Extremely Poor Pacman/HDD Performance

This is a problem I have been having for a while now.
After about a month after a clean Arch install, Pacman's performance, and the performance of the OS itself, severely degrades to the point of operations that took seconds taking minutes.
After a fresh install, Pacman would take about 10 seconds or so to display any matches to a search I preform. The computer now starts accessing the HDD for about 5 or 6 minutes per search, and so intensively that the rest of the computer comes to a halt while Pacman is doing it's job.
This HDD activity that completely chokes the computer is becoming more apparent in other operations as well. Firefox (which is an enormous memory hog, I know) will kill the machine. Even opening an xterminal can take about 6 or 7 seconds after some intense HDD activity.
The computer is old, a 10GB HDD, 64MB of RAM, and a 1Ghz processor, but I don't think it should be having such a hard time with the hard disk activity as it is. I run xorg7 and openbox. The only other graphical elements on that are a wallpaper and a simple panel program. There aren't many daemons running besides your run-of the-mill stuff like syslog and dbus.
I've already taken the steps in the "improving pacman's performance" article on the wiki page, but no dice. Can anyone help?

The dmesg you posted is a common problem with IDE devices in the latest kernels due to the lack of recognition 0f the 80-wire cable for UDMA. The normal use of 80-wire cables in IDE was to accomodate faster transfers and as such was a weak workaround for crosstalk problems.
In present kernels, the 80-wire system is not recognized therefore the speed of performance is degraded to UDMA 2.
See the following URL for a kernel patch force for 80-wire:\\
http://pixca.net/2008/02/03/limited-to-udma33-due -to-40-wire-cable/
The results of the install to kernel are presented, but no verifiable reports have been given for the patch from other users. Two answers by the same poster give no confidence in whether he loaded the kernel fix since his dmesg makes no reference to the 80-wire libata changes as does the original posted data.
This seems to affect every IDE interface in different ways and is based on not requiring 80-wire confirmation in scsi/sata since it is different than IDE interface and controller.
This may be causing your slowdowns.....give it a second look..

Similar Messages

IMAC not Performing extremely poorly

Please Help-
I purchased two 24' iMAC machines for our office.
Installed all my software from my mirror door G4, plus new copies of CS2 Suite.
I can harldy switch from program to program, saving 100 mb files out of Photoshop takes fifteen minutes, Illustrator hardly works, safari crashes, the entire system runs extremely poorly.
I have upgraded to 2gb of ram, but only 533 Mhz, I have no extra fonts loaded. I work off a firewire - 2.0 USB external drive, so no files are on the HD. The USB is plugged into the high speed port on the back of the machine.
I have downloaded Cocktail and run scripts, restarted, verified and repaired permissions, zapped P-Ram, everything I can think- and these forums say to do - and nothing works.
Many thanks in advance.
Kevin

If you used migration assistant to transfer files to your new mac, that is your problem. I have read about others on here who have had the same problem. Some programs and/ or files set up for power pc and not intel are causing your slowdown. You probably are going to have to reinstall osx and import them manually. It is tedious process, but it should solve the problem. I have not had this problem personaly, but others on here have and I do believe this is the fix for it. Try doing some other searches in the forums and see if there is anything else you can do. Also, photoshop is not yet universal and still set up for power pc so it's performance is going to be less than great. I wouldn't use 533 mhz memory in your mac. The specs are supposed to be for 667mhz memory. If that is causing your slowdown I am not for certain I am no computer engineer, but it would seem that using slower memory in the system would definitely cause performance issues. You are running a risky setup using memory not designed for your computer. Good luck.

FAMACR/APMACR EXTREMELY POOR PERFORMANCE AFTER APPLYING FA PATCHSET K

제품 : FIN_FA
작성날짜 : 2005-11-28
FAMACR/APMACR EXTREMELY POOR PERFORMANCE AFTER APPLYING FA PATCHSET K
======================================================================
PURPOSE
FA_MASS_ADDITION시 Expensive sql로 성능저하 문제 발생
Explanation
Expensive sql statement while running the report is
update ap_invoice_distributions apid set assets_addition_flag='N'
where (((((assets_addition_flag='U' and assets_tracking_flag='N') and not
exists (select 1
from ap_ae_headers aeh
where ((aeh.accounting_event_id=apid.accounting_event_id
and aeh.set_of_books_id=apid.set_of_books_id) and aeh.gl_transfer_flag<>
'Y')))
and posted_flag='Y') and accounting_date<=to_date(:b0,'YYYY/MM/DD HH24:MI:
SS'))
and exists (select 1
from gl_code_combinations
where ((code_combination_id=apid.dist_code_combination_id and
chart_of_accounts_id=:b1)
and decode(upper(:b2),'SEGMENT1',segment1,'SEGMENT2',segment2,'SEGMENT3',
segment3,'SEGMENT4',
segment4,'SEGMENT5',segment5,'SEGMENT6',segment6,'SEGMENT7',segment7,'SEGMENT8',
segment8,'SEGMENT9',
segment9,'SEGMENT10',segment10,'SEGMENT11',segment11,'SEGMENT12',segment12,
'SEGMENT13',segment13,
'SEGMENT14',segment14,'SEGMENT15',segment15,'SEGMENT16',segment16,'SEGMENT17',
segment17,'SEGMENT18',
segment18,'SEGMENT19',segment19,'SEGMENT20',segment20,'SEGMENT21',segment21,
'SEGMENT22',segment22,
'SEGMENT23',segment23,'SEGMENT24',segment24,'SEGMENT25',segment25,'SEGMENT26',
segment26,'SEGMENT27',
segment27,'SEGMENT28',segment28,'SEGMENT29',segment29,'SEGMENT30',
segment30) in (select distinct asset_clearing_acct
from fa_category_books fcb ,fa_book_controls fac
where ((fac.book_type_code=:b3 and fac.book_class='CORPORATE')
and fcb.book_type_code=fac.book_type_code)
union
select distinct cip_clearing_acct
from fa_category_books fcb ,fa_book_controls fac
where (((fac.book_type_code=:b3 and fac.book_class='CORPORATE')
and fcb.book_type_code=fac.book_type_code) and cip_clearing_acct is not null ))
call count cpu elapsed disk query current
rows misses
Parse 1 0.03 0.03 4 7 0
0 1
Execute 1 5198.88 5241.95 258933 99354479 9946808
0 0
total 2 5198.91 5241.98 258937 99354486 9946808
0 1
cause: The Cause of this problem is still undetermined.
fix:
1. Apply Patch:2395191
자산화하기 위해서는 Invoice Distibution계정을 Asset Clearing 계정으로
입력하여야 하나 Account Type만 Asset이면 Track as asset이 Check되기 때문에 , 이 계정에 대한
Validation을 하는 과정에서 너무 많은 데이타로 인해 Performance문제가 생김
결산 시점의 문제가 발생시 문제의 Sql을 참고하여 , invoice distribution의 계정이 Asset Clearing계정이 아닌 계정은 미리 N:reject로 Update하여 대상을 줄일수 있음
Example
4406888.992
Reference Documents
249802.1

Extremely poor performance to various websites during peak hours - peering issue?

Since approximately 26 Jan 2015, we have been experiencing extremely poor performance to several specific websites during peak hours, 9pm-11pm. Page loads take many minutes (or never complete), etc. Many other sites are perfectly fine, and if I connect to the same sites at the same time through my work VPN, they perform extremly well (under 1sec). There is no correlation between OS or browser and the poor performance (tested on Windows, OSX, Linux) and speedtest typically reports over 80/80.
I've not caught any packet loss using periodic pings. Traceroutes indicate a bunch of different routes being used (I assume this is expected for CDNs), but here's one example of an obviously bad single traceroute:
$ traceroute images.dailykos.com
traceroute to fallback.global-ssl.fastly.net (23.235.46.185), 64 hops max
1 10.1.1.1 0.464ms 0.364ms 0.298ms
2 173.48.161.1 5.223ms 4.793ms 4.904ms
3 130.81.191.250 7.387ms 7.466ms 7.366ms
4 130.81.151.76 4.909ms 4.905ms 4.932ms
5 152.63.20.117 12.441ms 12.433ms 12.434ms
6 152.63.4.141 12.373ms 12.468ms 12.370ms
7 152.179.220.126 14.989ms 14.937ms 14.872ms
8 68.86.84.249 12.505ms 12.259ms 14.988ms
9 68.86.85.25 22.409ms 22.433ms 22.519ms
10 68.86.85.1 19.817ms 19.894ms 19.919ms
11 68.86.83.74 17.389ms 19.870ms 22.460ms
12 4.53.116.18 24.815ms 25.080ms 24.851ms
13 * 208.122.44.198 2849.473ms 29.832ms
14 173.231.134.18 22.430ms * 2026.736ms
The sites in question use the Fastly CDN - my theory is that the VZ-Fastly connection is under provisioned or is broken, but I'm out of my depth at this point.

