Re: [CentOS-virt] SATA vs RAID5 vs VMware

2009-09-25 Thread Filipe Brandenburger
Hi, On Thu, Sep 24, 2009 at 21:18, Philip Gwyn wrote: > The problem seems like a disk problem. I grow to suspect that SATA isn't > ready > for the big time. I also grow to dislike RAID5. > > Questions : > - Anyone have a clue or other on how to track down my bottle neck? You can use the comma

Re: [CentOS-virt] SATA vs RAID5 vs VMware

2009-09-25 Thread Benjamin Franz
Philip Gwyn wrote: > Hello, > > I have strange behaviour on a server that I can't get a handle on. I have a > reasonably powerful server running VMware server 1.0.4-56528. It has a RAID5 > build with mdadm on 5 SATA drives. Masses of ram and 2 XEON CPUs. But it > stutters. > This will dou

Re: [CentOS-virt] SATA vs RAID5 vs VMware

2009-09-25 Thread Benjamin Franz
Benjamin Franz wrote: > This will double your memory usage. But it should fix your I/O. > > Take a look at http://vmfaq.com/?View=entry&EntryID=25 > > In particular, putting your temporary directory in a ramdisk will > improve your I/O profile immensely. > > Edit /etc/vmware/config and add: > > tm

Re: [CentOS-virt] SATA vs RAID5 vs VMware

2009-09-25 Thread Jerry Franz
Benjamin Franz wrote: > And I just learned something new. According to > http://communities.vmware.com/thread/105144;jsessionid=DE9B4FFB861971525BEDBD8984F6A670?start=15&tstart=0 > > if you use /dev/shm for your tmpDirectory you don't pay the 'double the > memory' penalty. I am testing it now.