PHWinfo - Afficher un message

19/02/2008, 13h46

"Jesper Arnecke" wrote:

> Hiya,
>
> First of all regarding hyperthreading, read this:
> http://support.microsoft.com/default...867586?lc=2057
>
> Secondly read this:
> http://www.microsoft.com/communities...4-0d0406fd60ac
>
> And third note that the guest systems can only emulate a 10/100 network
> card. (which is usually good enough, as the host will run 1000, and that way
> one guest system wont eat up the entire network. - it's a balance of good and
> bad.
> I cant see from your setup where you have your virtual files located either?
>
> I hope it s you getting a conclusion on your problem, else ask again

The virtual hard disks are fixed size SCSI, located on the iSCSI SAN, and
have to be in order for the VMs to be clustered. But the system isn't disk
bound, it's network bound. When I run a process directly on the VM, I get
about 33MB per second throughput. When I run the same process across the
network I get about 11MB per second throughput--despite there being gigabit
NICs and no other network traffic except between the high-end workstation and
the VM. That just doesn't make any sense. I've tried dedicating a 1GB
NIC--and it doesn't matter whether I use one of the embedded HP NICS or one
of the Intel NICS, or even the Microsoft Loopback adapter. The performance
is still roughly 1/3 of what in my opinion it should be. Something is screwy.

I tried disabling hyperthreading, but it didn't have any effect. The system
isn't by any means CPU bound.

19/02/2008, 13h46	#6
At the end of my rope Messages: n/a Hébergeur:	RE: Abysmal Network Performance "Jesper Arnecke" wrote: > Hiya, > > First of all regarding hyperthreading, read this: > http://support.microsoft.com/default...867586?lc=2057 > > Secondly read this: > http://www.microsoft.com/communities...4-0d0406fd60ac > > And third note that the guest systems can only emulate a 10/100 network > card. (which is usually good enough, as the host will run 1000, and that way > one guest system wont eat up the entire network. - it's a balance of good and > bad. > I cant see from your setup where you have your virtual files located either? > > I hope it s you getting a conclusion on your problem, else ask again The virtual hard disks are fixed size SCSI, located on the iSCSI SAN, and have to be in order for the VMs to be clustered. But the system isn't disk bound, it's network bound. When I run a process directly on the VM, I get about 33MB per second throughput. When I run the same process across the network I get about 11MB per second throughput--despite there being gigabit NICs and no other network traffic except between the high-end workstation and the VM. That just doesn't make any sense. I've tried dedicating a 1GB NIC--and it doesn't matter whether I use one of the embedded HP NICS or one of the Intel NICS, or even the Microsoft Loopback adapter. The performance is still roughly 1/3 of what in my opinion it should be. Something is screwy. I tried disabling hyperthreading, but it didn't have any effect. The system isn't by any means CPU bound.