[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] RE: [Xen-users] Running Xen 2.0 for Counter Strike: Source
Only changed the 100 hz setting to 1000 hz and turned Big mem support (4gb) on for both the dom0 and domU kernels. I configured the virtual machine to have 1000mb memory, it only used 830 meg or so without the big mem option. That's viseble in the graph at the bottom of http://core.zokahn.com/cs-01/ 75 fps is not a big deal! other systems run with 200 - 500 fps but it's a start! And if my players are happy... I will still try and boot to a normal debian kernel and run the same gameservers (they can run on the same machine) and test the difference between the Xen and the Normal world. Gr, Bart > Did you change anything else to get this or only to 1000HZ? > > John > > -----Original Message----- > From: xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > [mailto:xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bart van den Heuvel > Sent: Wednesday, February 15, 2006 6:17 AM > To: Ernst Bachmann > Cc: xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: [Xen-users] Running Xen 2.0 for Counter Strike: Source > > Ernst, > > I see what you mean, if your thougts prove to be true than vserver would be more of an option, i would hate to leave xen the concept is very attractive. > > Now that i look at my graphs again I see a very different picture! > > Please check http://core.zokahn.com/cs-01/ > > FPS is way up! I must be going MAD.... > > Thanks! > > Bart > >> On Wednesday 15 February 2006 10:37, Bart van den Heuvel wrote: >>> I have recompiled the kernels, both dom0 and domU. Counterstrike > comes >>> in >>> a compiled form (silly enterprises still do that :-) >>> >>> All is wel and i got the change to compile in the bigmem option! So > i'm >>> very happy there. I can now use more mem for my virtual servers... > But >>> thats where the happyness stops! >>> >>> Instead of a performance upgrade fps is now steady on 1, so the 1000 > hz >>> options made the fps value go from 50 to 1 instead of a higher value. >>> >>> I'm running like this for a few hours... Maybe more inspiration will come >>> to me. >>> >> The HZ Value sets how often timer interrups occur, so instead of interrupting >> work 250 times a second, you now interrupt it 1000 times. >> >> I guess timer interrupts in xen are more expensive than on plain > linux, >> since >> they also involve the hypervisor (correct me if I'm wrong here) >> >> if three domains use the same cpu, xen needs to switch the running > domain >> 3000 >> times a second, I guess you waste a lot of cycles there. >> >> Another reason (wild guess) could be: the hypervisor still generates interrupts at 250HZ, but now the domU kernel now expects them coming > at >> 1000Hz, hence the internal timing of the kernel is way off, resulting > of >> the >> timing source of your CS server working only on full seconds now => 1 frame >> per second max... >> >> For applications requiring short response time, a "lesser" > virtualization >> method, like linux-vserver, might provide much better performance. >> >> /Ernst >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |