KVM On 27.8.2009, at 9:38, Ulrich Block wrote:
> 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 > > -- > This message has been scanned for viruses and > dangerous content by MailScanner, and is > believed to be clean. > -- 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
