From outlook@opengroupware.org Tue Jan 30 12:07:33 2007 From: outlook@opengroupware.org (Antoine Hayoz) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 13:07:33 +0100 Subject: [OGo-Outlook] Zidelook slow... Message-ID: <20070130115247.M11710@hasa.ch> Hi there, I have ogo + zidelook running on my server. When I access any zidestore folder, it takes 30 - 40 secondes to show the content of the folder... Has anybody had the same problem? Is it a dns/network problem or is it something related to the fact that zidelook sync with zidestore and it takes a while? Any comments / suggestions / tips are welcome. Thanks Antoine -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. From outlook@opengroupware.org Tue Jan 30 13:53:58 2007 From: outlook@opengroupware.org (Adam Tauno Williams) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 08:53:58 -0500 Subject: [OGo-Outlook] Zidelook slow... In-Reply-To: <20070130115247.M11710@hasa.ch> References: <20070130115247.M11710@hasa.ch> Message-ID: <1170165238.4695.7.camel@aleph.whitemice.org> > I have ogo + zidelook running on my server. When I access any zidestore > folder, it takes 30 - 40 secondes to show the content of the folder... Has How many contacts do you have? What are your workstation specs? > anybody had the same problem? Is it a dns/network problem or is it something > related to the fact that zidelook sync with zidestore and it takes a while? Have you checked to see if there is actually any network traffic during this time (watch /var/log/skyrix5/skyrix-zidestore.out)? That way you can tell if Outlook is requesting objects / performing queries or just grinding away inside its local cache. Does this delay happen the first time you go to the contacts folder or does it happen every time? > Any comments / suggestions / tips are welcome. If you have a slowish machine and lots of contacts it can be pokey; Outlook is a very fat client. From outlook@opengroupware.org Tue Jan 30 16:48:02 2007 From: outlook@opengroupware.org (Antoine Hayoz) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 17:48:02 +0100 Subject: [OGo-Outlook] Zidelook slow... In-Reply-To: <1170165238.4695.7.camel@aleph.whitemice.org> References: <20070130115247.M11710@hasa.ch> <1170165238.4695.7.camel@aleph.whitemice.org> Message-ID: <20070130161528.M49902@hasa.ch> Thanks Adam for your answer, It doesn't really matter how many contacts are in the folder... I have once 140 contacts and one empty calendar: it takes the same time... The workstation specs are: 2 xeons running vmware server. One virtual machine runs ogo and another runs win2003 with terminal server (1.5g ram / cpu used normally). Ogo runs quite well. The same query (as on zidelook) takes 3-4 seconds on ogo. > How many contacts do you have? What are your workstation specs? > > > anybody had the same problem? Is it a dns/network problem or is it something > > related to the fact that zidelook sync with zidestore and it takes a while? > > Have you checked to see if there is actually any network traffic during > this time (watch /var/log/skyrix5/skyrix-zidestore.out)? That way > you can tell if Outlook is requesting objects / performing queries > or just grinding away inside its local cache. Ok I guess there is traffic exchanged. At the end of this mail I've copied the transaction. > > Does this delay happen the first time you go to the contacts folder > or does it happen every time? > It's not always happening but enough to be really disturbing... Sometimes the contacts seems to be in cache and it goes quickly. But most of the time it's slow. > > If you have a slowish machine and lots of contacts it can be pokey; > Outlook is a very fat client. > I've checked my cpu while requesting some contacts and it stays under 30%. It doesn't seems to load the virtual machine. I've also tested from my laptop (wich is not so old) and it's still quite slow. Thanks for your help. Antoine Here is the transaction log to get 140 contacts: it takes more than 1min. 192.168.1.20 - - [30/Jan/2007:16:31:11 GMT] "PROPFIND /zidestore/so/ahayoz/IPM/public/Contacts/ HTTP/1.1" 207 993 0.891 - - 152K 192.168.1.20 - - [30/Jan/2007:16:31:17 