I'd like to make a CentOS-based VMware server.
Anything I should consider before doing so?
(e.g. stuff to disable, kernel tweaks, etc)
On 8/1/07, Rogelio Bastardo scubacuda@gmail.com wrote:
I'd like to make a CentOS-based VMware server. Anything I should consider before doing so?
See http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=2189
There's some good info in there. Beyond that, disable/remove stuff you're not using. Keep your virtual machine files on a separate partition (mounted with noatime) and if you're using raid, make sure you lay out the filesystem properly for block alignment. This will REALLY give you a good speed boost for vmware.
You can change some memory options in /etc/sysctl.conf, but these are more customized so you'll have to play around with them or google a bit.
Rogelio Bastardo wrote:
I'd like to make a CentOS-based VMware server.
Anything I should consider before doing so?
(e.g. stuff to disable, kernel tweaks, etc) _______________________________________________ CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
XFS allegedly handles large files better than ext3/reiserfs.
and we all know that vmx files can be . . . . big!
Has anyone run any benchmarks on xfs / ext3 / reiserfs to establish which is better suited for holding virtual machines?
Yiorgos
On 8/3/07, Yiorgos Stamoulis yiorgos-lists@stamoulis.eu wrote:
XFS allegedly handles large files better than ext3/reiserfs.
and we all know that vmx files can be . . . . big!
Has anyone run any benchmarks on xfs / ext3 / reiserfs to establish which is better suited for holding virtual machines?
The only reason I'd avoid xfs here is for x86 systems. XFS still doesn't play well with kernels using 4k stacks. This has improved, but it still can leave you with crashes/corruption. For x86_64 systems the problem isn't nearly as bad, as this kernel uses 8k stacks, so xfs is a bit more reliable.
-
Jim Perrin -
Rogelio Bastardo -
Yiorgos Stamoulis