Re: terminal server 2003 perfmon pages/sec
On Jul 17, 2:19 pm, "Jeff Pitsch" <j...@jeffpitschconsulting.com>
wrote:
> How have you determined that they are high? Are you having issues with the
> system? Are you comparing it to a baseline you took when the servers were
> originally created? Has the baseline been updated over time? Keep in mind
> that default values in perfmon do not necessarily represent the best values
> for your particular environment. Your pages may be completely normal for
> your environment and unless you baselined the servers previously and can say
> that on this date the pages were this and now they are this high, you really
> have no idea if what your seeing is a problem.
>
> Jeff Pitsch
> Microsoft MVP - Terminal Services
>
> <zerbi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:59c879c1-e9c7-478d-a4e6-5fb7009dd976@e39g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>
> > hello guys,
>
> > I have a battery of terminal server used with office and some
> > financial applications. I noticed with perfmon that pages/sec usage is
> > always extremely high, costantly on top of the graph.
>
> > how can I find out which process is causing this high usage of ram ?
> > task manager does not show any possible culprits.
>
> > thanks in advance!
> > zz- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
thanks for your answer.
No, I don't have a baseline. the server is running fine but it does
look a bit "slow", even though task manager is not showing a high
usage of cpus and page file.
that's why I used perf mon. I have a battery of five terminal servers,
and on three of them there is a access application that seems to be
causing this pages/sec counter to be costantly over the top. the other
two terminal servers have this counter nearly at zero. I selected the
same counter (pages/sec) using the process counter and selecting this
particular process and again I see a high number of pages/sec, while
other applications (firefox, outlook, excel, etc) do not show this
behaviour....
do you have an idea of how to better troubleshoot this ?
thanks again for your help.
zz