"This is a nationwide peering/routing issue that was intentionally created by Verizon to create congestion and (1) extract priority fees from the likes of Netflix and (2) get customers to subscribe to higher speed tiers. This has been acknowledged by the FCC. Verizon is building new interconnections to remedy the problem, but it will persist for at least another 6 months."

ZBook 17 g2 - poor DPC Latency performance when running from z Turbo Drive PCIe SSD

I'm setting up a new zBook 17 g2 and am getting very poor DPC latency performance (> 6000 us) when running from the PCIe SSD. I've re-installed the OS (Win 7 64 bit) on both the PCIe SSD and a SATA HDD and the DPC latency performance is fine when running from the HDD (50 - 100 us) but horrible when running from the PCIe SSD (> 6000 us). I've updated the BIOS and tried every combination of driver and component enabling/disabling I can think of. The DPC latency is extremely high from the initial Windows install with no drivers installed. Adding drivers seems to have no effect on the DPC latency. Before purchasing the laptop I found this review: http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-HP-ZBook-17-E9X11AA-ABA-Workstation.106222.0.html where the DPC latency measurement (middle of the page) looks OK. Of course, this is the prior version of the laptop and I believe it does not have the PCIe SSD. Combining that with the fact that I get fine performance when running from the HDD I am led to believe that the PCIe SSD is the cause of the problem. Has anyone found a solution to this problem? As it stands right now my zBook is not usable for digital audio work when running from the PCIe SSD. But it cost me a lot of money so I'd sure like to use it...! Thanks, rgames

Hi mooktank, No solution yet but, as of about six weeks ago, HP at least acknowledged that it's a problem (finally). I reproduced it perfectly on another zBook 17 g2 and another PCIe SSD in the same laptop and HP was able to reproduce the problem as well. So the problem is clearly in the BIOS or with some driver related to the PCIe SSD. It could also be with the firmware in the drive, itself, but I can't find any other PCIe drives in the 60 mm form factor. So there's no way to see if a differnt type of drive would fix the problem. My suspicion is that it's related to the PCIe sleep states - those are known to cause exactly these types of problems because the drive takes quick "naps" to save power and there's a delay when it is told to wake back up. That delay causes a delay in the audio buffer that results in pops/crackles/stutters that would never be noticed doing other tasks like video editing or CAD work . So it's a problem specific to folks who need low-latency audio performance (very few apps require low latency audio - video editing, for example, uses huge buffers with relatively high latency). A lot of desktops offer a BIOS option to disable those sleep states but no such option exists in HP's BIOS for that laptop. In theory you can do it from within Windows but it doesn't have an effect on my system. That might be one of those options that Windows allows you to change but that actually has no effect. One workaround is to disable CPU throttling. That makes the CPU run at full speed all the time and, I believe, also disables the PCIe and other sleep states. When I disable CPU throttling, DPC latency goes back to normal. However, the CPU is then running full-speed all the time so your battery life basically goes to nothing and the laptop gets *very* hot. Clearly that is not necessary because the laptop runs fine from the SATA SSD. HP needs to fix the latency problem associated with the PCIe drive. The next logical step is to provide a BIOS update that provides a way to disable the PCIe sleep states without disabling CPU throttling, like on many desktop systems. The bad news is that HP tech support is not very technical, so it takes forever for them to figure out what I'm talking about. It took a couple months for them to start using the DPC Latency checker. Hopefully there will be a fix at some point... in the meantime, I hope that HP sends me a check for spending so much time educating their techs on how computers work. And for countless hours lost re-installing different OSes only to show that the performance is exactly the same as shown in the DPC Latency checker. rgames

Poor Wi-fi Performance

Hi all,
I have just installed Lion into my early 2011 MacBook Pro and I noticed my Wi-fi seems slower than usual. I looked at the System Information and I noticed the Wi-fi Card Type shows "Third-Party Wireless Card". Shouldn't it show "AirPort Extreme"? Could this be the problem to my poor Wi-fi Performance?
Thanks

SOLUTION FOUND to MacBook Pro poor Wi-Fi wireless signal.
First, let's talk about the actual problem: too much signal noise. There is a hidden app in OSX called "Wi-Fi Diagnostics" This will tell you everything you need to know why your Wi-Fi is not working!
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT5606
HINT: It is included in 10.7, just look for it.
The solution!
Turn off your wi-fi and run your internet through your home's electrical wires. Power-line adapters are devices that turn a home's electrical wiring into network cables for a computer network.
http://reviews.cnet.com/2733-3243_7-568-8.html
I purchased TP-LINK TL-PA511 and for the first time I'm downloading with ALL my internet speed (30mb down / 5mb up) tested via www.speedtest.net. I'M SOOOOO HAPPY!!!!
http://www.amazon.com/TP-LINK-TL-PA511-Powerline-Starter-Kit/dp/B0081FLFQE/ref=s r_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1385395374&sr=8-1&keywords=TP-LINK+TL-PA511

