Interesting.....
have seen similar scenario but not VLAN manager chewing on the CPU :)
-typically in l2 environment uplink shut/no shut fixes similar issues.
270 167303594 789523 211909 77.53% 79.32% 79.49% 0 VLAN Manager
See his VLAN manager is having issue. Looks like a bug in the code.
typically vlan mis-configuration shouldn't spike the CPU.
On Sun, Jan 23, 2011 at 10:20 PM, Carlos G Mendioroz <tron_at_huapi.net.ar>wrote:
> Would you pleasde share the actual configuration that causes the trouble ?
> That would be enlightening, to me at least. I fail to imagine a scenario
> that would cause a switch to trash in SPT.
>
> -Carlos
>
> Jezz Bird @ 22/01/2011 19:29 -0300 dixit:
>
> Hello,
>>
>> Thanks for your replies Guys.
>>
>> I have now worked out what the problem was: I had configured the native
>> VLAN
>> on the trunks as an unused VLAN to prevent VLAN hopping but I had not
>> actually configured the VLAN on the switches at each end of the trunks.
>> Once
>> I did this the CPU utilization went right down:
>>
>> CPU utilization for five seconds: 6%/0%; one minute: 5%; five minutes: 5%
>> PID Runtime(ms) Invoked uSecs 5Sec 1Min 5Min TTY Process
>> 319 6250 1492 4189 0.47% 0.03% 0.18% 5 SSH
>> Process
>> 4 371297 32106 11564 0.47% 0.11% 0.11% 0 Check
>> heaps
>> 191 188562 442160 426 0.31% 0.08% 0.05% 0 IP
>> Input
>> 92 1081515 1783874 606 0.15% 0.01% 0.00% 0 hpm main
>> process
>> 5 74 1025 72 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0 Pool
>> Manager
>>
>> The reason I configured it this way is that I had done so before but only
>> between switches and ESX hosts without any issues.
>>
>> In this case the switch was performing fine: routing, spanning-tree etc.
>> but
>> obviously I was concerned about the high CPU usage.
>>
>> Thanks again for your replies
>>
>> Jezz
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 9:37 PM, <istong_at_stong.org> wrote:
>>
>> Any spanning tree issues going on? What's the output from
>>> show spanning, etc
>>> Are you using vtp?
>>>
>>> Ian
>>>
>>> Hello All,
>>>>
>>>> I am seeing very high CPU utilization on a stack of 2 x
>>>> 3750s:
>>>>
>>>> CPU utilization for five seconds: 99%/14%; one minute: 99%
>>>> ; five minutes: 99%
>>>> PID Runtime(ms) Invoked uSecs 5Sec 1Min 5Min
>>>> TTY Process
>>>> 270 167303594 789523 211909 77.53% 79.32% 79.49%
>>>> 0 VLAN Manager
>>>>
>>>> 200 1108075 875272 1265 0.62% 0.57% 0.56%
>>>> 0 Spanning Tree
>>>> 36 122992 4860 25306 0.46% 0.05% 0.00%
>>>> 0 Per-minute Jobs
>>>> 96 245844 341634 719 0.30% 0.11% 0.12%
>>>> 0 hpm counter proc
>>>> 4 360969 31240 11554 0.30% 0.13% 0.11%
>>>> 0 Check heaps
>>>>
>>>> The VLAN Manager process appears to be the culprit using
>>>> approx 79% - does anyone have any idea why this might be
>>>> happening ?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Jezz
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>>>
>>>> __________________________________________________________
>>>> _____________ Subscription information may be found at:
>>>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Bigger. Stronger. Faster.
>>> Sign up for a New Free Email Account at http://MyEmail.com
>>>
>>
>>
>> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>>
>> _______________________________________________________________________
>> Subscription information may be found at:
>> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> --
> Carlos G Mendioroz <tron_at_huapi.ba.ar> LW7 EQI Argentina
>
>
>
> Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
>
> _______________________________________________________________________
> Subscription information may be found at:
> http://www.groupstudy.com/list/CCIELab.html
Blogs and organic groups at http://www.ccie.net
Received on Mon Jan 24 2011 - 00:23:07 ART
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Tue Feb 01 2011 - 07:39:17 ART