| |
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
xen-users
Re: [Xen-users] Slow windows network with gplpv driver.
On Thursday 03 March 2011 09:13:39 pm John McMonagle wrote:
> On Thursday, March 03, 2011 05:57:21 pm you wrote:
> > > This concerns an old problem
> >
> > http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-users/2010-08/msg00567.html
> >
> > > Still having the problem with network performance but need to really
> >
> > fix it.
> >
> > > Just did a test with 32 bit xp with 0.11.0.238 drive.
> > > it show device as Xen Net device driver.
> > >
> > > Iperf gives 14.7 Mbits/sec
> > >
> > > Running an xp live boot cd get 13.6 Mbits/sec
> > > Doesn't looks like the the pv driver is doing anything to help the
> >
> > network as
> >
> > > there is probably extra load with no pv drivers for disk and display.
> > >
> > > How much of a speed improvement are others seeing?
> > >
> > > The real issue is speed for samba shares.
> > >
> > > I have tried on other hardware and it's a bit faster but not that
> >
> > impressive.
> >
> > > To keep the speed in perspective this is /proc/cpuinfo
> >
> > XP is probably a poor benchmark for GPLPV (or even without) for a few
> > reasons. If you want to get decent performance out of XP, disable the
> > firewall service (in services, not just in the network control panel)
> > and append " /PATCHTPR" to the boot.ini entry if using GPLPV. The
> > problem with XP is that it makes _very_ frequent calls to change and
> > read the TPR (Task PRiority) register, which incurs quite a bit of
> > overhead. "/PATCHTPR" avoids that completely on AMD hardware and
> > optimises the read case on Intel hardware, although I think Intel under
> > Xen may not suffer so badly these days.
> >
> > I'm seeing a few gigabits per second when doing DomU<->Dom0 testing, and
> > full hardware speeds when talking over a physical network adapter when I
> > last tested.
> >
> > James
>
> Looks like I already had /PATCHTPR although in lower case. I changed to
> upper case. Turning off the firewall helped a little. Now up to 17
> Mbit/sec. This is an older intel server may that be the issue?
>
> I'll try the same on a amd server tomorrow.
>
> I'm thinking of running server 2008 on this intel server, is that likely to
> work much better?
>
> I have a couple windows applications that we must run that do not deal well
> with a multiuser environment. I'd prefer to use xp but suppose could run
> windows7 if that will help but will need a lot of extra ram.
>
> John
I tried on a AMD server and it was about the same percentage improvement.
The only thing that had any noticeable affect was stopping the windows
firewall.
Had no change with /PATCHTPR or disable checksum offloading and large send
offloading.
The application seemed a bit more responsive I'll see what the users say.
I'll try to install server 2008 next week and see what happens with that.
Any one know any tricks to get single user Windows apps to behave in a multi
user environment?
John
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
|
|
|
| |
|
Home