[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       amd-dev
Subject:    Re: new am-utils releases
From:       Nick Williams <Nick.Williams () msdw ! com>
Date:       2000-06-02 9:17:54
[Download RAW message or body]

Funnily enough... just talking about this elsewhere :-). This (IMHO),
sounds like the large memory/dnlc lookup problem which occurs on
solaris, due to the change I'm the culprit for :-(.

What would be useful is an indication of the size of memory of these
machines (or more specifically, the size of the dnlc, which is typically
a factor of the memory size) and the output of amq -s before and after
all of this.

Nick

Tom Schmidt wrote:
> 
> I have had a problem with 6.0.3 and later of am-utils that I cannot
> figure out what is wrong.
> 
> The problem is that the whole system slows down considerably when
> running any commands.  Commands that normally are very fast take
> 10 times or more as long to run when I have am-utils 6.0.3 or later
> installed.  I see the problem with 6.0.4s4 as well, but I do not
> see the problem on 6.0 - 6.0.2.  I am running it on SPARC clients
> running SunOS 4.1.3_U1, Solaris 2.5.1, 2.6, and 7, all with the
> same results.  All NFS servers are running Solaris 2.6 or 7.
> 
> The amd maps I am using are supplied by NIS.  For debugging, I tried
> local amd map files with the same results.  I am running amd with
> the following command:
> 
> /usr/am-utils/bin/amd -r -w 240 -l /usr/adm/amd.log -x noinfo -p -n -a
> /home /usr/am-utils/amd.home -cache:=inc,sync /net /usr/am-utils/amd.net
> -cache:=inc
> 
> The amd.home map is to map users home directories, and amd.net is for
> /net/hostname matching.  I am not using an amd.conf file.
> 
> I have tried removed the sync option from the cache map options but
> again
> I still have the same results with the sluggish system performance.
> I noticed that there were some changes to how sync behaves between
> 6.0.2 and 6.0.3, but removing the sync option did not help.
> 
> I have enabled the full logging and watched the messages, but I don't
> see it logging anything out of the ordinary.
> 
> Any ideas of what may be wrong?  I am stuck on 6.0.2 until I determine
> why later releases take such a performance hit!  Has anyone else seen
> this problem?
> 
> Thanks...Tom
> --
> Tom L. Schmidt, Manager, Component Characterization
> Micron Technology, Inc.
> 8000 S. Federal Way  P.O. Box 6  Mail Stop 376  Boise, Idaho USA
> 83707-0006
> mailto:tschmidt@micron.com  http://netnow.micron.net/~tschmidt/

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]