| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-users
Re: [Xen-users] major slow down with xen implementation
On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 12:55:20PM -0400, Geoffrey wrote:
> Ross S. W. Walker wrote:
> >Geoffrey wrote:
> >>Todd Deshane wrote:
> >>>On Thu, Sep 25, 2008 at 11:57 AM, Geoffrey <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>wrote:
> >>>>Is this a reasonable expectation with virtualization?
> >>>This doesn't seem quite right to me, try kernbench and
> >>>also make sure the versions of xen and guest kernels
> >>>are the same on the server and laptop for a good
> >>>comparision.
> >>I'm not running xen on the laptop. Laptop is RHEL 5.2,
> >>kernel: 2.6.18-92.1.10.el5
> >>
> >>>The overhead of Xen PV should be pretty low vs native.
> >>I was wrong when I said we were para-virtualizing, this is full
> >>virtualization.
> >
> >Well, why not put up the xen config for the domU and see if
> >anybody can suggest some tweaks, but if you are using RH + Xen
> >it would be silly NOT to para-virtualize it.
>
> Can't para-virtualize. Running 64bit on the hardware so as to get
> access to the full 32GB memory. Running 32bit virtuals, because we have
> a third party app that won't run on 64bit. I know...
>
https://www.redhat.com/archives/rhelv5-announce/2008-May/msg00002.html
"Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5.2 GA Announcement"
Technology Previews
-------------------
- 32-bit para-virtualized (PV) guests on
64-bit AMD64/Intel(r) 64 hosts
So you could try it.. there were some problems with it in RHEL 5.1, and I
assume those were fixed for 5.2.
-- Pasi
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
|
|
|
| |
|
Home