Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

CPU Ready time is really low on my physical server, however ASP.NET(2nd) application is not running fast. VM has 1 vCPU and 12GB of memory where only 6GB is used.

Sometimes when team starts working with the application - it spikes to 100% CPU Utilization. Additionally when we perform backup in background, the app slows down even further.

As IIS is multi threaded environment, I'm planning to add additional vCPU and give higher access to resources in VM Setting.

Please critique if you think this will not help.

thanks, Dmitry

share|improve this question
up vote 1 down vote accepted

Go ahead and add the vCPU. Perhaps it will provide some headroom during the backup window. This is easy to test. You can shut down, add the vCPU, reboot and apply a workload to the system to see how it responds.

Another consideration. How does the vSphere host's statistics look? Is it CPU-constrained in any way?

share|improve this answer
Thanks! No, it says only 25% utilized – DmitrySemenov Jul 27 '12 at 23:37

Just to share, I have added additional vCPU and our IIS ( v2, C#) application started to work noticeably faster. Load went down as well:

CPU Ready value went up from 0,1 milliseconds, to 5 milliseconds - but this was expected.

Anyway here are the numbers:

Speed change:

= project list page: from 2.1 secs to 0.953 secs
= dashboard page: from 3 secs to 1.4 secs
= reports (heavy SQL queries) from 2-3 secs to 0.4 sec
= tasks page (heave SQL queries) from 4-6 secs to 1.875 secs
= task view page (a lot of widgets & content) from 3 secs to 2.3 secs

We have SQL Express Edition running in the same VM as IIS that handles business logic. Next step is to move out SQL Server to its own Physical box and migrate to SQL Server 2012 Std Edition to be able to utilize 64gb of RAM for better joins (as we have a lot of them).

Hopefully this will be useful for you if you have the same issues as we did

Thanks, Dmitry

share|improve this answer
Make sure you need the memory first. Nothing against "because we have lots of joins" - that means nothing, though. Amount is less relevant than size of the data sets involved ;) – TomTom Jul 29 '12 at 7:39

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.