SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

July 2012

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Todd And Margo Chester <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Todd And Margo Chester <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 6 Jul 2012 13:16:28 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (49 lines)
On 07/05/2012 05:23 PM, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
> u didn't notice any performance issues with virtualized IDE versus SCSI?

No difference. This is probably because both drivers are fake.
I presume the SCSI driver is there to accommodate folks that
have code that makes SCSI calls.

Speaking of fake, it took me years to bend my mind around the fact
that the VM CPUs are fake too.  They are not actually using
a particular CPU.  It was a light bulb moment.

>
> XP on laptops is now pretty ugly due to chipset upgrades that just
> aren't XP supported. Netbooks that have more than enough power for XP
> are nightmares to install. And for high end server components, like
> 10G Ethernet, it's also difficult to support.

Oh ya.  The latest batch of notebooks are a nightmare to install
XP on.  It is made a lot easier if you only do it on models
with Intel chipsets.  (Did an AMD XP upgrade from Vista on an
HP laptop a couple of years ago.  Took me 15 hours.  Gad zukes!
I could only bill for 3 hours.  Never again -- nightmare stuff.
On the bright side, it is now the customer's fastest, most
reliable computer -- it was completely unusable under Vista.)

Here is a tip: call Lenovo tech support and find a model that
still has a set of XP restore disks.  That is the easiest
way.

On my VM, W7 is still half as fast as XP and ten times less
stable -- pretty much matches what I see in the field.
And Lotus Approach, which I use for my business accounting,
runs worse on W7 than it runs on Wine.

 > So yeah, virtualizing XP
 > is a good way to go if you have to support it.

Except that it slows the backups down by a factor of five.

Ultimately, on a server, it would probably be Windows 2003
server that I would put in a VM.  (They make great Terminal
Servers; Windows Server 2008 is an absolute nightmare to
run Terminal Services through: five times slower, crash all the
time, ...)  So, I would need to find it WS2003 did the same
backup slowdown, but I can not afford the license to
find out.  Suppose I will solve that when the need arises.

-T

ATOM RSS1 RSS2