From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Avi Kivity Subject: Re: slow guest performance with build load, looking for ideas Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 11:07:54 +0300 Message-ID: <4A3752DA.8060203@redhat.com> References: <20090612210443.GA21840@sgi.com> <4A34C3D2.9020009@redhat.com> <20090615141542.GA17448@sgi.com> <4A36598E.5050300@redhat.com> <4A3667F2.3040201@msgid.tls.msk.ru> <4A36685E.7090003@redhat.com> <4A3743C1.6090108@msgid.tls.msk.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Erik Jacobson , kvm@vger.kernel.org To: Michael Tokarev Return-path: Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:45216 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751517AbZFPIHv (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Jun 2009 04:07:51 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4A3743C1.6090108@msgid.tls.msk.ru> Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 06/16/2009 10:03 AM, Michael Tokarev wrote: >>>>> So if I understand what you're saying: best not to use kvm guests >>>>> for build >>>>> servers with pre-Nehalem processors. >>>> >>>> pre-Nehalem / pre-Barcelona, > 4 vcpus, yes. >>> >>> How about 2 vcpus, and how about AMD processors ? >> >> 2 vcpus (or 4) should be fine. AMD processors (Barcelona+) would be >> good for any number of vcpus. > [] > > Hmm.. that's sorta good (not so good for owners of most > Intel CPUs -- Nehalem just started its life). But still > confusing. Namely, 2..4 vcpus per GUEST or HOST -- for > the ore-Nehalem ones? :) 4 vcpus per guest would be fine (even more should work, depending on workload). Host will scale with any number of cpus. -- error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function