Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2012 17:24:41 +0000 From: Joe Holden <lists@rewt.org.uk> To: Ronald Klop <ronald-freebsd8@klop.yi.org> Cc: FreeBSD Stable Mailing List <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>, Martin Sugioarto <martin@sugioarto.com> Subject: Re: Timekeeping in stable/9 Message-ID: <4F1AF4D9.8030100@rewt.org.uk> In-Reply-To: <op.v8fr9tmx8527sy@pinky> References: <4F15D643.8000907@rewt.org.uk> <20120118075049.289954e8@zelda.sugioarto.com> <20120121101842.786fc402@zelda.sugioarto.com> <op.v8fok1hw8527sy@pinky> <20120121141151.0ee68aa3@zelda.sugioarto.com> <op.v8fr9tmx8527sy@pinky>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ronald Klop wrote: > On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 14:11:51 +0100, Martin Sugioarto > <martin@sugioarto.com> wrote: > >> Am Sat, 21 Jan 2012 13:20:51 +0100 >> schrieb "Ronald Klop" <ronald-freebsd8@klop.yi.org>: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> As I understand it. >>> Host: FreeBSD 9 >>> Guest: WinXP >>> >>> Which one has troubles with its clock? The host or the guest or both? >> >> Hi, >> >> only inside VirtualBox, I think it's only an application problem and >> my emails would be probably better addressed to ports@. ONLY the guest >> is affected when host is loaded. >> >> I noticed additionally: >> >> You get better results with a desync'ed clock in the guest system, when >> you start "openssl speed -multi 20" or similar. Within a few seconds the >> clock gets a 20 seconds difference. >> >>> How many CPU's did you assign to the guest? >>> Did you install virtualbox guest additions to the guest? >> >> Here a few details (guest additions are installed): >> >> Memory size: 1600MB >> Page Fusion: off >> VRAM size: 256MB >> HPET: on/off (tried both settings) >> Chipset: piix3 >> Firmware: BIOS >> Number of CPUs: 1 >> Synthetic Cpu: off >> CPUID overrides: None >> [...] >> ACPI: on >> IOAPIC: off >> PAE: on >> Time offset: 0 ms >> RTC: local time >> Hardw. virt.ext: on >> Hardw. virt.ext exclusive: on >> Nested Paging: on >> Large Pages: on >> VT-x VPID: on >> [...] >> 3D Acceleration: off >> 2D Video Acceleration: on >> >>> Do you run NTP on the guest XP also? If yes, turn it off. >> >> Windows XP default installation (synch'ed to time.windows.com). >> Switching this off, does not have any influence. I think MS-Windows >> does not do continuous synchronization, only at system start, I guess. >> >>> VBox guest additions can sync the guest clock with the host. >> >> I'll try to deinstall them. But I somehow like my shared folder. >> >>> BTW: My experience with VBox is that it is nice for hobby stuff, but >>> not for heavy load server stuff. VMWare does a better job there. >> >> Yes. I know. Still VirtualBox ist nice and cheap solution. >> >> -- >> Martin > > BTW: I used VBox on Linux at work. Same problems. Different problems > come and go with different versions of Linux in combination with > different versions of VirtualBox. Using VmWare ESXI solved it. If you > search a lot on the vmware website you will find a free version. > > Ronald. In the extreme case I have here, the host isn't taxed at all, cpu, disk i/o and such are almost idle but the time is skewed dramatically regardless. For reference the settings I have are: 4 VCPUS (4 physical cores) 1GB ram ICH9, SAS controller If I toggle the sysctl in my previous post the problem goes way, and doesn't return even if the sysctl is changed back... until a reboot of course. None of the pre-9 guests (there are quite a few spread across a couple of identical machines) exhibit the behaviour, nor does this particular one when reverted to a pre-upgrade snapshot, so in this case it is certainly not the hardware but whatever is used to keep track of the "ticks" (terminology probably incorrect) Thanks, J
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4F1AF4D9.8030100>