NOKIA N95 EXTREMELY POOR BATTERY

Hei.
I have bought Nokia N95 last week and returned it today after extremely poor battery performance. I observed following things:-
1) I charged the battery full early in the morning at 6. I recieved just one call at 9 and my battery was finished at 2:30. Just for 8 hours standby time?
2) I charged it fully, used GPS for 30 mins and battery was finsihed after 3 hours? What was that?
3) I fully charged the battery connected to WIFI and did chat on MSN for around 1 hour and battery was finished exactly after 3.5 hours.
Nokia builtup so great device and with so much poor battery?
We will be getting battery replacement? or nokia will be releasing some new battery in future for N95?
Anyone if having same problem with battery please post comments here or its just with my device?
Waqar.

selling my n95 on ebay
battery is too poor
i need a phone that dosent need charging 2x 3x every day just for average general use
gonna go back to my n73 battery is much better operating system is nice and stable after v4 on n73-- i hate the key miss bug in the v12 firmware on n95 --
i dont need wifi
dont like maps and in built gps as it takes so long even with the assisted thing turnt on
my n73 and tomtom is up and running in 1 min max via bluetooth gps
allthough it would be handy to have the inbuilt one when i didnt have my reciever but my battery would prob drain after 1-2 hours :-)
my gps reciever goes for at least 6 hours constantly connected probs much longer and that only cst 30 quid
dunno i was just much more satisfied with the n73 as a contract upgade
even the slider seems loose
this device is supposed to cost 500+ quid on nokias website
if i paid that i would be sooooo dispaointed
just my view
if your near a power source all the time or are in the car with a charger youd prob be ok but i just think nokia could/should have put a better battery in there i mean it plays music for like 3-4 hours then batterys drained a half decent mp3 player will last 10-15 hours and my n73 does 5-6 no probs :-)
cheeses it even more they release the american nokia n95 with bigger battery
pantsMessage Edited by buxz777 on 29-Aug-200701:53 AM

Why does my brand new HP Officejet 5740 have extremely poor quality scan results?

My brand new HP Officejet 5740 has extremely poor quality scan results!
Excessive and unacceptable amounts of white specs appear in the resulting jpegs, of what are perfectly clean, orignal, dark, documents, pages and photos, when placed into the scanner. Why is this happening???
Has anyone else experienced this problem? If so, how did you resolve it?

Hi @mpstone1,
Welcome to the HP Support Forums! I see you are not happy with the scan quality on your new HP Officejet 5740, when you scan something you are getting alot of white specs.
I would like you to first perform a Hard Reset on the OJ 5740:
1. Unplug all cables and memory cards from the printer. Unplug the power cord, directly from the back of the printer while the printer is still turned on.
2. Unplug the other end of the cord from the power source.
3. If there is a power module on the power cord, disconnect one end and reconnect it.
4. After 60 seconds, plug the cord directly into a wall outlet (not a surge protector or battery backup as they can cause the printer to lose basic functionality over time).
5. Plug the power cord into the back of the printer.
6. The printer should automatically power back up. If it doesn't, turn it on with the power button.
7. Try making a photocopy (if your printer is an all-in-on printer) before connecting any other cables to the printer.
8. Connect any other needed cables to the printer.
Please continue here: Vertical Bands, Lines, or Streaks in Copies, Faxes, or Scans, complete the steps listed, make sure the scanner lid is fully down when powering on, do not lift the lid until the printer is fully initialzied.
If after the troubleshooting has been done the copy quality has not improved, contact our technical support at 800-474-6836 as it may be the hardware and you would still be in warranty. If you live outside the US/Canada Region, please click the link below to get the support number for your region.
http://www8.hp.com/us/en/contact-hp/ww-phone-assist.html
I hope this helps!
HevnLgh
I work on behalf of HP
Please click “Accept as Solution” if you feel my post solved your issue, it will help others find the solution.
Click the “Kudos Thumbs Up" to the left of the reply button to say “Thanks” for helping!

