[dtrace-discuss] opensolaris2009.06 slow boot

2009-06-03 Thread Nischal
i upgraded my opensolaris from 2008.11 to 2009.06 today and i found that boot process is painfully slow. On my 2GB ram system it takes about 2 minutes to boot. I tried the text boot. the mounting of zfs filesytem and other regular stuff take about 40seconds and then i see the console login

[dtrace-discuss] opensolaris2009.06 slow boot

2009-06-03 Thread Nischal
i upgraded my opensolaris from 2008.11 to 2009.06 today and i found that boot process is painfully slow. On my 2GB ram system it takes about 2 minutes to boot. I tried the text boot. the mounting of zfs filesytem and other regular stuff take about 40seconds and then i see the console login

Re: [dtrace-discuss] dtrace performance overhead

2009-06-03 Thread tester
Michael, Thanks. I think that's what the script from wiki.sun.com (specopen.d) does. Did I mis interpret your suggestion? Thanks -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ dtrace-discuss mailing list dtrace-discuss@opensolaris.org

Re: [dtrace-discuss] dtrace performance overhead

2009-06-03 Thread tester
Hi Jim, The app software doesn't poduce a errno in its logs (bad software, although from a leading vendor, I think they inherited it, but a error string says not enough space I tried grepping some of the header files but could not find a match. /var/adm/messages: that's the first thing I

Re: [dtrace-discuss] dtrace performance overhead

2009-06-03 Thread Jim Mauro
Try this; #!/usr/sbin/dtrace -s #pragma D option quiet extern int errno; syscall::forkall:return, syscall::vfork:return, syscall::forksys:return, syscall::fork1:return / arg0 == -1 || arg1 == -1 / { printf(FORKED FAILED, errno: %d, arg0: %d, arg1: %d\n,errno, arg0, arg1); }

Re: [dtrace-discuss] dtrace performance overhead

2009-06-03 Thread tester
Thanks Jim. Will use this during the next testing window. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ dtrace-discuss mailing list dtrace-discuss@opensolaris.org

Re: [dtrace-discuss] dtrace performance overhead

2009-06-03 Thread Jim Mauro
not enough space indicates an errno 28 ENOSPC, which isn't listed is the fork man page under ERRORS. Are you sure it's fork(2) that's failing? It may be errno 12, ENOMEM. So what does a general memory health profile of the system look like? Lots of free memory? Plenty of swap space? How about

Re: [dtrace-discuss] dtrace performance overhead

2009-06-03 Thread Jim Mauro
D'oh! Disregard that last question (address space) - my brain was thinking thread create failures - it's not applicable to fork failures. My bad. The system memory and swap space health checks still apply, as well as process count - grab some sar -v 1 60 samples /jim Jim Mauro wrote: