On 12/08/2014 05:43 PM, Fong, Trevor wrote:
Hi Mike,
It's Mark :-) I get that a lot for some reason.
Thanks for the reply. The typical result of the result is:
[08/Dec/2014:07:08:04 -0800] conn=130262 op=1 RESULT err=0 tag=101
nentries=5 etime=0
Yeah this looks fine.
There are no notes=A/notes=U in the results.
Do you mean in the entire access log, or just for that search?
Can you run logconv.pl and post the results? "logconv.pl -V <access logs>"
Thanks Trevor,
Mark
Objectclass and member are both indexed.
There were 30,000-odd searches on conn=130262, which took 34 mins.
Thanks,
Trev
From: Mark Reynolds <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
Reply-To: "[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>"
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Monday, December 8, 2014 at 11:29 AM
To: "[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>"
<[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>, Trevor Fong
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: [389-users] 389-ds and Multi CPU's
On 12/08/2014 02:08 PM, Fong, Trevor wrote:
Hi Everyone,
We’ve inherited a 389-ds system (1.2.11.15-48.el6_6) that is running
on a VM provisioned with a single CPU. We have been experiencing
high CPU with a client that connects with a single connection, and
then runs large amounts of queries of the form:
SRCH base="ou=GROUPS,dc=<our dc>" scope=2
filter="(&(objectClass=groupOfNames)(member=uid=<loginname>,ou=EMPLOYEES,<our
dc>))" attrs=“1.1"
Trevor,
From the access log, what is the result of this search? etime? It
there a notes=U/notes=A in the result? It could be an unindexed
search which would cause the high CPU.
Thanks,
Mark
We’re wondering if adding extra CPU’s to the vm will make things
better. The original engineer noted that at the time of
implementation, he had come across some notes that indicated that the
underlying process was single threaded and adding extra CPU’s would
not make any improvement; in fact, on heavily loaded vm
infrastructure like ours, may make things worse as the the vm would
have to wait for the CPU to become available. Is this still true?
Thanks a lot,
Trev
--
389 users mailing list
[email protected]https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
--
389 users mailing list
[email protected]
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
--
389 users mailing list
[email protected]
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/389-users
