| 
 Well Pasi and others... 
I do not know whats happen... I follow each instruction contents on this mail and other ones and remus crash again! 
However, I already compile Xen 3.3 testing with Kemari patch and Kemari show more stable that Remus.... 
Maybe I am wrong with this option, but I will remain with Kemari :) 
Thanks 
Em Qui 21 Jan 2010, às 08:57:37, Gilberto Nunes escreveu: 
> Em Quinta-feira 21 Janeiro 2010, às 08:43:27, Pasi Kärkkäinen escreveu: 
> > On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 08:40:35AM -0200, Gilberto Nunes wrote: 
> > > Em Quinta-feira 21 Janeiro 2010, às 08:16:55, você escreveu: 
> > > 
> > > Hi Pasi 
> > > 
> > > > On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 08:12:21AM -0200, Gilberto Nunes wrote: 
> > > > > Em Quarta-feira 20 Janeiro 2010, às 22:20:17, Brendan Cully 
> > > > > escreveu: 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Hi Brendan... 
> > > > > 
> > > > > > On Thursday, 14 January 2010 at 09:52, gilberto nunes wrote: 
> > > > > > > I installed the Remus but had some problems. 
> > > > > > > He leaves the VM very slow. I'm using a partition with DRBD / 
> > > > > > > LVM. May even be that you say that has many layers (DRBD / LVM) 
> > > > > > > that can influence on performance. 
> > > > > > > But the interesting thing is that when Remus is not running the 
> > > > > > > VM is light even with 512M of memory. And look what I'm talking 
> > > > > > > about a Windows 2003 Standard Edition. 
> > > > > > > The Remus to stop working inexplicably (at least for me) 
> > > > > > > and let the VM's started in a state of the two nodes ... 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > It's taken me a while to get Xen unstable running again, but now 
> > > > > > that I have I can't reproduce any of these problems with an XP 
> > > > > > guest. It remains responsive while Remus is running, and doesn't 
> > > > > > fail over unless I kill it. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Right 
> > > > > 
> > > > > > Disk access isn't likely to make a huge performance difference 
> > > > > > (although I should say, simply parking a Remus VM on top of DRBD 
> > > > > > is not safe, since there is no way of rolling back changes that 
> > > > > > have been written since the most recent checkpoint). 
> > > > > 
> > > > > What you suggest... NFS! 
> > > > > 
> > > > > > It sounds like your network 
> > > > > > link between the primary and backup is either low capacity or 
> > > > > > flaky in some way, or you have a loaded dom0. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > My network between primary and backup server is a dedicate network, 
> > > > > make with a dedicate fast ethernet switch... 
> > > > 
> > > > Not sure if Fast Ethernet is enough for Remus syncing? 
> > > 
> > > Well, I try too with crossover network cable, in Giga Ethernet, but I 
> > > have the same... 
> > > 
> > > > > I do not understand wath you say about that "I have a loaded dom0". 
> > > > > On fact, Xen always have a loaded dom0, right! 
> > > > 
> > > > I bet he meant "do you have high load on dom0", aka do you have high 
> > > > cpu usage in dom0? Try running "xm top" to figure out. And also 
> > > > normal "top" in dom0. 
> > > 
> > > Ok... I run xm top and get this: 
> > > 
> > > NAME 
> > > Domain-0 
> > > 
> > > STATE 
> > > -----r 
> > > 
> > > CPU(sec) 
> > > 135 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > CPU(%) 
> > > 0.6 
> > 
> > So it's not using much CPU. 
>  
> right... indeed I have just one VM running right now... My server has 8G 
> amount of memory and it is a Intel Xeon E3113 3.00 GHZ 
>  
> > > MEM(k) 
> > > 7226368 
> > > 
> > > MEM(%) 
> > > 86.2 
> > 
> > Did you configure dom0_mem= for Xen? 
>  
> Yes! It's dangerous or not!! 
>  
> > See: 
> > http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XenBestPractices 
> > 
> > Or is there something in dom0 using all the memory for real? 
>  
> no... all clean... :) 
>  
> > Run "top" in dom0, and sort by memory usage by pressing shift+m. 
> > 
> > > MAXME(k) 
> > > no limit 
> > > 
> > > MAXMEM(%) 
> > > n/a 
> > > 
> > > VCPUS 
> > > 2 
> > > 
> > > Something wrong!!! 
> > > 
> > > >>> I'd recommend using single-processor dom0 and guest to start with, 
> > > >>> and 
> > > >>> 
> > > > > > pinning the VCPUs to their own separate physical cores. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > I see. But how I do this!! I am a newbie. If you can point some 
> > > > > ways to me, I'll appreciate... 
> > > > 
> > > > See: 
> > > > http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XenCommonProblems 
> > > > 
> > > > There's a chapter called "How can I limit the number of vcpus my dom0 
> > > > has?" and "Can I dedicate a cpu core (or cores) only for dom0?" 
> > > 
> > > I see... However, this procedure do not take alway the beneficity of 
> > > multi- core processors to my VM's!!!! 
> > 
> > You can still use multiple cores on your VMs. 
> > 
> > If you don't want to dedicate a core only for dom0, at least configure 
> > the domain weights so that dom0 is guaranteed to get enough CPU time. 
>  
> So, in theoretical way, Remus would running properly with this adjust 
>  right! (sorry, I using now KDE 4 on opensuse, and I cannot yet configure 
>  my keyboard proerly, so the dor question go always from my 
>  board...rsrsrsr...) 
>  
> Thanks for all.... 
>  
> > -- Pasi 
> > 
> > 
> > _______________________________________________ 
> > Xen-devel mailing list 
> > Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel 
>  
 -- 
  
Gilberto Nunes Ferreira 
Selbetti Gestão de Documentos 
Suporte TI 
Telefone: +55 (47) 3441-6004 
Celular: +55 (47) 8861-6672 
MSN: gilbertonunesferreira@xxxxxxxxxxx  |