Could windoze survive this ?

The Jackal · 25-10-2006, 13:03

The memory in one of my live machines looks like it's been cooked and is not working properly but the box and linux is still up, webservers, hosting,dns and smtp etc are still up.

Type Percent Capacity Free Used Size
Physical Memory 6% 944.05 MB 64.57 MB 1008.62 MB
Disk Swap 10% 1.00 GB 119.63 MB 1.12 GB

As you can see the machine has 1Gig of RAM but is only addressing 64Meg - in desperation the kernel has started to use SWAP.

Errr shall I go and fix it ? Errrrr I think not LOL it can just limp along until I get the time to go down there.

I would be fe**ed if this happened whilst running windows

25-10-2006, 13:05

I dont care I still dont like linux

The Jackal · 25-10-2006, 13:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by zinglebarb

I dont care I still dont like linux

Not addressed at you mate it's just an interesting thing to see....

I went to see a webpage on my site and noticed it being slow not normally the case as I'm in a datacentre co lo'd by a mate on a very phat pipe.

I immediately thought that its a machine problem had a looked at phpsysinfo and lol : Machine load was 5 with the mem usage as above.

25-10-2006, 13:15

I do concede windows wouldnt be running but then you wouldnt run a data centre on it would you? . Fair play on it going on though

The Jackal · 25-10-2006, 13:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by zinglebarb

I do concede windows wouldnt be running but then you wouldnt run a data centre on it would you? . Fair play on it going on though

Heh oh yeh ran all sorts of win2k data centre edition w2k3 etc etc etc but with like only 64 Meg of RAM they wouldnt have survived that.

Stuart · 25-10-2006, 13:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrC-3rr0r

The memory in one of my live machines looks like it's been cooked and is not working properly but the box and linux is still up, webservers, hosting,dns and smtp etc are still up.

Type Percent Capacity Free Used Size
Physical Memory 6% 944.05 MB 64.57 MB 1008.62 MB
Disk Swap 10% 1.00 GB 119.63 MB 1.12 GB

As you can see the machine has 1Gig of RAM but is only addressing 64Meg - in desperation the kernel has started to use SWAP.

Errr shall I go and fix it ? Errrrr I think not LOL it can just limp along until I get the time to go down there.

I would be fe**ed if this happened whilst running windows

Windows would cope (and has done in my experience), although it would be painful to watch.

Actually, I'd check what's using all your memory (real and virtual). I've helped run busy webservers for work, and never seen that kind of usage.

Skatoony · 25-10-2006, 13:38

My Linux system is using all 2GB of my RAM and zero swap. Linux uses the extra RAM to keep the system up to speed and stable - the RAM is mostly used for disk cache. Don't worry if it's always maxed out, Linux's resource management is far better than Windows. If you launch something that requires like 500-1024MB RAM, Linux will very easily allocate that RAM to the program without slowing down.

The Jackal · 25-10-2006, 13:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stuart C

Windows would cope (and has done in my experience), although it would be painful to watch.

Actually, I'd check what's using all your memory (real and virtual). I've helped run busy webservers for work, and never seen that kind of usage.

Yeh all checked she's doing fine this machine has been up 5 years and so is running some pretty old lightwight linux and kernel... just checked her and she's doing fine.... I'll just turn off disk syncing which seems to have alerted me as to why she's starting to run slow.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stuart C

Windows would cope (and has done in my experience), although it would be painful to watch.

*painful* lol How painful ? I dont even want to go there - dont even remind of days where it takes like 5 minutes to ctrl-alt-del and 5 more to login lol horrible memories dude.

**Paul** · 25-10-2006, 19:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrC-3rr0r

*painful* lol How painful ? I dont even want to go there - dont even remind of days where it takes like 5 minutes to ctrl-alt-del and 5 more to login lol horrible memories dude.

Memories that probably have little to do with Windows 2003 Server ?

Are you just guessing that the memory is fried ? I'd be surprised if any machine carried on running happily with terminally dead memory, whatever OS it's running. The amount of RAM would be reported to the OS by the BIOS, so if Linux only sees 64M, then so would Windows - and it too would use swap file.

The Jackal · 25-10-2006, 19:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul M

Memories that probably have little to do with Windows 2003 Server ?

Are you just guessing that the memory is fried ? I'd be surprised if any machine carried on running happily with terminally dead memory, whatever OS it's running. The amount of RAM would be reported to the OS by the BIOS, so if Linux only sees 64M, then so would Windows - and it too would use swap file.

Of course its not terminally dead machine cant boot without memory what exactly will the BIOS do ? - have you never seen fried memory where only a couple of banks work with the rest being unaddressable ?

It's happened to me before with a freebsd box. I dare not think how windows 2003 would be swapping with only 64Meg physical available to it nor do I dare think how it would cope having already buffered say 300Meg before the addressing issues occured.

Maybe you could find out if windows 2003 could cope with re-allocating the open buffers to swap ? I know exactly what happened with my box the services were HUP'd and thrown into swap.

**Paul** · 25-10-2006, 20:06

I've run 2003 server on 128M, we don't have any 64M chips at work to go that low, so I cannot test it. It would be slow I would think ......

Skatoony · 25-10-2006, 20:27

If my old 2000 Pro machine was slow on 64MB RAM, I think 2003 server would go to a crawl

The Jackal · 25-10-2006, 20:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul M

I've run 2003 server on 128M, we don't have any 64M chips at work to go that low, so I cannot test it. It would be slow I would think ......

Thats real sweet running 2003 on 128Meg suppose it's just the webserver edition or did you do a custom build?

Nice to see someone using Windows Effectively

AbyssUnderground · 27-10-2006, 16:19

Ive run 2k3 on 32MB RAM, with some hacking of course. An untouched version will refuse to run on 32MB but a friend of mine modded it for me and it ran on 32MB. Seemed to run fine with just windows with all the un-needed services disabled. It was painful to watch it run anything server related though.