From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge Subject: Re: XCP: dom0 scalability Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 09:12:18 -0700 Message-ID: <4CB5DA62.1040508@goop.org> References: <81A73678E76EA642801C8F2E4823AD219331853A47@LONPMAILBOX01.citrite.net> <20101013160738.GI4007@whitby.uk.xensource.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20101013160738.GI4007@whitby.uk.xensource.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Tim Deegan Cc: Dan Magenheimer , "xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" , Dave Scott , "xen-api@lists.xensource.com" List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 10/13/2010 09:07 AM, Tim Deegan wrote: > At 16:46 +0100 on 13 Oct (1286988381), Dan Magenheimer wrote: >> Hmmm... if dom0 is getting scheduled enough and the VMs are still >> blocking on xenstore (i.e. the Linux scheduler in dom0 is the problem), >> getting xenstore off of dom0 makes sense. But if the reason xenstore >> is not getting back to them is because dom0 is simply not getting >> enough cpu time (i.e. the Xen scheduler is the problem), moving xenstore >> out of there may not only NOT help, but may make things worse. True? > The reason that dom0's not getting enough time in this case is that it's > running with only 1 vcpu and trying to do more than 1 vcpu worth of > work. I'd expect things to get very slightly better if some of that > work can happen on another vpcu (in another dom). Or just make dom0 multi-vcpu? J