Extreme poor quality in full screen preview and exported movie

I have spend evenings and evenings to create the content of a project.
After dealing with error -108 and extreme poor quality in full screen preview and in exported movies (extreme stuttering) I decided to install my iMac new again.
The error -108 disappeared, but the extreme stuttering still remained in full screen preview and in exported movies.
If I make the preview screen in the iMovie browser as big as possible there is nothing to see of any stuttering.
Now I am getting pretty annoyed and have no clue what to do anymore (how to solve this problem) .....
Anyone any suggestion ?
The orginal video was recorded with a Panasonic HD camcorder.
I do have a mid 2011 iMac with 16GB ram and 256GB SSD and 1TB HD with a complete clean installation
of OS X Lion and iLife. This configuration should be enough to create a proper movie :-(

mantralightroom wrote:
why is it this option disabled? do the generate monitor sized previews increase a lot the cache a lot!
Potentially, yes. The standard Preview is 1024 pixels, longest size. Some people (like Omke) have displays 2560 pixels longest side, potentially increasing file size by over 500%.

Nokia 5800 - poor wi-fi performance?

I own both 5800 and E51. Both wi-fi chips are set to Tx 100 mW. I notice that E51 detects more networks, connect to more networks than 5800. I compared the signal strength between the two phones. E51's signal is always 20-30% higher than 5800's. I must say 5800 is quite poor wi-fi performer.

Tough mate you must have a phone with the well known wi-fi poor connection error .
Easy to fix .
jje

FCPX 10.2 audio extremely poor from HDV import

As of version 10.2., audio imported from a SONY FX1k (tape-based camera, has extremely poor quality once in the browser or on the timeline. It sounds a little like phone calls over the internet at very low bandwidth. The last time I imported from the SONY FX1 was under version 10.1 and the audio was fine. When i play back the imported clip in QTPlayer 10 directly from the Original Media folder (via ...fcpbundle > Package Contents > ...), the audio is fine!! When I duplicate a clip from the Original Media folder to a folder outside of the package and then "re-import" it, audio again becomes terrible.
I tested this with older tapes i still have and imported without problems in older versions of FCPX. But in 10.2., that footage now has extremely poor sound quality.
Anybody else with this issue? Any ideas what could be going on?

I have the same problem. I can not import footage from my CF card using USB 3.0. The whole thing crashes.
So, a solution I found (not a solution but a work around!) is to do a camera archive in FCPX with your card and save it to either an external driver or to your desk top. Then disconnect the USB 3.0 and then import from your camera archive.
That worked for me.
Ali

Headphone sound quality extremely poor, why?

Had dust in the head phone socket, cleared this out and now the sound is extremely poor quality. Is the socket damaged beyond repair?

I've tried that, and numerous headphones in the iphone. It's definitely the phone.
Thanks anyway

Why the extremely poor sound quality in playback with itunes?

I am having problems with the sound quality of itunes music. this applies to both downloads and cd's. This problem is new, I believe, and affects bluetooth speaker, earphones, and macbook pro internal speaker. All have extremely poor playback with itunes. This Problem does not happen with playback of youtube videos.
Thanks for any advice you can give.

I would be worth playing some tracks with Quicktime so see what the quality is like there.
iTunes uses Quicktime to play music.
Also check this Apple help on audio playback problems:
http://support.apple.com/kb/TS1362

Extremely poor sound quality on all apps after using Real Player!

Hi there
On my Leopard iMac (Core2Duo) I am experiencing extremely poor 'lo-fi-like' quality on all audio from all applications including iTunes, Quicktime and Safari as a result of using Real Player to play a file online.
I very rarely use Real Player and this was the first time I'd used it in months to even a year. The file was a simple RAM file from a store website allowing me to listen to a sample of a music file. When played, the quality was low but I expected this from a music sample, and from Real Player. However, after closing Real Player, I noticed the sound quality had dramatically dropped to an almost un-listenable quality.
I have restarted and uninstalled Real Player with no luck. The poor sound quality still comes through my internal speakers, as well as external speakers, so it seems like a software issue.
Not sure what to do, please can anyone help as the audio is used all day every day on this iMac!
Thank you

Just tried it as I did get iLife with my Mac. GarageBand froze for the first few times I loaded it up, then I managed to get it to work. Played with the on-screen keyboard which produced perfect sound.
Closed GarageBand, restarted iTunes, tested, working perfectly! Crystal clear sound back again!
Thanks so much for that, really appreciated!
=]

Upgraded to ios 5.1 now extremely poor battery usage any ideas?

Upgraded Sunday to ios 5.1 now extremely poor battery usage - any ideas? Have tried a few thinks - nothing seems to make a difference?

Downgrading is not supported. What IS supported is searching though the forums....there are a number of excellent posts with great suggestions on maximizing battery life and troubleshooting battery issues.

Extremely Poor Pacman/HDD Performance

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for