Webamin is very slow (about 10sec for response time) on ASL 5. I was previously running ASL 4 on the same machine (PII 233 with 160Mo RAM) without any problem (about 1sec as response time). Any Idea ?
when i tested one of the betas with snort enabled i hit it with kazaa traffic from 4 machines on my hardware without any idegredation of performance. I be this mahcine could handle at least 10 if not more..[:)] it is not a performance or intergratiion issuse.
The use of snort in a small company with, lets say, 400 workstations CAN be a disaster. Not to mention the false postives/ true negatives or whatever they like to call them. It can be a very handy tool but nothing more and only if you know what you are doing.... again IMHO.....
with today's litigous environment it would not be a disaster but prudent. With Snort you can customize the rules however you like. ASL's webmin helps in the customization. I would take a bit of false positive in exchange for the savings from not having to fight the horde of lawsuits that would enevitibly follow p2p behavior or in some cases IM traffic.
IMHO it would be disastrous for SMB/Medium businesses to not use Snort to filter traffic as they can easily be put out of buinesse by one p2p lawsuit.
I myself already run snort on my network (PureSecure) but I am not interested in snort on ASL but rather PortScanning and from what I am told I need the IPS lic in order to enable port scanning [:(]
I'm not saying that you should not use SNORT (or equiv.) but i'm wonder if A) a firewall should be the place for SNORT and B) if there are not any options to block p2p in a 'firewall way'....
And if a company wants to stop the use of p2p they should review there policy when it comes to user rights etc....
1. 5.000 has a bug that makes index.fpl use lots of RAM. I'm talking about ~500 Megs here [:)]ent). 2. Version 5 does not require more CPU, but more RAM in general. The new reporting, confd and the IPS will require a big share. My personal recommendation is at least 512Megs.
What makes WebAdmin so slow is the disk swapping due to memory exhaustion. Get more RAM and it should respond much quicker. I'm afraid it will not reach V4 speeds, but that is due to our new architecture (which does have its advantages after all).
1. 5.000 has a bug that makes index.fpl use lots of RAM. I'm talking about ~500 Megs here [:)]ent). 2. Version 5 does not require more CPU, but more RAM in general. The new reporting, confd and the IPS will require a big share. My personal recommendation is at least 512Megs.
What makes WebAdmin so slow is the disk swapping due to memory exhaustion. Get more RAM and it should respond much quicker. I'm afraid it will not reach V4 speeds, but that is due to our new architecture (which does have its advantages after all).
1. 5.000 has a bug that makes index.fpl use lots of RAM. I'm talking about ~500 Megs here [:)]ent). 2. Version 5 does not require more CPU, but more RAM in general. The new reporting, confd and the IPS will require a big share. My personal recommendation is at least 512Megs.
What makes WebAdmin so slow is the disk swapping due to memory exhaustion. Get more RAM and it should respond much quicker. I'm afraid it will not reach V4 speeds, but that is due to our new architecture (which does have its advantages after all).
/tom
[/ QUOTE ] my memory and swap graphs and logs do not show this behavior..cpu stays low as well...a bug to be sure but my machine does not show evidence of memory exhaustion.
[ QUOTE ] Odd, Tom just told everyone exactly the problem. He coudln't be more specific if he wrote it in kindergarten-speak.
Yet here come the replies. But I guess what does Tom know? It's not like he WROTE webadmin or anything...
[/ QUOTE ] yes he told us very clearly..however the fact of the matter is there are those of us whose machines say otherwise and at least i was saying my stats say otherwsie. Never once did i or anyone else say..no Tom you are wrong..we are stating our stats say otherwsie and in effect there may be another issue. I am sure Tom knows what we are saying by stating our experiences.
Venom, you have an apt nick since you seem to be full of it.
Users were stating the stats pages in ASL were giving a different indication to what Tom said, not that Tom was wrong. Surely as much feedback from users as possible is a good thing. Why don't you ever contribute a mail that is not bagging somebody else ?
1. 5.000 has a bug that makes index.fpl use lots of RAM. I'm talking about ~500 Megs here [:)]ent).
[/ QUOTE ] Nasty [:(]
[ QUOTE ] 2. Version 5 does not require more CPU, but more RAM in general. The new reporting, confd and the IPS will require a big share. My personal recommendation is at least 512Megs.
[/ QUOTE ]In a historic perspective, that's a lot of RAM. My first Linux box ran with 16 MB. Many of us are still running our Windows PCs with RAM in the 128 - 256 MB range. However, RAM has been coming down in price pretty stedily over the years, so that should be quite manageable.
[ QUOTE ] What makes WebAdmin so slow is the disk swapping due to memory exhaustion. Get more RAM and it should respond much quicker. I'm afraid it will not reach V4 speeds, but that is due to our new architecture (which does have its advantages after all).
[/ QUOTE ] Finally, a real explanation of the slow Webadmin issue.
Thank you, Tom, for setting us straight. The machines I have tested the ASL v5 betas on so far have really been quite inadequate in terms of installed RAM to do ASL v5 justice.
My Windows PCs need some topping up too. I guess I better look into getting myself a six pack of 256 MB DIMMs. Getting a couple of 512 MB DIMMs wouldn't hurt either.
Like I said, the V5 webadmin will not be as fast as the V4 one. This is due to architectural changes in the way how configuration data is stored (a flat file is always faster than a managed database like confd).
About the reporting: It will show you a series of snapshots taken in the past. These snapshots are also "averaged" for the longer-term graphs. To see the real current memory load:
1. Start 'top' on the shell 2. Press SHIFT-M 3. Do stuff in WebAdmin and watch top. Look at the RSS number [:)]
