dbus daemon/messagebus 100% CPU usage

[Jordan Erickson]

Hi David,

If 1 of 2 servers is experiencing this issue, and nobody else has chimed
in yet to say they're having the same problem, I'd have to assume it's
something very particular to your one server's setup.. A couple of
questions:

- Is this happening with specific users, only before/after login, ...?
- Have you checked logs on the terminals themselves?
- Just a shot in the dark (google in the dark?) but have you seen
comments 11 & 12 at
https://bugs.launchpad.net/debian/+source/pulseaudio/+bug/390528 ?

I'm sure there's a solution to your problem. The important thing IMHO is
to do as much research on your issue as possible and not let the school
director think that it's unsolvable. Worst case scenario you could
always wipe/re-install the system. Going back to an unsupported LTSP 4.2
probably isn't your best option.


Cheers,
Jordan


On 09/16/2010 05:12 AM, David Hopkins wrote:
> I am still having issues with the dbus-daemon randomly consuming 100%
> of the cpu on my servers which renders them unusable.  There doesn't
> appear to be any messages in the logs but the school director has now
> stopped by and asked if it wouldn't be simpler to go back to the RHEL5
> with LTSP4.2 instead of staying with Ubuntu.  He is very supportive of
> using LTSP and for him to ask this is a serious concern.
> 
> Does anyone have any ideas about why the dbus-daemon would suddenly
> spike to 100% cpu usage and hang the system?  The load average can be
> very low (4-5 on a dual-quad) and yet the system is completely
> nonresponsive?
> 
> Sincerely,
> Dave Hopkins
> 
> 
> On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 3:01 PM, David Hopkins <dahopkins429 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Has anyone noticed dbus (messagebus) using 100% of a CPU on an LTSP
>> server?  I have two identical servers both hardware and software
>> (Karmic 9.10, comparing output from dpkg --get-selections). However,
>> one server runs flawlessly, the other shows dbus_daemon using 100% of
>> a CPU. Also, memory usage slowly climbs until the system begins using
>> virtual memory and everything then comes to a halt.  Both systems
>> connect to the same brand of switch, both connect to a KVM.  The only
>> differences are in the client systems that they serve. One servers
>> GX150/GX240s while the other (the misbehaving system) serves
>> GX50/GX110/GX150's.  I'm in the process of replacing the GX50 systems
>> and as many GX110's as possible, but curious if anyone has noticed
>> this issue.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>> Dave Hopkins
>> Newark Charter School
>> Newark Delaware
>>
> 


-- 
Jordan Erickson - LNS
(707) 636-5678  - http://logicalnetworking.net