From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Becker Subject: Re: compute performace problem Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 13:28:45 -0400 Message-ID: <20050424172845.GA9065@cs.duke.edu> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Ian Pratt Cc: xen-devel List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org " Do you get predictable performance running in domain0? d'oh I thought of it, and then forgot. Trying it now, 2.0-testing dom-0 does give consistent run times. Today I also get consistent times with xen-unstable. Turns out unstable dom-0 needs more memory than the 2.0 system, so my default setup was swapping when I tried unstable on Friday. If I give the unstable dom-0 more memory, xen0 and xenU do run the app with consistent times. And, if I run the tests in xen0 and xenU simulataneously, cpu time is shared evenly on unstable and on 2.0. Thats all good. So the only domains showing the 4x deviation in run time are the 2.0 xenU domains. I'll have to discuss with the users if we want to upgrade or investigate 2.0 further. Upgrading Xen is a pretty disruptive task so close to the end of the term, so I may end up figuring out whats going on in 2.0 anyway.