Your slowness could be due to not telling vmware to allocate all memory into
physical memory, and not using a full sized disk image. It seems like vmware
accesses the blocks directly, when you pre-allocate. And if the image gets
fragmented, vmware warns you about it, so that you can ask it to defragment it.
But, if you're using a resizable image, then you may see some slowness.
I bench marked the disk running gentoo linux on a Dell D820 notebook, in native mode. I
copied that same gentoo over to a VM, and ran into in windows on the same D820 Notebook,
and got slightly better performance results, by about 2-5 M/sec. I used "bonnie++
-c 5 -s 4096 -r 768 -u someone". I haven't tried it on a dynamically re-sizable
disk. These results indicate to me that VMware is using direct block access, and
bypassing the file system. Either that, or simply keeping it un-fragmented makes a big
difference.
!
As far as compiling slower, I've found there is a very MINOR difference between
a real machine, and a VM.
On 11/7/06, Daevid Vincent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I use a Gentoo VM for a lot of LAMP dev work, and I can tell you it's kind
of painful to upgrade packages with all the compiling. VMWare is slower than
normal to compile, mostly due to disk I/O. Since each HD is a big-ass file.
A few optimizations I might suggest:
Partition a dedicated physical hard drive into chunks and use VMWare's "raw"
disk so you have real hardware/hard disks. I'd suggest a very fast SCSI
drive for the best performance since you're running several VMs.
Also, look into the VMWare server version which uses the raw iron a bit
better as it's dedicated to running many VMs.
I find that more RAM on VMWare has a point of deminishing returns. I have a
VM that I dedicate 512MB of my 2GBs and honestly it feels slower than when I
give it 128-256MB only. It may be a WinXP thing that it's not efficiently
using the RAM right or something.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Trenton Adams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Sunday, November 05, 2006 9:19 PM
> To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Mini Gentoo in VMWare
>
> Yes, VMWare is fit for the task, simply because I would be using it on
> a windows machine. Unless there is something better for a windows
> machine?
>
> Thanks for the hints.
>
> On 11/3/06, Harm Geerts <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Friday 03 November 2006 06:43, Trenton Adams wrote:
> > > Hi Guys,
> > >
> > > Has anyone here played with minimalizing everything for
> use in vmware?
> > >
> > > Basically what I want to do is create a series of VERY
> tiny VMs that
> > > are all independent of each other, which provide one service. For
> > > instance, I might put apache on one VM, and tomcat on
> another, and so
> > > on. Obviously, I would want their memory usage to be absolutely
> > > minimized, seeing that I would like to run them all on
> one computer.
> > > I would probably provide them 64M-128M of RAM each, for
> their specific
> > > service. Perhaps a little more if really required.
> > >
> > > Is there really anything that I should worry about?
> Perhaps I should
> > > just DO IT?
> >
> > Nick[1] made a post about minimizing Gentoo a while back.
> > But that topic was mainly about the disk usage.
> > I suppose you would benefit from a system that uses the -Os
> flag to create
> > small binairies.
> >
> > But do you think vmware is fit for such a task?
> > vmware is a big strain on resources itself.
> > You might want to have a look at xen[2] instead.
> >
> > [1]
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.user/160899/focus=160903
> > [2] http://www.xensource.com/xen/xen/index.html
> > --
> > gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
> >
> >
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
