virtualbox.org

Hi All,

Host: CentOS 5.5
Guest: Windows Server 2003, x32 Sp2 R2
VM: vb 3.2.12

I have a vendor who is trying to run a data conversion utility on one of my Windows Server 2003 guests. The conversion utility is running about five times slower than he wants it to run. Everything else seems to run fine. The Performance Monitor and Task Manager both show him hardly running any CPU or anything else for that manner. And, or course, it is all my VM's fault.

Is there some benchmark utility I can run that would show if my machine is performing normally?

Many thanks,
-T

All benchmark software that I have used is really geared for metal installs. They seem to not to be able to handle being run on a virtual machine.
The only real way to test is the old fashioned stop watch and test the results on both metal and virtual IMHO.

Hi Perry,

I know there is a bug (7628, 7643, probably others) in file transfer such as samba which they are (ha ha) "supposedly" working on. I am wondering if that could be the problem. The vendor queries a Fox Pro database, does a conversion, and write the result to a Samba drive on another server

I would love a report that says "here it is working just fine".

-T

So do you think this is network related?
What is the virtual NIC adapter you are using?

Perryg wrote:So do you think this is network related?

No clue. I am grasping at straws

What is the virtual NIC adapter you are using?

<Network>
<Adapter slot="0" enabled="true" MACAddress="0800277BE89C" cable="true"
speed="0" type="82545EM">
<BridgedInterface name="eth0"/>
</Adapter>
</Network>

Is there a faster one. I thought network adapters were all phony anyway: they when at their own I/O internal speed of the system. Am I wrong?

Many thanks,
-T

Well actually Virtio is by far the fastest but depending on the guest you may or may not be able to install it. If the guest is 64-bit Windows then you run into driver signing issues. ( the most wicked thing Windows has done since the freakin registry) The number you posted really doesn't tell me without looking it up but is that the IntelPRO/1000 server?

Perryg wrote:Well actually Virtio is by far the fastest but depending on the guest you may or may not be able to install it. If the guest is 64-bit Windows then you run into driver signing issues. ( the most wicked thing Windows has done since the freakin registry) The number you posted really doesn't tell me without looking it up but is that the IntelPRO/1000 server?

I quotes my machine XML file. The "type="82545EM"" is the "Intel PRO/1000 MT Server"

I am 32 bit. How much faster is the "Virtio"? And is it native to Virtual Box? I am finding "Paravirtualized Network (Virto-net)". Is that what you are speaking of? Are the guest drivers in the guest extensions?

Don't forget the UAC in there with the registry, the signed drivers, and Vista/W7/server 2008.

Many thanks,
-T

Yes it is the Paravirtualized drivers, and no it does not come native to Windows. You can however install them in Windows, but not with the GAs.
http://wiki.libvirt.org/page/Virtio will explain this to you. It will require you to do some studying and I would first get this to work in a test system, but the speed is so much faster I use it on everything I have.

As a side note I don't mind the UAC. It forces the Windows user to actually not run as admin for everything. We have been doing that in Linux for years with su and sudo.

Thank you!

But how much faster are the Virtu drivers? 0.2%, 10%? Can you guess?

-T

Most of my machines saw at least 75% increase. Read up on it and you will understand. It removes another layer and you use the actual host nic more efficiently.
I also do some tunning on the MTU and few other things but you should see a drastic improvement in network speed regardless of any other tweaking you do. Since you are in the business you should learn about it.

Hi Perry,

Found these drivers meant for use with KVM:

http://www.linux-kvm.com/sites/default/ ... dows-1.zip

Will they also work with Virtual Box?

Do you have any good working papers to point me to on tuning the MTU?

Many thanks,
-T

Perryg wrote:Most of my machines saw at least 75% increase.

Hi Perry,

Just out of curiosity, will this automatically increase my disk I/O as well? Or, is that a separate subject? Some where I heard that the network is how guest and host do all their communications.

Many thanks,
-T

They don't work in VirtualBox. That's not the problem. They work in Windows and Linux has them native. VirtualBox provides the proper connection for virtio but the necessary side is the guests driver. As for pointing you to reading about MTU, it is standard networking. You can set the maximum transmission unit to a higher level them Windows does natively and you can also tune the RTS, CTS to achieve the max available throughput. This is something that everyone in the industry really should know how to do.

As for Disk IO this has nothing to do with that. That is a totally different subject. VirtualBox has an effective IO if you use the proper disk controller and have the settings right.

ToddAndMargo wrote:Hi Perry,
Do you have any good working papers to point me to on tuning the MTU?

Tried changing my MTU from 1500 to 3000. Made no difference on Samba file transfers.

-T

Perryg wrote:They don't work in VirtualBox. That's not the problem. They work in Windows and Linux has them native.

Where do I find the the Windows drivers that work with Virtual Box guests? (Not having any luck Googling them.)

Many thanks,
-T