Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2019 10:44:36 +0100 (CET) From: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@puchar.net> To: Darius Mihai <dariusmihaim@gmail.com> Cc: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@puchar.net>, "Rodney W. Grimes" <freebsd-rwg@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: bhyve+windows 7 multicore performance Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.20.1912051043510.83609@puchar.net> In-Reply-To: <CAPj=67vMMNoG%2BYEATOD6p=cw83egvUh9SzvJLsw_rsfcprywdA@mail.gmail.com> References: <201912031529.xB3FTMnY035614@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> <alpine.BSF.2.20.1912041720570.5885@puchar.net> <CAPj=67vMMNoG%2BYEATOD6p=cw83egvUh9SzvJLsw_rsfcprywdA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 4 Dec 2019, Darius Mihai wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 4, 2019, 18:22 Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@puchar.net> wrote: > >>> > >>> Try 4 cores, and drop the priority boost, you may be causeing > >> > >> Well i need more cores than 4 for that VM. > >> I will try even number (10) and no nice. > > > > If 4 cores performs better than 10 cores why would you want > > performs better per thread. Not as total. > > > removing -P option improved performance a bit. Well - a large bit. > > > If I remember correctly, windows runs PAUSE very often when idling, > so having many cores that stay idle may slow down the system > since -P forces context switches when that instruction is > executed. > > Darius Possibly. But for sure - this made things faster a lot. Actually close to bare metal performance.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.20.1912051043510.83609>