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
|
Home