[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [Xen-users] Re: Xen guest domain freezes when prelink runs
On Fri, 22 Jun 2007 03:40:48 +0100, "Daniel P. Berrange" <berrange@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >On Thu, Jun 21, 2007 at 08:33:51PM -0400, Tim Boyer wrote: >> On Thu, 21 Jun 2007 09:09:39 -0500, Richard Blocker <rblocker@xxxxxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >> >> >I'm new to running Xen, so maybe I missed something, but this is a >> >puzzling problem that I didn't find on any of the Xen lists. >> > >> >I'm running the Xen 3.0.3 that comes with RedHat EL 5 (all stock, all up >> >to date as of today) and I have a single guest domain HVM also running >> >RHEL 5. Whenever the guest OS runs the initial prelink job defined in >> >/etc/cron.daily (/usr/sbin/prelink -av -mR -f) the guest CPU pegs at >> >100% and the system stops responding. It never resumes (at least not for >> >12 hours). I can reboot the guest domain from the host machine, and it >> >recovers fine, until prelink runs. I even ran cpu-burnin on the HVM to >> >see if it was just the load, but it was fine while that ran. If I run >> >the prelink command manually, it immediately freezes. >> > >> >For the record, the hardware is a dual quad core Xeon system with 8GB of >> >memory. The guest HVM uses a single CPU with 512MB of memory allocated. >> > >> >Has anyone else seen this? >> >> Hah! Someone else with this... >> >> I've got a trouble report into RH on this one. It's not just prelink; I >> think >> it's tied to rpm. I can bring the system down doing a rpm -Va, or a >> sysreport >> without the -norpm switch. Also a dual quad core, with 16gb, and 1gb on the >> guest. > >Actually it is prelink - rpm -Va will call out the prelink libraries when >verifying IIRC. Anyway, this is ultimately a hypervisor bug in Xen 3.0.3 >which should be fixed in the Xen 3.1.0 hypervisor. So should be working >come RHEL-5.1 updates. > >Seriously though, you really really really don't want to run any OS in >full-virt if its capable of paravirt. You'll get x10 -> x100 the I/O >performance if you use paravirt and be able to scale up the number of >guests per host much better. So I'd recommend using RHEL-5 paravirt >at which point you won't see the HVM bug anymore either... > >Dan. Dan, thanks _very_ much for the info. Maybe you can answer my other open ticket while we're here. :) I suspected that I made a Bad Choice when I did full virt on the RHEL5 systems instead of paravirt. I've got five systems running full - is there any good way to migrate a system from full virt to paravirt? -- tim boyer tim@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ Xen-users mailing list Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |