Are you using also xen or another virtual enviroment? Kveri schrieb: > believe me, if you have paravirtualized enviroment you don't have > equal performance than on bare-metal. Paravirtualization adds another > layer, so does overhead. Maybe performance in CSS, but I doubt about it. > > I'm using full VT on 4x quad core xeons with 16gb ram and providing > 1000fps 1.6 servers (yes, stable 1000fps, kernel self-pached with RT > and some HZ tweaks), CSS servers with 100 ticrate and and some tf2 > servers without any problems. > > Kveri > > On 25.8.2009, at 20:52, Valtteri Kiviniemi wrote: > > >> Hi, >> >> We are running multiple TF2 servers with Xen 3.4.1 paravirtualized. >> Performance is exactly the same as bare-metal, maybe even better. Only >> downside is that you need xen-patched kernel so to get most stable and >> working environment you have to use the default 2.6.18.8-xen kernel. >> Ofc. you can compile a 1000hz domU kernel like we have. >> >> There is also pv_ops kernels which are included in the xen-unstable >> tree. They are the normal kernel.org kernel with patches that make it >> suitable for Xen hypervisor. >> >> In my opinion Xen is the best solution for gameserver virtualization >> because it is the fastest. ESXi virtuals are not paravirtualized so >> they >> have slower disk i/o and network performance. They also use more >> resources. >> >> If you want same performance as bare-metal you need paravirtualized >> guest operating systems and Xen is the best solution for that. >> >> We have a physical 2 x 2.5GHz Quad-core Xeon machine with 16 GB ram >> and >> a ARECA ARC-1220 raid controller with RAID10 array. >> >> We are also running many other virtuals on the same machine without >> them >> affecting the gameserver virtual performance. >> >> With Xen you can for example assign 4 physical cores to the gameserver >> virtual and use the other 4 for other virtuals. >> >> - Valtteri Kiviniemi >> >> Daniel Worley kirjoitti: >> >>> I don't have exact numbers, but I've run srcds both natively and >>> under ESXi >>> on a PowerEdge server. Under both I was able to run multiple >>> instances, no >>> issues. I saw no difference in performance playing on the servers, >>> but once >>> again I don't have numbers to back it up. >>> >>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 11:07 AM, Claudio Beretta <[email protected] >>> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> HiI'd like to know your experiences with running srcds in a >>>> virtualized >>>> environment. Searching mail-archive for past discussions about >>>> this subject >>>> didn't provide a reliable conclusion to this topic. >>>> From what i understand, only hypervisors such as ESXi, XEN (and >>>> maybe >>>> Hyper-V) are suitable to be used for game servers because they >>>> should be >>>> the >>>> ones that introduce the lower overhead and response delay. >>>> Having a minor performance loss is fine, as long as no noticeable >>>> jitter is >>>> introduced or ping is increased.Has anyone had a chance to test >>>> these >>>> products and compare srcds performance on the same machine when >>>> virtualized >>>> and when running on the bare metal? >>>> Provided that the machine can handle it, do you know if it is >>>> possible to >>>> virtualize tickrate100, 1000fps CSS servers? Not that i want to do >>>> that, >>>> but >>>> if it can be done.. anything can be done :-) >>>> >>>> best regards, >>>> Claudio >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list >>>> archives, >>>> please visit: >>>> http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list >>> archives, please visit: >>> http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list >> archives, please visit: >> http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux >> >> -- >> This message has been scanned for viruses and >> dangerous content by MailScanner, and is >> believed to be clean. >> >> > > >
_______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
