blocks [2/1] [U_]
[Code]...
I've been searching the web for hours but have yet to find someone with a solution to this situation. If anyone has a thought on how to access this disk I'd be pleased to hear from you. In the meantime I will start building a new (9.10) machine from scratch, without RAID, 'cos that's probably going to be necessary.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Oct 21, 2010
My ubuntu desktop died yesterday. I rebooted my computer in like 1 month and after grub, the screen is all black and it stays there... forever. So I decided to see if the problem persists or not when I completely upgrade my ubuntu to the latest version. So I downloaded the latest ubuntu iso from the site, burned it, and booted from CD and I see several selections to choose from the menu list. The second one was "Install Ubuntu". What I'm worried about is I don't know whether selecting 'Install Ubuntu' will erase all my previous data, or there will be an option to upgrade Ubuntu without erasing all the data. Is it safe to install from the live disk? Will my data be safe? Is there any way to upgrade my Ubuntu on the HD to the latest Ubuntu from a live disk?
View 3 Replies
View Related
Oct 4, 2009
I just upgraded my F9 system to F10 using they preupgrade method, and though nothing seems to have failed during the upgrade I can't boot my system any longer.I have a completly encrypted system, and so I need to enter a passphrase at boot. The new F10 system does boot and I do get a Password: prompt but the passphrase is not accepted.My passphrase doesn't contain any odd characters to prevent problems with keyboard mappings. Just plain letters (upper and lower case) and digits
View 9 Replies
View Related
May 30, 2011
I followed the guideline 'How to use PreUpgrade' to upgrade F14 -> F15. What happened was that after reboot: 1. The screen was a mess ... no readable information 2. No reaction on pressing 'return' 3. The disk led showed no activity, so I reseted the computer after 5 minutes inactivity. The system came up but with F14. I repeated the 'preupgrade' and all messages are in [URL]... but still F14 comes up after reboot. Where have I missed ... eager to get F15
View 4 Replies
View Related
Jan 12, 2011
I would like to re-raise this topic that I have seen on other discussion boards but seems to be going no where.I have been using Ubuntu for many years now having switched from other distributions. All my machines ran some version of Ubuntu, until just recently. I upgraded my personal HP TX2500 from 9.04 to 10.04. No problems. After 10.10 had been out for a while I upgraded again. The wireless would drop when busy/(signal slightly weakened) etc. It would not function again unless the wifi module was reloaded.
Then I installed 10.10 on my HP NC6400 the same thing occured. I installed Ubuntu 10.04 instead. It seemed no better. After some Googling, it seemed I was not alone. I tried all the suggestions I could find and none of them worked. One suggestion was to install Fedora 14. This works perfectly on the nc6400. The HP TX2500 has been reinstalled back with 10.04 where the wireless seems ok and I assume I am stuck there for a while.
Now my question is why would the networking behave this way for Ubuntu 10.10 (10.04 as well on the NC6400) but wireless on Fedora 14 is perfect (I mean really good! Better than either Ubuntu 10.04 or 10.10 on any of my laptops) on the NC6400. I am hoping that we can find a way to fix this, otherwise I will likely have to drop Ubuntu completely because I do not have an upgrade path for laptops. There must be many other users in the same position who are not discussing it and just rebooting each time this occurs. This must give a negative perception of otherwise great software.
Systems running Linux
Dell D610
HP TX2500
HP NC6400
IBM T20
[code]...
View 7 Replies
View Related
Jun 16, 2010
Since I upgraded to Slackware64 13.1 my system feels slower than before (Slackware64 13.0).I paid attention to the documentation (changes_and_hints.txt, readmes etc.) regarding the update. The only thing I changed is, that I used the KDE-4.4.4 packages of AlienBob instead of the KDE-4.4.3 packages of Slackware.
But since AlienBob at his blog wrote, "Although it seems (by looking at the changelog between 4.4.3 and 4.4.4) that there were no spectacular updates in the latest stable KDE Software Compilation, I got some feedback that 4.4.4 does feel �snappier� than the 4.4.3 which is part of Slackware 13.1.", I thought it would be a good idea to use these packages.
I also recognized a few crashes in KDE, which I didn't have before so often. Therefore I moved the .kde to .kde_bak and configured kde new. This improved the behaviour regarding the crashes, but it still seems not that stable to me like the KDE 4.2 in Slackware64 13.0.Did anyone recognize similar problems after the upgrade, or can give some hints how to solve it?
View 6 Replies
View Related
Apr 30, 2010
I cannot upgrade to 10.4, because my EEE 901 has a too small "system disk", 4GB. However, I do have enough space on my slower 16GB SSD disk. Can I move some recommended system directory there temporarily and symlink from the root disk? Would the upgrade data itself be a good candidate, perhaps? The work around would be to do a clean install of the new version, but I rather not, as I have some tweaking to do afterwards in that case. As it is now, I have 700MB of free space, and need about 1.4GB, if I'm not mistaken.
View 3 Replies
View Related
May 6, 2011
I've tried to use that thread to help but to no avail, i tried to use this:
[URL]
BUT I CAN'T OPEN A TERMINAL!!! as i am at a point where the screen says: Continue to wait, press S to skip or M for manual recovery. so if i run this command : gksudo gedit /etc/fstab my computer whines about there being no way to show this on the screen, I have tried this:
Use a non-graphical editor, like emacs or vi. Try Ctl+Alt+F3 -- you should get a login prompt. Login to an account with admin privileges (like, the first account you created, for example), and then type 'sudo vi /etc/fstab'; that will open /etc/fstab in the vi editor. Make your changes, save them, exit the editor, reboot... but if you're not used to working with a non-graphics-based editor, you'll have a bit of research to do. It's not hard, though, just tedious.however i have not managed to make it work.
View 9 Replies
View Related
