- Community Home
- >
- Servers and Operating Systems
- >
- Operating Systems
- >
- Operating System - HP-UX
- >
- Possible Network Bottleneck
Categories
Company
Local Language
Forums
Discussions
Forums
- Data Protection and Retention
- Entry Storage Systems
- Legacy
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- Storage Networking
- HPE Nimble Storage
Discussions
Discussions
Discussions
Discussions
Forums
Forums
Discussions
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
- BladeSystem Infrastructure and Application Solutions
- Appliance Servers
- Alpha Servers
- BackOffice Products
- Internet Products
- HPE 9000 and HPE e3000 Servers
- Networking
- Netservers
- Secure OS Software for Linux
- Server Management (Insight Manager 7)
- Windows Server 2003
- Operating System - Tru64 Unix
- ProLiant Deployment and Provisioning
- Linux-Based Community / Regional
- Microsoft System Center Integration
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Community
Resources
Forums
Blogs
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО10-28-2002 09:19 PM
тАО10-28-2002 09:19 PM
Possible Network Bottleneck
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО10-28-2002 09:23 PM
тАО10-28-2002 09:23 PM
Re: Possible Network Bottleneck
What application in running on your server ?.
Do you have enough Free memory ?
For TCP tuning for performance
Have a look at this document,
http://www.psc.edu/networking/perf_tune.html
regards,
U.SivaKumar
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО10-28-2002 09:25 PM
тАО10-28-2002 09:25 PM
Re: Possible Network Bottleneck
Have you tried changing the switch port or switch and observed whether the problem exists ?.
Have tried changing the Network Interface of the server for isolating the problem ?
regards,
U.SivaKumar
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО10-28-2002 09:29 PM
тАО10-28-2002 09:29 PM
Re: Possible Network Bottleneck
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО10-28-2002 09:31 PM
тАО10-28-2002 09:31 PM
Re: Possible Network Bottleneck
#netstat -in
regards,
U.SivaKumar
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО10-28-2002 09:32 PM
тАО10-28-2002 09:32 PM
Re: Possible Network Bottleneck
This is when there is no usage I'll put one on tommarow during peak usage.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО10-28-2002 09:35 PM
тАО10-28-2002 09:35 PM
Re: Possible Network Bottleneck
You have not answered the questions in my second posting
regards,
U.SivaKumar
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО10-28-2002 09:39 PM
тАО10-28-2002 09:39 PM
Re: Possible Network Bottleneck
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО10-28-2002 09:42 PM
тАО10-28-2002 09:42 PM
Re: Possible Network Bottleneck
You have given me details of your Server's network card.
I want speed details of the switch port whereyour server is connected ?.
By the by , FD stands for Full-Duplex
regards,
U.SivaKumar
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО10-28-2002 09:42 PM
тАО10-28-2002 09:42 PM
Re: Possible Network Bottleneck
I beleive the FD stands for fixed correct?
Thanks,
Bobby :)
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО10-28-2002 09:53 PM
тАО10-28-2002 09:53 PM
Re: Possible Network Bottleneck
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
тАО10-30-2002 10:35 AM
тАО10-30-2002 10:35 AM
Re: Possible Network Bottleneck
The send queue in netstat -a output is simply how much data is queued to the socket buffer for which the local system is awaiting an ACKnowledgement from the remote. That could indeed mean there is a network bottleneck, but it does not say where in the network between the machines the bottleneck might happen to be.
The default SO_SNDBUF setting for HP-UX 11 is 32768 bytes, so an 8Kish value does not mean that the send socket buffers are full.
If a NIC is bottlenecked, it should show a consistently non-zero outbound queue length in its lanadmin statistics.
If a NIC is _really_ bottlenecked, you would see an increasing count of outbound discards. (Or inbound for the inbound path).
You might also check the netstat -p tcp statistics and see what the TCP retransmission and retransmisstion timeout rates are relative to the number of TCP segments sent.
Finally, I think the latest revs of glance can show the KB/s rates going through the interface(s) - so you might want to make sure you are up on the latest rev and see if those KB/s rates are close to the max for the NIC. It would also be nice to know what Glance is reporting as the packet per second rates.
Finally, while it would be unlikely with just a 100BT interface, is there by any chance a single CPU that is running at 100% utilization when these alarms are going-off?