I also forgot to mention, on older hardware like that (and newer too)
there is some fine tuning you can do on the dom-u's themselves.
If you're running out-of-the-box Fedora, RH, CentOS / etc you'll find
most of your daemons are running with a priority of 0 (see man nice for
more).
Since everything is running at the same priority, its going to cause
some congestion. Try making use of a tool like spri.
http://www.rfxnetworks.com/spri.php , and you may be able to squeeze a
little more out of the dom-u's themselves.
I wouldn't recommend spri on dom-0.
Hope this helps :)
Tim
On Tue, 2006-07-04 at 05:44 +0800, Tim Post wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-07-03 at 12:45 +0200, Tomasz Chmielewski wrote:
> > I have a xen 3.0.2 running on a 733 MHz server, 1 GB RAM.
>
> That's part of the problem, but should work much better than it does.
>
> > It has two domU domains.
> > dom0 has 512 MB, domUs have 256 MB each.
> >
>
> Have you considered shrinking dom-0 to 128 MB and not using it for
> anything but managing the dom-u's? I'm guessing you're also :
>
> 1 - Using file backed VBD's
> 2 - Using legacy IDE/EIDE drives
>
> Your problem is I/O congestion due to a very slow CPU and slow drives. I
> wouldn't use dom-0 to do anything, make yourself a dom-u to use.
>
> > Whenever load average on dom0 is above 1-2 (for example, compressing 200
> > MB file), I can't reach any domU domain.
> >
>
> See above related to I/O. You're choking the dom-u's from accessing
> their VBD's by doing that on dom-0. You could try setting scheduling
> appropriately and see if that makes a difference, however even if you
> used a dom-u to do that kind of work, I/O is going to be a problem on
> that kind of legacy system.
>
> > Ping replies to domUs take very long time (it's on LAN), and there are
> > packet losses:
> >
> > 64 bytes from 192.168.11.61: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=4140 ms
> > 64 bytes from 192.168.11.61: icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=39548 ms
> >
>
> Yes, i'd imagine so. :) The dom-u's can't access their own file system
> because the disk is backed up tarring up your 200 mb file on dom-0 - and
> dom-0 isn't scheduling cpu access because its very busy waiting for your
> drives to write data.
>
> >
> > When I ping dom0, it replies immediately, there are no packet losses:
> >
> > 64 bytes from 192.168.111.173: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=4.07 ms
> > 64 bytes from 192.168.111.173: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.406 ms
> >
> >
> > It's problematic to get to the domU with "xm console domain": it takes
> > really long to get the login prompt, and even if I get it, it times out
> > when waiting for the password.
> >
>
> See above about choking the dom-u from access to their FS.
>
> > There are no problems logging to dom0.
> >
> >
> > I found a similar problem here, but it didn't have any conclusions:
> >
> > http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-users/2005-12/msg00728.html
> >
> >
> > Is it a known problem, and if so, is there a remedy for this?
> >
>
> Use slightly better hardware and stop doing intense stuff on dom-0.
>
> > It makes things a bit unreliable when one system makes some job, and
> > other can't be accessed because of it.
> >
> >
>
> However, your CPU cooks eggs beautifully! That's not a bug its a
> feature! <kidding>
>
> Try re-arranging things a bit, using partitions instead of file backed
> VBD's and then try fine tuning cpu scheduling and priority based on what
> you want each dom-u doing. Only run services that are absolutely
> necessary on dom-0, and try to avoid i/o intense workouts on dom-0
> itself.
>
> HTH
> Tim
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-users mailing list
> Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
>
>
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
|
Home