Re: windows 2003 smp guest

[Avi Kivity <avi-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>]

Haydn Solomon wrote:
>
>
> On 9/18/07, *Avi Kivity* <avi-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org <mailto:avi-atKUWr5tajBWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>> 
> wrote:
>
>
>
>     It's working will with -no-kvm-irqchip.  Not so sure without the
>     switch,
>     but we're improving things.
>
>     I haven't tested performance very thoroughly.  What's your workload?
>
>
> My workload medium to high. Running full cisco labs using cisco emulator.

Well, no idea what that is.


>
>
>
>     Good question.  What HALs are available for Windows 2003 SMP?
>
>
> The following are available...
>
> acpi multiprocessor pc
> acpi uniprocessor pc
> acpi pc
> mps uniprocessor pc
> mps multiprocessor pc
> standard pc
> other
>  
>

mps multiprocessor may give the best performance, though I've never 
tested it.

>     --
>     error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function 
>
>
>
> One other question. I'm doing this a core 2 duo and am wondering about 
> number vcpu. I know xen for example can have more vcpus than physical 
> cpus, example 4 vcpus on 2 physical cpus/cores. What is the 
> recommendation for best performance? I would imagine a one to one ie. 
> 2 vcpus on 2 cores/cpus?
>
>

Yes, 1:1 (or less) is best.  Overcommitting cpus will definitely degrade 
performance drastically.


-- 
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/