GMT] "GET /zidestore/so/ahayoz/IPM/public/Contacts/getIDsAndVersions HTTP/1.1" 200 1196 0.726 - - 56K 192.168.1.20 - - [30/Jan/2007:16:31:28 GMT] "PROPFIND /zidestore/so/ahayoz/IPM/public/Contacts/ HTTP/1.1" 207 24795 4.562 - - 1M 192.168.1.20 - - [30/Jan/2007:16:31:38 GMT] "PROPFIND /zidestore/so/ahayoz/IPM/public/Contacts/ HTTP/1.1" 207 24685 2.417 - - 828K 192.168.1.20 - - [30/Jan/2007:16:31:45 GMT] "PROPFIND /zidestore/so/ahayoz/IPM/public/Contacts/ HTTP/1.1" 207 2131 0.220 - - 44K 192.168.1.20 - - [30/Jan/2007:16:31:51 GMT] "PROPFIND /zidestore/so/ahayoz/IPM/public/Contacts/ HTTP/1.1" 207 139 0.092 - - 8K 192.168.1.20 - - [30/Jan/2007:16:31:57 GMT] "GET /zidestore/so/ahayoz/IPM/public/getIDsAndVersions HTTP/1.1" 200 0 0.114 - - 8K 192.168.1.20 - - [30/Jan/2007:16:32:02 GMT] "GET /zidestore/so/ahayoz/IPM/public/Contacts/getIDsAndVersions HTTP/1.1" 200 1196 0.096 - - 20K 192.168.1.20 - - [30/Jan/2007:16:32:09 GMT] "PROPFIND /zidestore/so/ahayoz/IPM/public/Contacts/ HTTP/1.1" 207 65078 1.480 - - 972K 192.168.1.20 - - [30/Jan/2007:16:32:15 GMT] "PROPFIND /zidestore/so/ahayoz/IPM/public/Contacts/ HTTP/1.1" 207 65273 0.949 - - 428K 192.168.1.20 - - [30/Jan/2007:16:32:21 GMT] "PROPFIND /zidestore/so/ahayoz/IPM/public/Contacts/ HTTP/1.1" 207 5315 0.200 - - 24K -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. From outlook@opengroupware.org Tue Jan 30 17:00:54 2007 From: outlook@opengroupware.org (Peter Hopfgartner) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 18:00:54 +0100 Subject: [OGo-Outlook] Zidelook slow... In-Reply-To: <20070130115247.M11710@hasa.ch> References: <20070130115247.M11710@hasa.ch> Message-ID: <45BF79C6.30208@tin.it> Antoine Hayoz wrote: > Hi there, > > I have ogo + zidelook running on my server. When I access any zidestore > folder, it takes 30 - 40 secondes to show the content of the folder... Has > anybody had the same problem? Is it a dns/network problem or is it something > related to the fact that zidelook sync with zidestore and it takes a while? > > Any comments / suggestions / tips are welcome. > > Thanks > > Antoine > > I do restart Zidestore regularly. It works for me. Peter http://www.hopfgartner.it From outlook@opengroupware.org Tue Jan 30 17:29:04 2007 From: outlook@opengroupware.org (Antoine Hayoz) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 18:29:04 +0100 Subject: [OGo-Outlook] Zidelook slow... In-Reply-To: <45BF79C6.30208@tin.it> References: <20070130115247.M11710@hasa.ch> <45BF79C6.30208@tin.it> Message-ID: <20070130172624.M93085@hasa.ch> Peter, it seems very efficient. Thanks for the tip! I'll crontab that ;-) Antoine > I do restart Zidestore regularly. It works for me. > > Peter > > http://www.hopfgartner.it -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. From outlook@opengroupware.org Tue Jan 30 18:59:18 2007 From: outlook@opengroupware.org (Helge Hess) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 19:59:18 +0100 Subject: [OGo-Outlook] Zidelook slow... In-Reply-To: <20070130161528.M49902@hasa.ch> References: <20070130115247.M11710@hasa.ch> <1170165238.4695.7.camel@aleph.whitemice.org> <20070130161528.M49902@hasa.ch> Message-ID: <4BD2E2BE-A0ED-4E00-BA74-97E7B861997D@opengroupware.org> On Jan 30, 2007, at 17:48, Antoine Hayoz wrote: > Ogo runs quite well. The same query (as on zidelook) takes 3-4 > seconds on ogo. 3-4 seconds also sounds quite slow. BTW: the queries done by ZideLook and those done by the web interface are quite different. > It's not always happening but enough to be really disturbing... > Sometimes the > contacts seems to be in cache and it goes quickly. But most of the > time it's slow. Yes, on the initial click the cache is filled, this takes a bit longer. But for 140 contacts it should be just a few seconds. Greets, Helge -- Helge Hess http://www.helgehess.eu/ From outlook@opengroupware.org Tue Jan 30 19:04:27 2007 From: outlook@opengroupware.org (Adam Tauno Williams) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 14:04:27 -0500 Subject: [OGo-Outlook] Zidelook slow... In-Reply-To: <20070130172624.M93085@hasa.ch> References: <20070130115247.M11710@hasa.ch> <45BF79C6.30208@tin.it> <20070130172624.M93085@hasa.ch> Message-ID: <1170183867.4695.75.camel@aleph.whitemice.org> > Peter, it seems very efficient. Thanks for the tip! > I'll crontab that ;-) Yep, we restart the services at midnight every night. Otherwise they tend to grow and grow; especially ogo-xmlrpcd, but ZideStore as well, although not as badly. From outlook@opengroupware.org Tue Jan 30 19:26:44 2007 From: outlook@opengroupware.org (Helge Hess) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 20:26:44 +0100 Subject: [OGo-Outlook] Zidelook slow... In-Reply-To: <1170183867.4695.75.camel@aleph.whitemice.org> References: <20070130115247.M11710@hasa.ch> <45BF79C6.30208@tin.it> <20070130172624.M93085@hasa.ch> <1170183867.4695.75.camel@aleph.whitemice.org> Message-ID: <51742921-1159-4B0C-95B2-262D6DD46F51@opengroupware.org> On Jan 30, 2007, at 20:04, Adam Tauno Williams wrote: >> Peter, it seems very efficient. Thanks for the tip! >> I'll crontab that ;-) > Yep, we restart the services at midnight every night. Otherwise they > tend to grow and grow; especially ogo-xmlrpcd, but ZideStore as well, > although not as badly. Not sure about the (older) Skyrix variant, but ZideStore should restart itself if it grows beyond 200MB. Or whatever value you configure using the SxVMemLimit default. Probably the feature should be easy to add to xmlrcpd, if it doesn't already have that feature. Greets, Helge -- Helge Hess http://www.helgehess.eu/ From outlook@opengroupware.org Tue Jan 30 19:32:46 2007 From: outlook@opengroupware.org (Florian Reitmeir) Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 20:32:46 +0100 Subject: [OGo-Outlook] Zidelook slow... In-Reply-To: <20070130161528.M49902@hasa.ch> References: <20070130115247.M11710@hasa.ch> <1170165238.4695.7.camel@aleph.whitemice.org> <20070130161528.M49902@hasa.ch> Message-ID: <20070130193246.GA14652@squat.noreply.org> On Die, 30 J=C3=A4n 2007, Antoine Hayoz wrote: > The workstation specs are: 2 xeons running vmware server. One virtual mac= hine > runs ogo and another runs win2003 with terminal server (1.5g ram / cpu us= ed > normally). do you have an broadcom network inside the server? like a tigon card? and linux as host system? --=20 Florian Reitmeir From outlook@opengroupware.org Wed Jan 31 08:45:31 2007 From: outlook@opengroupware.org (Antoine Hayoz) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 09:45:31 +0100 Subject: [OGo-Outlook] Zidelook slow... In-Reply-To: <20070130193246.GA14652@squat.noreply.org> References: <20070130115247.M11710@hasa.ch> <1170165238.4695.7.camel@aleph.whitemice.org> <20070130161528.M49902@hasa.ch> <20070130193246.GA14652@squat.noreply.org> Message-ID: <20070131083956.M85485@hasa.ch> Hi Florian, On the server I have got intel cards (I got e100 and eepro100 modules loaded) and debian sarge. On the vmware virtual machine (which runs ogo) I have got a pcnet32 driver loaded and debian sarge as well. So I don't think I've got any broadcom card. Antoine > do you have an broadcom network inside the server? like a tigon > card? and linux as host system? > > -- > Florian Reitmeir -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. From outlook@opengroupware.org Wed Jan 31 10:19:56 2007 From: outlook@opengroupware.org (Florian Reitmeir) Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 11:19:56 +0100 Subject: [OGo-Outlook] Zidelook slow... In-Reply-To: <20070131083956.M85485@hasa.ch> References: <20070130115247.M11710@hasa.ch> <1170165238.4695.7.camel@aleph.whitemice.org> <20070130161528.M49902@hasa.ch> <20070130193246.GA14652@squat.noreply.org> <20070131083956.M85485@hasa.ch> Message-ID: <20070131101956.GD2407@squat.noreply.org> On Mit, 31 J=C3=A4n 2007, Antoine Hayoz wrote: >=20 > On the server I have got intel cards (I got e100 and eepro100 modules loa= ded) > and debian sarge. >=20 > On the vmware virtual machine (which runs ogo) I have got a pcnet32 driver > loaded and debian sarge as well. >=20 > So I don't think I've got any broadcom card. the intel card is also a good catch.. try turning off TSO ethtool -K eth0 tso off vmware has the bug to connect even for localhost connection via the network adapter configured. --=20 Florian Reitmeir